Michael Swickard
“Most of the change we think we see in life is due to truths being in and out of favor.” – Robert Frost
When a truth is out of favor, it is still a truth. One such truth is that protecting your family is only possible with a force at least equal to an attacker’s force.
Years ago in the middle of the night my house was quiet, as was the neighborhood. Something woke me. My wife was asleep but I could see the eyes of our dog Shadow, who slept in the corner. She sensed something was amiss.
I stepped into the hallway. Our seven-year-old daughter was asleep in her bedroom. In that hallway I was brought face to face with the practical issues of my need to protect these loved ones.
As a martial arts instructor I understood that battling an armed intruder in the hallway would end quickly and badly for me despite my training and experience. I was not armed nor did I have a pistol in the house. The realization of my vulnerability was one of my worst moments ever.
Shadow growled as we walked down the hallway. Through a window I saw the outside gate open. I dialed 911 and told the dispatcher I had an intruder. The police are on the way, I was told.
Should I retreat back down the hallway or take on the intruder? In an instant I realized it was my job to sell my life to protect my loved ones, so I turned on the lights and signaled Shadow to bark, which she did with gusto. The kitchen window was partially pried open but the person had fled the noise and lights.
Twenty minutes later an officer arrived. A report was taken. Sleep would not come that night because I knew an armed intruder could have easily killed me and my loved ones and gotten away.
School personnel must be armed
My role as the primary defender of my loved ones was defective and of no benefit if the intruder had been anything but a petty thief. I woke up in a cold sweat a number of times after that. Then I added another layer of defense which I have had ever since. This additional layer of defense does not guarantee my safety, but provides enough force in an emergency.
I recently thought of that long-ago night. I was at a school in New Mexico when the school went into lockdown. In the computer lab we turned off the lights, closed the door and stood in the corner in the dark hoping an armed intruder would not come in and kill all of us. It turned out to be a test, so after a while the all-clear announcement came and we went back to what we were doing.
That night I woke in the middle of the night remembering the experience from years earlier and how helpless I felt to protect my loved ones. The truth is, to repel an armed attacker school personnel must be armed because the police will never arrive in time. Even though having a firearm in a school is out of favor, it is still the truth about how to protect schools.
It made news in Albuquerque when the school district would not allow armed police officers on any school campus. That is the fervor of the anti-firearm lobby. Cooler heads finally prevailed and the ban on armed police officers was canceled. But protecting schools with firearms is still out of favor regardless of the truth of it as the only real defense.
Attackers know school personnel are not armed, which emboldens them. I am not saying that everyone at schools should be armed; rather, potential attackers must know that some people who are not easy to spot at every school are armed and will shoot back. It is important that a potential attacker not know who has this ability to shoot back.
Perhaps a few janitors and teachers could conceal carry. Many school personnel have had military training. Further, there should be school programs that train defenders. Can we admit the truth even if it is out of favor about needing deadly force available?
Having the ability and will to protect
Further, not every security problem at a school requires deadly force. Example: There are obnoxious intruders who violate entry rules but do not necessarily pose a threat. Hopefully they can be dealt with in ways that protect the children but do not require deadly force.
More problematic are the individuals who are temporarily distraught but do not harbor-term ideas of harming school personnel and students. The responders must thwart their threat yet recognize that they may not really want to harm anyone. That takes lots of ongoing training.
Finally, there are twisted people who singularly or with others attack a school bent upon the highest death toll. They must be neutralized as quickly as possible, which is why the defenders cannot be a phone call away. They must be at the school and able to respond.
Not all problems of security at a school require deadly force, but there is that potential. It will only be in the moment that the defense can be made. Two things are needed: the ability to have force equal to the attackers and the will to protect the children, even if it takes using a firearm. Does our society have that will?
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.
Swickard bio │ Archives │ Feed