Get PJ Media on your Apple

Belmont Club

Convoy to Scatter

April 2nd, 2014 - 7:53 pm

The phrase “shelter in place” has been used at least twice in the last few hours. The first was in reference to a shooting at Fort Hood. “The incident began shortly after 5 p.m., when Ft. Hood tweeted and broadcast an alarm that all personnel should take shelter in place” The second was to do with Kent State. “Kent State campus puts shelter in place after gunfire.”

What is “shelter in place”?

The phrase appears to have originated in connection with a hazardous environmental contamination. It was part of civil defense and disaster preparedness. The CDC says:

“Shelter-in-place” means to take immediate shelter where you are—at home, work, school, or in between. It may also mean “seal the room;” in other words, take steps to prevent outside air from coming in. This is because local authorities may instruct you to “shelter-in-place” if chemical or radiological contaminants are released into the environment. It is important to listen to TV or radio to understand whether the authorities wish you to merely remain indoors or to take additional steps to protect yourself and your family.

Homeland Security has a very similar definition: “Shelter-in-place means selecting a small, interior room, with no or few windows, and taking refuge there. It does not mean sealing off your entire home or office building. If you are told to shelter-in-place, follow the instructions provided in this Fact Sheet.”

Gradually the word has morphed to mean to hide somewhere in case a roving shooter guns you down. Wikipedia notes: “The phrase has also erroneously been used, instead of the more accurate lockdown, to describe precautions to be taken by the public when violence has occurred or might occur (particularly in shootings) in the area and the perpetrator is believed to still be in the area but not apprehended. The public in the area is advised to carry out all the same tasks as a typical shelter-in-place but without the key step of sealing the shelter up to prevent outside air from circulating indoors, in this scenario people are simply urged to lockdown – stay indoors and “close, lock and stay away from external doors and windows.”

There is some debate over whether going into lockdown does any good in the face of an armed gunman or team.  Some people think it’s useless.

School safety expert Ken Trump told ABC News that he thinks the Sandy Hook teachers did what they could to protect their students.

“It does sound as though the teachers did everything humanly possible, down to risking their lives, to protect the children in this Connecticut school,” Trump said.

The school’s principal and five other adults died in the Sandy Hook school shooting in Newtown, Conn.

“Teaching kids to lock down, securing your rooms, and, in some cases, teachers stepping forth to protect the children at the risk of their own lives, is something that we see occurring more and more over the years in school safety,” Trump said.

How effective were these tactics against Adam Lanza?  There’s a growing body of experience about what happens in when shooters invade schools and malls. The Mumbai attacks and the Westgate Shopping Mall attack in Kenya are valid data, so the question deserves an answer.

At around the time of the Mumbai attacks I received an email from a recently retired US Marine Captain who followed the attacks with great interest and who expressed a frustration at not being at the hotel when the attackers tried their stunts. He felt sure, he said, that he could have turned the tables on them somehow. But he mentioned something curious. “They used buddy pairs,” he wrote.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I remember years ago reading that Americans were astonished that the Jews of Europe could just be led away to the gas chamber without resistance.

I'm not sure where I read this anecdote- in a nonfiction essay by Robert Heinlein, I think- but the point was that Americans wouldn't willingly be murdered without resistance.

Well. Many years later I see stories like this, with disarmed soldiers ordered to hide while a murderer kills them one by one until people authorized the regime to shoot finally get around to finally ending it.

I wonder what Heinlein would say about all this. I suspect he wouldn't be pleased.

In my view this idea of "shelter in place" is nothing but more than an attempt to teach and enforce a sense of helplessness among the public, and convince them nothing can be done other than by very specially trained minions trusted by the regime. So just sit there and wait to be killed, peasants, while we deal with the problem as we see fit. But don't get the idea that you can do anything about it yourselves.

Despicable.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, once again, I've jumped the shark (or whatever the appropriate analogy is, "jumped the gun?" poor taste on this topic), so I'm pulling my last post from last thread forward to catch up to Wretchard's (relevant) train of thought. Reposting.

========================================
So, we've had another mass murder of military personnel on a military base. At least the third occurrence on Obama's watch, yet our military men are disarmed on their bases. The CINC owns this, and bears full responsibility for every injury and death, unless he can convince me, convince the American people that he did something meaningful to prevent this.

I have more firepower in my bedroom top drawer than 40,000 Marines and their families nearby at Camp Pendleton. There is absolutely nothing, other than political correctness, stopping the military from issuing on base "carry" permits to key individuals - LOTS of key individuals. If a "Petty Officer of the Watch" and "Roving Patrol" can carry on Navy ships 24/7, then why not when their off watch, and in their personal quarters?

This asinine policy of disarmament was implemented, as far as I can tell, under Carter or Clinton's watch. It wasn't always this way. We're still at war, and we're still leaving our warriors and their families vulnerable in their own quarters. I swear, if I were still on active duty and a base commander, I'd hope I had the balls to implement the policy myself as part of base security. Grant enough permits to just about guarantee someone in every space and building and cubby hole was trained, screened, and armed.

This isn't rocket science. It's as Wretchard tells us about Progressive economic and reality: When mathematical analysis takes over, it becomes unavoidably real. For example, the only way that they could fudge "global warming" was to fake the data, because math is apolitical.

Well, we have a glaring, repetitive failure in "homeland Security" on military bases due to idiotic, now-clearly-failed policies universally disarming our troops. Change it, damn it. Come on, base commanders, show a fraction of the gonads your troops demonstrate every day, and implement the damn policy. Identify the personnel (from all units), train them in use of force and rules of engagement, give them carry permits, coordinate these permits with local authorities for off base (personal use; no posse comitatus issues), get the training going and issue within 60 days.

GET IT DONE, BASE COMMANDERS. Let Obama fire you for defending your troops, if he has the balls, but protect your troops by letting them protect themselves.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Sheltering in place, given that in our civilian world police response speed can be measured in furlongs per fortnight, means gathering the victims together for the convenience of the killers, the crime scene techs, and the coroners' office. Until the day comes [and it inevitably will] when group attacks are made on schools, theaters, or shopping centers; retreat covered by those souls who are Sheepdogs is the safest course for the most people. In reality, concealed carry becoming the societal norm in an area is the best defense in all cases. And I include schools. Trained and armed teachers protecting their students will mean that the next Adam Lanza can be stopped before he runs out of victims or ammunition.

And even in cases where the bad guys come en-masse and with the sanction of the state, resistance is .... contagious ... and in the long run more effective.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” - Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Vol. One "The GULAG Archipelago".

Oh, in the matter of the latest Fort Hood shooting: Before the number of shooters was known, before the number of casualties were known, before the exact location of where the shootings were taking place on the huge Fort Hood compound, and long, long before it was known who the shooter was; the Department of Defense released a statement that it was definitely NOT terrorism. It was "soldier on soldier violence". Of course, Major Nidal Hasan; who also shot soldiers at Fort Hood, who was known to be in contact with a terrorist leader, sending him contributions from his pay, and who yelled Allahu Akhbar as he killed American soldiers still is officially not a terrorist, because it was defined by the Federal government as "workplace violence".

When they start out, early and often, lying to you; it makes believing their suggestions are for your own good and safety somewhat dicey.

Subotai Bahadur
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (128)
All Comments   (128)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Why write an entire article about appalling English? It would have been better if these people were instead told to advise others to "seek shelter".

Why do Americans keep inventing new meaningless expressions?
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nice Essay
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I was stuck with two electronic vans at Danang’s aerial port fifteen awaiting the lifting of the Tet cease fire in 1968 before proceeding to Dong Ha. As the well known Tet offensive began, I was sleeping atop one of the vans which were stacked on the tarmac next to the runway. A cargo jet landed on the runway amidst all the explosions and noise and stopped about two hundred yards from where I was located.

A hatch located under the cockpit dropped open and the pilot climbed down to tarmac. I and another guy with me ran out on the runway to gather the pilot in and take him to safety. We found an air force bunker with about 10 guys it that we thought would be the safest place for pilot. There was a young lieutenant there who saw that I and my partner both had M16s and he promptly ordered us to guard the bunker as they were completely unarmed..

The bunker, buried in a rat maze of materials, was completely indefensible. It was impossible to see anyone approaching before they were within hand grenade range. I explained that to the lieutenant and told him we would go back to our vans near the runway where we could see what was happening and would protect the bunker from there.

Fortunately, no sneaky feet approached the area and all were safe. Nevertheless, as a Marine, I’ve since then doubted the military capabilities of the Air Force. Here they were in the biggest offensive since Korea sheltering in place because their weapons were locked in an armory with no key.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
There are old taught ways to deal with a superior force encountering a confined, weaker force. Scatter or organized retreat. Bunching elevates the numbers of casualties of each kill shot. Throw up some roadblocks. Slow down the attack. If there is a sheepdog going against a buddy team, flank to the weak side. That is, the side that is reloading first. Upend the direct frontal assault and redirect it away from the sheep. If possible set up a distraction. Noise or music on a PA system. Smoke or fire alarms. GI guys, feel free to criticize this non-GI guy to make a better set of suggestions.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
OK Mike, not criticism just extra comments...

Marine Infantry, circa 1980's , Immediate Action SOP to any "near ambush" is to Assault Through it...

To attack it...you are in the kill zone, get out of it by getting CLOSER to the enemy because they are most likely NOT prepared for that...

In any comperable Force on Force situation, we are the Better Marksman, the More Disciplined, the Better Trained, the Bolder Warriors....but for the element of suprise and the first volley, we will own any battle with them...remove that card from their hand IMMEDIATELY, and ATTACK THEM....

There is no such thing as a "rear area" soldier, an Admin Clerk or a "non-combat MOS", or at least their shouldnt be. Anyone who wears a uniform who's patches are emblazoned with swords, eagle wings and rifles, ought to HAVE that fighting instinct, and the TOOLS AT HAND 24/7 to fight.

16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
There was a time when virtually every citizen would have felt this way as well. It has taken a long time to make sheep out of a nation of wolves.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
To attack it...you are in the kill zone, get out of it by getting CLOSER to the enemy because they are most likely NOT prepared for that...

Absolutely! Either fire and maneuver, or die in place.
Shelter in place=die in place.

You need to move to gather intel, to disrupt the enemy plans, to ambush. If I were in an office building and heard shooting, i.e. multiple shots, small arms fire, I've already decided to move towards the sound picking up any tool or object I come across along the way, in order to form a better defense. If I have innocents with me (e.g. perhaps a group of kids, etc.) I stash them in the storeroom and then move on. "Guarding" the storeroom until the perp opens the door and kills us all, isn't an effective defensive strategy.

If you've got a brain, you're never really "unarmed". Disadvantaged, maybe. Unarmed? Never.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
tank = firepower + armor + maneuver.

Anything with armor alone is called a target (such as people sheltering behind masonry or plaster walls).
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I just feel like sharing that I recently dropped cable and I tell you it's so damn liberating to not have another media circus recycle itself over and over again in my face. I already don't care about what happened or who it was. Until people get serious about gun-free zones, I just don't care.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
I dropped cable also. Saved almost $70 per month or $ 840 per year after taxes.

I am no longer supporting Al Jazeera, CNN, MSNBC, etc.

I still get the news via PJ Media, other sites and over the air TV.
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
Libtards are obsessed with two things: making government more powerful and making the individual powerless.

These "die in place" tactics are useless without armed security guards. Admin, faculty and staff can all have 'fangs'.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Almost every 'shooter' in these Gun Free Zone shootings has been...medicated for a 'mental/emotional' problems. This seems to be the common thread. What 'cocktail' of meds were these people on? Psychiatric medicine and the drugs commonly prescribed may be at the root of the problem. The contraindications of many drugs used in psychiatry are pretty scarry...actually many 'approved' meds for every aliment imaginable have very scary contraindications. Go to your medical cabinet and check out yours. Get online and read...crazy. I'm not at all surprised that this is happening. We're Guinea pigs for the BIG Pharma...........
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
See the April 2014 Discover magazine article "The Second Coming of Freud".

It supports your contention on medicating mental health problems.

http://discovermagazine.com/2014/april
15 weeks ago
15 weeks ago Link To Comment
I've learned a lot about the limits and pitfalls of pharmaceuticals listening to Drew Pinsky rail against over-prescribing fellow Doctors.
LA seems to be awash in "Legal Drugs"

http://adamanddrdrewshow.com/

http://drdrew.com/116-rick-shapiro/

...this poor victim of abuse and drugs can hardly be understood due to his stuttering and stammering.

Amazingly, when he slips into character, his speech is faultless!
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
One of Drew's pet causes is Opiates and Hyperalgesia.

I recommend anyone suffering from chronic pain to be sure they are up to speed on this issue.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hyperalgesia&oq=hyperal&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.7402j0j8&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
In addition to shooters and murderous drivers are all the suicides and accidental overdoses of the drug mixing and consuming masses.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
See "muskegonlibertarian" below.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
No, not despicable. What is despicable is a bunch or armchair warriors who want to play soldier creating an imagainary workplace where there are not: Grandmothers, Grandfathers, Men and Women in wheelchairs, untrained unarmed airheads who just want a job(nothing wrong with that, right?) and all the rest of the Working population of the USA. If you are brave enough to take some bullets to save lives good for you, but don't fantasize about what ordinary working people are capable of. If you think you have a better plan for civilian safety say it, but don't tell 8 year olds to turn into Die Hard part one.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
exept that I've known some eight year olds to be damn goo dshots, and have the wisdom to know what to shoot at and what not to. Don't write them off. There is a reason the "untrained unarmed airheads" are so plentiful: government have, over the past few decades, TRAINED them to be such. And wishes to perpetuate the myth that ONLY the trained professionals are "qualified" to make a difference.. whenver they get round to making their appearance. Meanwhile, those "untrained unarmed airheads" ARE the First Responders. And many are dealing with the second of their above named attiributes and getting armed.... then trained. And at that point I question even their status as "airheads".
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment

prothink,
If you are ever present when something bad happens please identify yourself. If I happen to be there I would want to know so that I could offer you the same respect and willingness to assist that you offer to others. How odd it must be to walk under the same sky and walk on the same streets as Americans and yet to live in a separate world populated not by men and women and citizens but by livestock. Were you exempted fro the ACA because you qualify to be treated by veterinarians? Don't worry they will value relieving your suffering over preserving a life.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yes, despicable. Pardon me for pointing out that in this instance it ain't a bunch of armchair warriors wanting to play soldier who happened to get targeted.

It was actual real live warriors on a freakin' army base who are on active duty in the US military. I suspect even the most ardent gun-banners want the US army to have guns, likely even Leland Yee.

So no, it is utterly despicable to disarm soldiers on a military base, especially after a warning that a potential shooter was on the loose. Not only that, but this isn't the first shooting either. Policy should have changed, obviously.

Utterly unforgivable.

Not only that, but the ability to point and aim a gun isn't some rare and difficult skill to acquire. Tens of millions of ordinary people know how to do it and I bet plenty more would be willing to learn, to save a classroom full of young school children as at Sandy Hook.

Do it for the children, folks. And even though the left is often making use of that phrase in endless attempts to garner support for a wide assortment of idiotic policies, in this case they'd rather see children dead than let people use guns to defend them.

Despicable.

16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Being helpless and more importantly unarmed...why? We have a GOD given right to defend our lives and those of our families and friends. It's how we've evolved to be here now. All those who chose a...less proactive path have been killed off or died naturally. Fighting for life IS what life is about. It's in our DNA. Fight of flight. Being armed is critical to having a 'fighting chance'. Gun Free Zones are easy kill zones. Why force that on free people? Every man and woman has a responsibility to fight the good fight. Once your on your knees...it's a litlle bit tooooo late for a do-over. Every time I see pictures of people in that situation I can ony imagine the...regret each of them must feel. Wasted is putting it mildly.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
not just a RIGHT, but a sacred responsibility to be our brothers' keepers. Yes, the RIGHT to arms carries with it the RESPONSIBILITY to do so, to train well and acquire the necessary skills, and to stand against evil when it comes calling, to protect those who might otherwise be in harm's way. THAT is why that pesky Second exists.... doesn't it say outright that the SECURITY of a free people is dependent upon the keeping and bearing of arms? We forget about that bit....... to our great pril and shame. And THAT is why I advocate the personal carrying of arms, always and everywhere.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
It seems Obama's homeboys have decided to scatter rather than shelter in place.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/04/03/amazing-graphic-shows-chicagos-middle-class-disappear-before-your-eyes/

Amazing Graphic Shows Chicago’s Middle Class Disappear Before Your Eyes

16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All