Invasions is the first of eight War Report specials in which we will examine the military history, fighting traditions and objectives of the major powers.  We will, also, discuss major changes needed in U.S. military policy to improve the defense of the U.S. in light of potential foreign threats.

Police respond outside GHS. Photo: Bob Luckey

This event brought to light several glaring problems with the lockdown procedure in general that I feel should be brought to the national conversation. First, it seems that all it takes to ruin someone’s reputation is to call in a false weapons threat. So if you dislike someone at school, you can simply call the police and report that you heard them talking about shooting someone. From the police report: “Interviews with the witnesses revealed that the suspect, a student of GHS, made a comment to two other students where he intimated that he possessed a firearm in his book bag. That he planned to use the firearm to shoot people in another state.” So he “intimated” that he was going to shoot someone in another state? That doesn’t sound like an immediate threat to me.

Second, the suspect was apprehended when 5 SWAT officers entered the classroom with assault rifles drawn. If the student was armed, they would have opened fire and killed not only him, but everyone around him.

Third, the lockdown, once initiated locks the students inside the classroom. This is fine as long as your classroom has no windows and the attacker is outside. But what this event helps us realize is that each of the students are the potential attackers and they are being locked inside the classroom with a room full of unarmed victims. In addition, since the students are there during the lockdown drills they know exactly what happens during a lockdown. A potential killer would need only wait till his biggest class of the day and then call in a threat against himself. Once the lockdown begins he could have free reign of the room and then actually escape by taking the teacher’s key.

Fourth, in discussing this with Marchand, In Context’s military affairs commentator, he immediately recognized that the lockdown essentially hands a terrorist a room full of hostages that could be used for negotiating purposes.

All of these factors combine to create a situation for maximum casualties, quite the opposite of the intent. Parents are often comforted by the thought that the government is “doing something” in response to a problem, but nobody actually thinks critically about whether or not it’s a good idea or even addresses the issues at hand. Almost all mass killings have been perpetrated by people on anti-depressant SSRI medications that cause psychotic breaks as a side effect, yet almost nobody talks about this because our own schools and doctors are pushing these drugs which make billions of dollars for big pharma and create dependent customers for life. The lockdown procedure is about as effective to stopping mass killings as duck and cover was for protecting yourself against nuclear blasts. People just seem to need to be comforted by the psychological effect of doing something, regardless of efficacy.

The police simply should have addressed the issue with appropriate reaction and instead of letting a suspect know that his cover is blown, approach him quietly and de-escalate the situation. Several armed officers should have gone to the classroom and had a teacher pull the student out of class for a discussion. A quick search of his bag and locker would show that he was just blowing smoke and they could talk some sense into him and find out why he was angry at these other people. Psychology shows us that violence is most often a reaction of our desire to be heard. People who act out are expressing themselves in the only way they know how. This was no excuse to traumatize students and parents and further erode individual liberties by falsely arresting someone based on rumor and innuendo. The icing on the cake is that the GPD charged the student with breach of peace even though they found no evidence. It was as if they needed to justify their over-reaction.

People who support the lockdown procedure think that containing and isolating the threat is a good idea, unless of course it’s them, their spouse or their kid locked in the room and chalked up as “acceptable losses”. I do not think that the death of any person is an acceptable loss for the greater good of the whole, and I don’t think anyone would sign the waiver stating as such. But if Greenwich High School or any other school is going to implement the lockdown as standard protocol, I think that is exactly what is called for. An acknowledgement by parents stating they understand their kids might be locked in the room with a potential killer. I for one won’t sign.