This, goes hand in hand with this...PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 5:16 pm The guardian program alone (as laid out by the state) is actually pretty bad, and not the standard I would want the school employees to have if my kid were in their school.
Its better than nothing, but in my opinion honestly not a high enough standard.
The DPS School Safety Course's classroom portion on Avoid/Deny/Defend is pretty solid, in my opinion, especially when coupled with the Practical Exercises.Paladin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 18, 2024 11:47 am This discussion reminds me of Paul Howe's article: ACTIVE SHOOTER: TRAIN NOW OR PAY LATER
Active shooter classes are generally two-days, 16 hours in length. I have found that
this is not enough time to cover all the contingencies.
What's lacking is in the handgun training portion, which currently is a very low round count set of events that are more akin to 'familiarization drills' instead of 'skill building drills'. The most egregious fault I see is the prohibition by DPS on conducting holster work as part of their SSC POI. The course of fire's 'start position' with the gun laying on a barrel or table in front of the students is absurd; given that most teachers or faculty will be carrying concealed while on the job, it's insane to not include holster work as part of the curriculum. ((I say 'most', but there are some districts that provide gun safes for storage within the classroom. For those, a practical standard would be to place a gun safe on a barrel or table and have the student access their firearm as part of the 'start position')).
Perhaps doing the academic classroom portion online would provide more time for the practical exercises in person, and the remainder of the two days could be devoted to actually developing handgun skills that would be useful in a school / college setting.