Lone Wolves in the USA (new title)

[Dayuhan]

So, do not presume one can find the "root cause" of excessive gun violence and mass murder such as this recent event. But do resist the urge to knee-jerk action and pause to think about it holistically and in ways that force one to step outside their particular paradigm to do so. Identify some energy sources and considers ways to disconnect from or to turn down those sources. To just put armed guards in every school and to put greater restrictions on guns is the same type of senseless, symptomatic approach we applied to 9/11. Have we learned nothing? We cannot simply cling to things we do not want to change while generating powerful programs to guard against and attack the products of those things. We must evolve. But first we must think.

Have you any course of action to suggest?

Lots of people out there thinking, and lots of proposals, but I'm not seeing anything terribly compelling. Given that we're dealing with a tiny number of deeply disturbed individuals, I'm not sure we're going to accomplish much by looking for root causes or energy sources, which are likely to be different in each case.

Better mental health care is desirable certainly, but even mental health professionals admit that they cannot reliably predict who may be involved in these events. My concern when we discuss greater alertness or anticipation on the mental health side is that kids that just happen to be a little strange (there are many of them) may be stigmatized as potential mass murderers, which is going to mnake already difficult lives even harder. Aside from being unfair to those individuals, that could provoke precisely the behavior we seek to avoid.

Those with pre-existing biases against guns and video games will have predictable suggestions, but I personally see few solutions there.

I don't have any good ideas, and I'm not seeing many I think are good. I think it would be great if the identities and histories of those involved could be kept out of the media completely, but realistically I can't see how that is to be done.

[jmm99]

The "Cops in Schools" projects (plural; a number of different pilot projects developed) came to life because of President Clinton's Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, as part of "Community Oriented Policing Services" (COPS).

According to the Sep 2000 AG's Report to Congress:

p.12 pdf

COPS has been at the forefront of one of the most pressing issues facing our country today – violence in our nation's schools. Through its COPS in Schools program, COPS has funded the addition of over 2,600 officers in our nation's schools. These school resource officers are partnering with students, teachers, and parents to become an important part of the fabric of the daily school environment.

See p.18 pdf: COPS in Schools was initially awarded (Oct 1998) $294.4 million (Salary/benefits costs over $125,000 for a 3-year period).

The program continued into the Bush II Admin with a 2005 258-page guide, A Guide to Developing, Maintaining, and Succeeding With Your School Resource Officer Program - Practices From the Field for Law Enforcement and School Administration. E.g., p.116

Finally, programs may wish to consider providing training in other areas addressed in COPS in School trainings, including:

- community policing in the schools (e.g., the SRO as a community liaison and problem solver),

- youth culture and diversity (e.g., the challenge of school bullying), and

- promoting mental health in schools, including intervening with at-risk students (e.g., detecting early signs of trouble).

Obviously, there is much more in the 2005 Guide from Bush II.

The website for the Obama Admin's version of "COPS" appears as I write this. I was especially interested in "The Latest Information on Community Policing"; but alas, after going there, I found of material interest to me only "Campus Safety":

With over 15 million students and several million more faculty and staff at U.S. institutions of higher education, it is not surprising that campus safety is a field of great interest within community policing. That is why the COPS Office provides a range of resources to help administrators and security personnel create safe and secure environments on our nation's colleges and universities.

The Scope of the Problems

Security services on the nation's campuses vary considerably in size, role, authority, and quality. They include full-service police departments, private security operations, contractual services, and more. Campus police departments also vary greatly in how they relate to and share information with local and state public safety agencies.

In light of tragic violent events on several campuses, more than 20 institutional, state, professional association, and governmental reports have recommended that colleges and universities develop and implement threat assessment and management tools to enhance campus safety. The COPS Office offers a variety of resources aimed at helping the campus public safety field address these and many other issues.

COPS programs focused on institutions of post-secondary education have included the 2004 National Summit on Campus Public Safety hosted by the Mid-Atlantic Regional Community Policing Institute, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement's Fellowship Program and Accreditation Pilot, the United Negro College Fund Special Programs Corporation's Campus-Community Policing Partnership Program and, most recently, the Margolis Healy and Associates Campus Threat Assessment training seminars.

So, there is some current Federal LE emphasis on "higher education" safety.

However, in the publications, I scored more success re: school safety (at the secondary and primary levels). Thus, we have 2009 COPS Secure Our Schools Grant Owner’s Manual (SOS):

Abstract: Provides funding to municipalities to assist with the development of school safety resources. SOS funding will allow recipients the opportunity to establish and enhance a variety of school safety equipment and/or programs to encourage the continuation and enhancement of school safety efforts within their communities.

and, 2010 Assigning Police Officers to Schools:

Abstract: Nearly half of all public schools have assigned police officers, commonly referred to as school resource officers (SRO's) or education officers. Assigning Police Officers to Schools summarizes the typical duties of SROs, synthesizes the research pertaining to their effectiveness, and presents issues for communities to bear in mind when considering the adoption of an SRO model.

Exactly what the present status of this program is = ? to me. Is it funded, defunct, etc. ?

This little backgrounder may help in reading through the extreme left and right wing posts on this specific topic.

Regards

Mike

PS: I thought it a bit humorous to see an argument develop on the application of doctrinal (and non-doctrinal) military strategy and the military planning process to what is such a basic local domestic political question. Well, what the hell !; this is a military site and it's the holiday season - so, go to it.

[Bob's World]

Have you any course of action to suggest?

Lots of people out there thinking, and lots of proposals, but I'm not seeing anything terribly compelling. Given that we're dealing with a tiny number of deeply disturbed individuals, I'm not sure we're going to accomplish much by looking for root causes or energy sources, which are likely to be different in each case.

Better mental health care is desirable certainly, but even mental health professionals admit that they cannot reliably predict who may be involved in these events. My concern when we discuss greater alertness or anticipation on the mental health side is that kids that just happen to be a little strange (there are many of them) may be stigmatized as potential mass murderers, which is going to make already difficult lives even harder. Aside from being unfair to those individuals, that could provoke precisely the behavior we seek to avoid.

Those with pre-existing biases against guns and video games will have predictable suggestions, but I personally see few solutions there.

I don't have any good ideas, and I'm not seeing many I think are good. I think it would be great if the identities and histories of those involved could be kept out of the media completely, but realistically I can't see how that is to be done.

I fall back to where I began in post #6. A call to look at the problem holistically and to not leap to any program of activities designed to simply mitigate or prevent the obvious symptoms. There are many factors coming together within the context of American history and culture to feed this problem. We could begin that analysis by building a list of as many of the factors as possible, and then working to backtrack each of those, both independently and in the context of how they interrelate with each other in a effort to better understand how we got to where we are, and then also how to better get to where we want to be.

I believe that both the 1st and 2nd amendments play critical roles in keeping a healthy balance of power between those who govern and those who are governed; but recent trends have been to increasingly remove restrictions on the first, while increasingly place restrictions on the second. We tend to think of these amendments in isolation, or at least not in the context of why they were created in the first place. The result is that we are out of balance. We need to find a balance across these important rights that is tuned to the overall mission.

We need to see this trend of these tragic attacks as a powerful metric that the health of our society is trending in the wrong direction. We overly focus on the individuals who act out. We can't prevent individuals from acting out, but we can look to ways to address the trends in society as a whole. This very thread is named in the context of the individual, the "lone wolf." That is tactical thinking: How do I stop the lone wolf. I think strategic thinking would be: how do I change this trend in the society as a whole.

The approach to the attacks of 9/11 share this same flaw. We focus overly on how do we "defeat, disrupt, deny" organizations such as AQ, rather than on how do we better understand and address the trends in society that are fueling the rise of such organizations.

The tactical approach provides immediate gratification of action, and also allows us to not have to take responsibility for how we have all contributed to the conditions that feed the problem. It enables the same type of avoidance of personal (or societal) responsibility that one sees in people wrestling with addiction.

We all want better answers, but first I think we need to spend more time working on getting to better questions.

[Bob's World]

Bill,

I don't claim to be, nor do I think I am smarter than others who work in "strategy" related fields. I claim only that I think about thing differently than most, and that I tend to spend more time attempting to sort out why things are the way they are in a quest to find insights to offer to guide the efforts of the decision makers above me.

Most strategists focus on identifying and cataloging lists of things that are, and then applying against those lists the framework of guidance from their own boss and bosses higher in the command structure. This is important, but is the science of strategy. What can I measure, what have I been told to do, how do I apply that at my level. This is objectively assessable.

What I am talking about is the art of strategy. What does one understand about the things going on around them, how does that make them think about the guidance they have received, and what recommendations or questions does that suggest to inform how everyone can get to a better place at the least possible cost and with the lowest likelihood of negative consequences.

I don't think we prioritize the art of strategy as highly as we should, nor do I think we attempt to identify early and nurture over time that type of artistic talent in the US military.

Instead we seem to think that once one achieves a certain rank or educational degree, or is assigned to a headquarters commanded by a person possessing a certain number of stars that one is automatically "strategic." That, IMO, is "arrogant."

We are, too often, the very type of "intelligent fool" as discussed by Mr. Einstein below. I too often count myself within that number of intelligent fools. The only difference in me is that I actively seek to avoid that natural tendency that Einstein described. I realize sometimes that makes others uncomfortable. Just shut up and color, right? There is a comfort in following orders and applying tactics with vigor and effectiveness. We have become too comfortable in that regard. We need to start trying to make ourselves uncomfortable, as that is what leads to discovery and growth.

[slapout9]

Bill,

I don't claim to be, nor do I think I am smarter than others who work in "strategy" related fields. I claim only that I think about thing differently than most, and that I tend to spend more time attempting to sort out why things are the way they are in a quest to find insights to offer to guide the efforts of the decision makers above me.

Bob, I love you man but........you think like a prosecutor!!!you think everything can be analyzed into a pure cause and effect. When it comes to dealing with people especially very disturbed people that kind of thinking is going to break down. Sometimes you just have to accept the fact that really bad stuff can happen to really good people.

[carl]

We need to see this trend of these tragic attacks as a powerful metric that the health of our society is trending in the wrong direction. We overly focus on the individuals who act out. We can't prevent individuals from acting out, but we can look to ways to address the trends in society as a whole. This very thread is named in the context of the individual, the "lone wolf." That is tactical thinking: How do I stop the lone wolf. I think strategic thinking would be: how do I change this trend in the society as a whole.

I don't see the murderous actions of mostly deranged young men as a metric of anything other than a trend among deranged young men. As frightening and disturbing as these things are, they are still the actions of very isolated individuals. There is nothing society wide about it. Something like murder rates as a whole going up and down says something about society. These don't because they are individuals taking advantage of some fairly obvious vulnerabilities.

Individuals can be prevented from acting out. That is done every day in prisons and families and everywhere. Individual humans aren't a like cells in a Portuguese man 'o war, each an animal in its own right but acting as a whole. Individuals humans aren't Borg parts. They are individuals and make individual decisions. If they are likely to get frustrated or thumped, they probably won't act in a way that will get them frustrated or thumped. Getting thumped hurts.

It is nice to think about the big picture but what is the object of the big picture thinking? It is to stop those little picture things that hurt. If short sighted superficial tactical things reduce greatly mass shootings, then the object is accomplished.

The approach to the attacks of 9/11 share this same flaw. We focus overly on how do we "defeat, disrupt, deny" organizations such as AQ, rather than on how do we better understand and address the trends in society that are fueling the rise of such organizations.

An object of things done after 9-11 was to prevent attacks of a similar magnitude from happening in the US again. That has been (knock on wood that it continues) accomplished. That isn't a flawed approach. It has worked.