Mass Shootings...Are We Done Yet?

Perhaps 'are we done yet' should be qualified as a rhetorical question because, obviously, we aren't done yet when it comes to mass shootings. In fact, mass shootings....all kinds of mass shootings....have seen a significant uptick this year. 

My go-to source for up-to-date gun violence stats, including all categories of mass shootings, is the non-profit organization, Gun Violence Archive (GVA). They have a presence on GVA Twitter and on GVA Facebook. 

GVA's most recent stats show 296 mass shootings in the U.S. as of June 22, 2021. That's more than a significant uptick from the previous year. It's a downright scary uptick:

 

Link to Image on Twitter: Gun Violence Archive Mass Shootings

There's also quite a bit of confusion out there as to what a mass shooting actually is. To be clear, GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. This is an important distinction because a lot of people refer to FBI stats, but the FBI doesn't even have a definition of mass shooting. Their definition is for mass murder. I agree with the GVA definition of mass shootings.

But I digress. 

A question was asked of me a few years back regarding gun violence prevention in our country that's still as relevant today as it was back then:

Do you feel we can and will see a safer nation in coming years or do you see our division on these issues as insurmountable?

I don't pretend to have the definitive answer to this question, but I can certainly weigh in with my opinion, and that's what I'm doing here. Is that a disclaimer? Yup, that's what it is.

First, I offer this from social media:

Source: Middle Age Riot on Twitter

This, in my humble opinion, is part of why we have difficulty in trying to address gun safety reform. Why? Because it is intended to provoke emotion and to promote division.

Show this meme to any avid pro-gun advocate, and, well....the response might not be so nice.

Then there's this, also from social media:

Source: NRA on Twitter

This, in my humble opinion, is also part of why we have difficulty in trying to address gun safety reform. Why? Because it also is intended to provoke emotion and to promote division.

Show this meme to any avid gun violence prevention advocate, and well....the response also might not be so nice.

There are plenty more posts on both sites that espouse divisiveness to support their viewpoints. And they aren't the only sites that do this sort of thing....not by any stretch of the imagination.

Two opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to gun safety reform. Both are divisive. Both leave little doubt as to their stance(s). Neither really leave any room for middle ground consensus on what might actually work to help address the gun violence epidemic in this country.

So, perhaps everything related to gun violence prevention all boils down to how each of us defines 'safer' and 'insurmountable'.

Trying to wrap my head around this issue gives me headaches. Please note I did not say "a headache". I said "headaches" in the plural because this battle, if one wants to call it that, has been ongoing since well before the Columbine massacre, and I've lost count of the number of headaches it has caused me since then.

Some will look at 'safer' as advocating for more guns, more and bigger guns because ya gotta have them humongous magazines and assault style weapons to pertect yersef and yer family from home intrusion and a tyrannical gubment, don’t ya?! Well, DON'TCHA?!!!!

Sorry, I tend to go off the rails when it comes to stuff like this. 

Others will look at 'safer' as being a world bereft of any guns at all because all y'all don't need an assault style weapon strapped over your shoulder to go grocery shopping, do ya?! Well, DO YA?!.

Again, sorry. My rails don't seem to be able to keep me aligned on the straight and narrow here of late.

Which is a more realistic view? Neither from my perspective.

To me, 'safer' means we must establish some sort of a baseline from which to measure just what safer actually looks like.

Thus far, any baseline regarding gun violence prevention and gun safety has been stifled by special interest groups. To me, establishing this baseline is first and foremost in addressing these issues.

With the ever increasing frequency of mass shootings, it might be safe to say that no one any longer denies they can happen anywhere at any time and affect entire communities. But here's the thing; do we then let our irrational fears dictate our actions in response to them? On either side of the issue?

Bad things can happen. Yes, they can. The point I'm trying to make is that in life, we can approach everyday occurrences from a feeling of dread or apprehension, or we can look at the possible exposure to harm or injury and do something rational to address that exposure before they actually occur. And this applies to both sides of this issue.

Sadly, nothing we do will ever be perfect. Also, even more sadly, nothing we do will ever guarantee 100% that mass shootings will never occur. 

Right now, though, we see knee jerk reactions from extremes on both sides of the issue. 

Those of us somewhere in the middle advocate more for an approach that doesn't dismiss anything out of hand, but, rather, identifies the root causes (guns, mental health, psychotropic drugs, violent video games, etc., etc.) and tries to address each of them based on their individual causes, effects, and potential societal impacts, and then tries to come up with viable solutions to each and together. 

Therein lies the gist of this blog post - a fear of danger. And therein lies the danger of fear (sorry FDR, didn't use your full quote, but it certainly has a lot of relevance here). If we choose to live our lives knowing that dangers exist and yet we do nothing to address those dangers beforehand, it is pretty reasonable to assume we will also respond to those dangers with a modicum of fear, as well.

I, personally, would rather face danger knowing I've done everything possible to reduce or eliminate the probability of a dangerous event from occurring, or that I've done everything I possibly can to prepare for it ahead of time. And, by association, trying to help others do the same for themselves and their loved ones. After all, isn't that what this is all about? Caring for our loved ones be it in school, at a mall, in church, in a theater, wherever?

My Mom taught me how to swim. She also tried to instill in me a respect for the water, whether in a swimming pool or a lake. In spite of her efforts, I almost drowned in a local lake where I grew up. I had respect for the water....or so I thought. I just didn't pay enough attention to the depth markers, and, as a result, I went into deeper water than I should have. My resultant panic almost cost me my life. The calmness exhibited by my rescuer (my uncle Harlan who couldn't swim a stroke) helped teach me a valuable lesson that day - to approach danger with respect rather than fear, but to face it none-the-less.

So, is our gun violence epidemic insurmountable? I guess that will depend entirely on whether we keep on approaching solutions from a position of fear or from a position of rational thought and viable realistic action(s).

My two cents....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Are 'Single Incident Experts' a Thing?

What follows may not sit very well with some folks. I hope it does, but if it doesn't, that's ok. It took me a loooooong time to come up with something that I hope speaks truth to reality, truth with compassion, truth with empathy, and even truth with sympathy. That isn't easy when talking about school safety related to school massacres and the fallout that ensues. So, please take what I have to say with a proverbial grain of salt and take it in the spirit it is intended.....the highest good for safer schools.

Truth is, following school massacres, we often see parents whose children were murdered or injured become advocates for school safety or gun safety reform or both. I kinda sorta include myself in both....to a degree. My focus is mostly on school safety, although I've been known to not back down from a challenging 'discussion' on gun safety reform, either.

Both kinds of advocacy sometimes take on a strident, sometimes adversarial tone.

The most vocal parent advocates oftentimes speak from their own unfiltered anger or sometimes even rage and frustration stemming from their children being murdered or injured in a place they were supposed to be safe. Rightfully so. Who can blame them? Not me. I empathize with them. I sympathize with them. I have two children who were directly affected by the massacre at Columbine High School. One of them almost didn't survive her injuries. So, I get it. I really do.

That being said, and although some might disagree with me on this, I also advocate that parents whose children have been killed or injured in a mass school shooting must have, and be given, a voice in advocacy for school safety. No doubt about that! 

However, a word of caution must be used here because many of those parents also appear to conflate school safety solely with gun safety reform. And this is where I try to speak truth to reality:

The reality is that these two arenas of advocacy are not mutually exclusive. Nor are they mutually inclusive.

It might also be safe to say most parent advocates also really don't possess adequate knowledge of, or expertise and experience in, what it really takes to make our schools as safe as they can be. I don't say that to be disrespectful. I say it as a simple statement of fact. As a result, they oftentimes end up trying to re-invent the wheel. I’ve seen it happen following virtually every single mass school shooting since Columbine in some form or another. 

For example, following the Marjory Stoneman Douglas (MSD) school massacre I put together a graphic that helps illustrate how the more things changed, the more they stayed the same following the Columbine school massacre. The graphic takes quotes directly from the final reports from each of these massacres (MSD Final Report and Columbine Final Report). The similarities are striking....at least they are to me.

This sort of redundancy is probably the single most frustrating thing for me, personally, because recommendations made are supposed to be considered and then implemented if appropriate, right? RIGHT?! 

I know changes were made in response protocols following the Columbine massacre (engage and neutralize active shooters instead of waiting for SWAT to arrive to do that), but seriously, folks? This isn't rocket science!!

Both school massacres saw multiple advocacy groups form that were led by parents whose children were murdered or injured. Some have been much more successful in their efforts than others. I tried that route following the Columbine massacre and failed miserably to make even a small dent in the school safety arena. I think part of the reason for that is my 'window' for doing something passed by before I actively engaged in trying to make a difference. The reason(s) for that delay are very personal, but they are real.

But I digress.

Parent advocates' passion drives them. Their pain drives them. Their anger and even rage drives them. I get it. I do. I’ve been there and done that. But those things should never, solely by themselves, drive policy making decisions in the school safety arena.

This is where the term 'single incident experts' comes into play. The only thing that separates me from being a 'single incident expert' is I also have a background in emergency management.  

In emergency management there are ‘theoreticians' and there are 'practitioners'. I didn’t become a 'practitioner' until my Columbine experience. Thing is, though, I was a ‘theoretician’ in emergency management for decades prior to Columbine. I have yet to see a single parent whose children that were affected by a mass school shooting possess the necessary ‘theoretician’ expertise  in emergency management prior to their tragedy occurring. That doesn't mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that some of them haven't acquired necessary expertise in emergency management related to school safety since their tragedy. There are certainly some that have. But many of them have not. That, too, is a statement of fact.

As a direct result, I don't know any other way to say this, so I'm just going to be blunt: If the injury/murder of a person's child is the first time that person has been involved in advocating for policies that would have protected said child, that’s a problem. 

Full disclosure; because my emergency management career was primarily focused on dam safety, one could say I'm just as guilty as the next parent advocate regarding school safety. It’s being reactively proactive in school safety after the fact. That's what I did. I was being reactively proactive and am still doing it.

The difference? If proactive parents whose children have been killed or injured in a mass school shooting choose to let their emotions control their activism, it can become problematic. I chose a long time ago to set my emotions aside as much as I possibly can to advocate as rationally as I possibly can.

Also, if parent advocates do not acquire necessary knowledge and expertise in promoting their advocacy, that’s where the ‘single incident expert’ approach becomes problematic in the school safety arena. That approach does not allow addressing a full spectrum of threats and risks. Its focus too often aligns solely with gun safety reform simply because mass school shootings are, by their very nature, gun safety reform related.

The fact so many 'single incident expert' parents are so actively promoting methodologies lacking in emergency management protocols is something I've long had concerns about. So, I say this with utmost respect, compassion, sympathy, and empathy as both a parent of kids affected by the Columbine massacre and as a retired emergency management specialist: school safety isn't rocket science, but it IS a process…an emergency management program design, development, and implementation process. 

Finally, my frustration level with the direction school safety efforts keep going is palpable. 

There are some things we have done in the school safety arena. But, there are still sooooo many things we can, and must, do to help make our schools as safe as they can possibly be. Focusing almost exclusively on gun safety reform to drive school safety policy isn't one of them. This kind of focus will never adequately address all the hazards and risks faced by every school nationally.

That….that right there is what ‘single incident experts’ must come to understand and accept if they truly hope to have the safest schools possible.

With love sent and much respect given to parent advocates in school safety, this has been my two cents.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

And That's How The Fight Started.....

It all started out innocuously enough....or so I thought.

The idea was to create a meme....a thought provoking meme on the issue of school safety vis a vis gun safety reform. I won't call it gun control any longer for several reasons, not the least of which is the word 'control' has become a lightning rod in this ongoing debate. And, control really is an illusion when one comes right down to it.

But I digress.

The meme was intended to help demonstrate my belief that gun violence, and the singular focus thereon, can have a harmful effect on school safety efforts overall because gun safety reform efforts are so predominant nationally....especially given the recent spike in gun violence incidents nationally. That includes in, or near, schools, too.

Here's the meme:

The meme was shared on several social media pages and in several groups.

And that's how the fight started.....

The pushback was pretty intense, and it was immediate. It came primarily from, how shall I say this tactfully, 'radical' individuals who push for bans on all guns.

There was one private group I finally decided to leave as a result. The pushback was pretty nasty in that one! Anything that didn't conform to their views on guns, or bans thereof, was roundly vilified and condemned.

• How DARE you posit that a focus on gun safety reform might harm school safety efforts! The NERVE!!!
• BAN ALL GUNS!
• Get this kind of crap out of this forum!!! ADMINS!!!! Delete this post!!!
• I'm not sure you HAVE a mind to change!

And those are just a few of the 'nicer' responses.

I discovered the hard way that that group's members are much like 'radical' members of pro-gun advocacy groups only from the opposite end of the spectrum. Both sides rarely, if ever, seek open dialogue on the subject of gun violence prevention. Nor do they truly understand school safety that well, if at all. It's either their way or the highway, so to speak. In this instance with this group, I finally had enough and chose the highway.

Still licking my wounds, as it were.

Frankly, I was surprised at the lack of civility in the pushback. I expect that from the more radical pro-gun advocates. I did not expect it from pro-gun violence prevention advocates.

Guess I'm still too naïve, even at 72 years of age.

But, again, I digress.

And that's when a friend of mine on Facebook from 'Down Under' (that's Australia for those who might not get the reference), a subject matter expert in risk management by the name of John Salter, weighed in with these words of wisdom:

Truer words of wisdom might be hard to find.

So, where am I going with this? 

I created a poll on Twitter to help ME see if I was on the right track.

After the poll ended, the results, although not overwhelming and certainly not scientific by any stretch of anyone's imagination, pretty much confirmed my premise that gun safety reform can have a harmful effect on school safety efforts:

How so, you ask? 

Well, the first two choices are big picture activities when it comes to school safety that can, and should, include the other two issues as COMPONENTS of those school safety activities. The second two choices are, as stated, components of school safety. They should never be the singular focus of school safety. Not EVER!

The majority of participants in this poll jumped immediately to gun safety related issues, as did members of the group I mentioned earlier in this blog post, when the words 'school safety' were presented; ergo, my assertion that gun safety reform CAN have a harmful effect on school safety efforts if those gun safety reform issues take center stage and stay there.

I rest my case.

So, as stated in the meme that started this kerfuffle in the first place, Change My Mind.

My two cents....

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

When Does Enough Become MORE Than Enough?

No, this blog post isn’t about the #Enough campaign to end gun violence, a hashtag phenomenon I see quite often on social media. Not even a little bit. It’s about something entirely different. Rather, it’s about when whole communities come to the aid of those affected by mass school shootings, and that aid gets to a point, at least in my own personal healing journey, where it's simply MORE than enough and then some.

Robin Cogan, a friend of mine on Twitter, tagged me in one of her tweets asking me for my input on this article: New Study: After School Shootings, Well-Off Families Flee and Enrollment Drops. Low-Income Kids are Left to Confront the Aftermath. After having read it, I decided it might be better to just write a blog post about it, and so here we are.

The article’s primary focus is on people living in communities affected by mass school shootings and what happens in the aftermath as they struggle for their own survival which can sometimes also mean struggling with whether or not to stay in those communities. The article's take on it appears to me to be that the more affluent can leave while those not as affluent are constrained to stay because of their circumstances. There's a whole lot more to the article than just that, of course, but that's the primary focus in a nutshell from my perspective. 

That being said, the numbers don't always tell the whole story, though.

The author began the article with ‘Columbine’.

Screen Capture From the Article

As media is so often times inclined to do, they used Columbine as the start point in this article. It's not surprising to me. Because my family was directly affected by the Columbine massacre, and because I eventually moved my family out of the Columbine community, I guess I can weigh in with some personal information and perspective related to the issue. 

The focus of this article is on families that leave their communities following a mass school shooting. I must say I'm honestly not sure how many families actually moved away immediately following this massacre. I do know many families acceded to their kids' wishes to graduate from Columbine. Those parents may have moved away after their kids graduated, but I have no way of knowing that.

In my own personal case, I moved my family out of the Columbine community not too long after Anne Marie graduated from Columbine High School. Nathan wanted to graduate from Columbine, too. Although he wasn't too happy about it, he had to commute to do so because of the move to Bailey, CO. He graduated from Columbine two years after Anne Marie.

Moving was a difficult decision for me, but I felt I had to make it. I'm pretty sure others who 'could' do a move after the massacre did so for any number of reasons, some similar to my own and others for completely different reasons. So, when studies like this come out and focus primarily on the financial capability of those who choose to relocate, it appears to me that it gives the impression finances play a singular role in those families wanting to do so and/or being able to do so. That's my opinion, of course, but I believe it's a valid opinion. To be clear, the article does also talk about some other issues than just affluence, or lack thereof. Those things just aren't the primary focus.

I struggled with a lot of things following the Columbine massacre (as did so many others), but the singular thing that motivated me to move my family I remember most is that we were not doing for ourselves what we needed to do to heal and survive as a family. The Columbine community was, quite literally, doing for us what we should have been doing for ourselves. Because of that, I realized our mental, emotional, psychological, and physical well-being were in dire peril, and addressing those four life considerations became the prime motivating factors for the move. The fact we weren't addressing them was the catalyst that pushed me to actually make the move.

I get that more affluent folks can often times do what less affluent folks can, and that those who are less affluent are often times constrained in considerations like those being discussed in the article. Thing is, I didn’t consider myself affluent. We were comfortable, but certainly not affluent as I understand the meaning of the word. The 'affluent' descriptor was something the media used to describe the Columbine community following the massacre. 

I also get that making a decision to uproot from everything familiar and comfortable and moving out of a community that has long been a huge portion of one's life is an extremely difficult choice to have to make.

To be honest and blunt, there were quite a few in the Columbine community who were indignant with, and scornful of, me for quite awhile after I made the move. Things like "how could you move after everything that was done for you" kept coming up over and over. My feelings of guilt were palpable. My kids weren’t happy with me either. I quite literally had to shut those things out and do what I thought was best for my family because I believed we weren’t going to survive as a family if I didn’t do something drastic, and that’s what I did….I moved my family.

Following the massacre at Columbine High School our community and nation galvanized. They came together to help in the aftermath of this senseless massacre. This help would go on for months for some of us and would even stretch into a year, at least for my family. It was more than enough for many. It certainly was for me.

Help took many different forms. I can't, and won't, speak for any of the other families, but the help my family received went above and beyond anything I could ever have imagined it would, much less hope for. Things like meals brought to the hospital for visiting family and friends all the way through Anne Marie's stay at Swedish Medical Center and Craig Hospital (April 20, 1999 through August 15, 1999 to help give some perspective). After her discharge from Craig, the meals would continue through the one year anniversary. They were brought to the hotel in which we stayed until our new house was ready. After we moved into our new home, the meals were brought there. There was so much, we eventually had to seek out storage in friend's freezers to not let it go to waste. Looking back now, I should have donated the extra to shelters, to those in need of food. I wasn't thinking clearly, though. My reluctance to even go grocery shopping following Carla's suicide was based in fear - fear we would run out of food, fear of being confronted by curious shoppers who might recognize me and intrude on my privacy, fear if I donated food meant for us it would offend someone.

Donations kept pouring in, both monetary and other. The Home Builder's Association took care of all costs associated with renovating our new home to accommodate Anne Marie's disability. Sherry, our Victim's Advocate, made sure we received everything Anne Marie would need like a stair glide, a lift from the garage into the house, etc., from the Victim Compensation Fund in Colorado. Offers were made from family and friends to ‘spell’ us in our vigil during Anne Marie's hospital stay so we could get some much needed rest. Government agencies came to us, not the other way around, to offer assistance in sorting out the details of our response to this tragedy. Private organizations came to us, not the other way around, offering their assistance, their facilities, and their resources to help. Churches, pastors and parishioners came to us, not the other way around, offering their counseling, their help in any way we might be able to think of. My employer, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, sent out a call for other Federal employees to consider donating their ‘use or lose’ annual leave so I could keep my job at full pay and still be able to take care of my family instead of having to go back to the office after my own sick leave and annual leave ran out. This single act allowed me to be a stay at home Dad and try to take care of my family's needs for almost two full years at full pay.

The initial outpouring of generosity would go on well into the summer of 1999 during Anne Marie's recovery in the Critical Care Unit and into her stay in the Multi-Trauma Unit and beyond. While it diminished slightly during her stay at Craig Hospital, it didn't even come close to stopping. I'd never experienced anything like it! The caring, the giving - I couldn't believe it.

After awhile, when we'd get asked what we needed or even what we'd like, we had no definitive answers. We really didn't know what we needed or wanted. The fact is we were headed into uncharted territory for our family, as were so many others going through rehab at Craig Hospital. I'd sometimes look at those families; share their grief, their anxiety, and their hopes for the future for their injured family member. I'd look introspectively at all the help my family was getting and be even more thankful than I already was. I couldn't imagine what those other families were going through. Would the assistance they received be enough?

While we were at Craig Hospital, I remember a young man going through rehab at Craig. He was from St. Louis. He'd been injured and paralyzed in a construction accident. We talked quite a lot about his situation. He told me about his efforts to work with his insurance provider and how difficult it was. I felt guilty because the insurance coverage for Anne Marie wasn't even an issue. While I had to coordinate with the health insurance company, they took care of virtually everything. I didn't see any paperwork. I didn't have to sign anything. This young man, on the other hand, had to wage a constant battle to make sure he got the coverage he needed. Were we getting special treatment from our insurance provider because of Columbine? I honestly don't know. What I do know is I felt sympathy for this young man. He was in his mid-twenties and had, through no fault of his own (same with Anne Marie and all the others affected by the Columbine massacre), been thrust into a future fraught with uncertainty, a future of new and difficult challenges. Why should we be treated any differently than him? The help we were receiving was of a magnitude completely outside our individual control. His situation helped me realize I'd eventually not only want to, but actually need to, do something to give back somehow some of the generosity our family received. We did some of that in a very small but incredibly rewarding way for everyone involved by engaging in something we called "Wood for Warmth". I'll write about that in another blog post at some point.

Editorials in the local papers, comments from their readership, and letters to the editors began taking another turn during all of this. Some said the families of the victims of Columbine, were receiving and asking for more. Some said they were sick and tired of hearing about this massacre and that the victim's families needed to get over it and get on with their lives. Others quietly, and behind the scenes, continued their selfless efforts to help. It was becoming clear this event was having a serious and divisive effect on everyone, perhaps even as much, or even more so, than the event itself from what I was hearing and seeing.

The event, in other words, was the catalyst for results in the aftermath of the event that would have both a devastating and a healing effect, if that makes any sense at all.

I was offended at some of the things being said, to say the least. None of us had asked for this to happen to us. Why couldn't people understand what we were going through? I just couldn't understand why everyone wasn't equally sharing in our grief, our pain, our suffering. In reality, that was naïve of me. That was selfish of me. That was unrealistic of me. 

The generosity was so pervasive (in a positive way), so heartfelt, so caring, I began to get used to getting it, to begin taking it for granted so to speak. Taking advantage of all the good will certainly wasn't something I wanted to do. It just happened, and I allowed it to happen. That's when ‘enough’ actually became ‘more than enough’, although I didn't grasp it at the time.

Katherine, on one of her home visits to work with Anne Marie, tossed the car keys to me after her session with Anne Marie was done, and told me we were going grocery shopping. She knew what was going on. She could see it. She felt it. She experienced it. She'd been a single Mom for 14 years raising two, and then three, kids of her own. She knew what was now being required of me as a single parent. She'd already gone through what I was now experiencing. She didn't pull any punches about it either. I wasn't accepting the fact I was now a single parent. I wasn't taking full responsibility to take care of my family by doing for ourselves what others were so generously doing for us. I'd taken advantage of all the good will sent our way. I couldn't bring myself to decline anything that was offered. 

My insecurities were tormenting me full force.

I told her I couldn't do it. She told me it wasn't an option, and we went.

Going through the store, I was actually fearful; fearful someone might recognize me and try to engage me in conversation about my family. That was the last thing I wanted to have happen. It didn't happen. My anxiety was palpable, but unwarranted.

As we went from aisle to aisle putting things into the shopping cart, Katherine told me this was something I'd have to do from now on. I told her in what I thought was a kind of joking tone she shouldn't expect the feminine side of me to come out. She scoffed at me, and rightfully so. This wasn't something to be joking about. I was a single parent. I needed to take that very seriously, and be both parents for my kids.

The generosity continued, but at a slower pace. The meals eventually came to a stop. The person coordinating all of that was understandably exhausted, and had decided, rightfully so, it was time to let us fend for ourselves once again.

My kids grew distant. They spent virtually all their time in their rooms when at home. I installed an intercom system so we wouldn't need to yell at each other when something was needed. That just contributed more to the isolation we were experiencing. It wasn't even necessary, once the intercom was up and working, to even see each other face to face anymore.

Nathan got a part time job in addition to being in school. Anne Marie was in school part time. She volunteered to work in the school infirmary with the school nurse.

When the kids were attending to their activities, I spent my spare time in front of my computer screen, typing emails, communicating with family in other states, basically trying to impose my misery on them. I didn’t consciously realize that at the time, but it was most certainly a subconscious effort to get them to feel even more sorry for me than they already did.

I was feeling alone and so helpless. Self-pity wasn't something I wanted to indulge in, but it was becoming a serious problem for me.

Anne Marie became unwilling to engage in many of the physical activities she needed to do to keep her in healthy physical condition not only to help prevent further debilitating conditions from developing, but to also hopefully be able to someday walk again. And, to be clear, not one of her doctors ruled out the possibility of her one day walking again.....not one! Pushing her to do the things she needed to do to stay physically healthy became problematic for me. Questions arose as to how hard should I push. Counsel I got from health experts universally said to push her hard. In addition, while she agreed to counseling and therapy for her mental and emotional well-being initially, she dropped it after our move to the mountains. I didn't push the issue of continuing the counseling and therapy like I probably could have or even should have.

Nathan flatly refused professional counseling and therapy for himself. He took refuge in commiserating with his friends instead.

I sought help from a family therapist, but felt it wasn't doing any good. All I was doing was talking and not really putting forth the effort I would need to in order to progress. So I dropped this therapy. Later, I would seek help from a licensed Psychologist. This, too, seemed ineffective to me. Again, I must take responsibility for not putting forth the effort I needed to in order to progress. I gave up on therapy thinking it should have done more for me, when, in reality, I should have been doing more for myself. It's a difficult thing to admit, but true.

Even in my own personal fog, I began to see the downward spiral my family was in. I eventually realized I needed to do something drastic in order for my family to survive....hence, the move to Bailey.

When Katherine came into our lives, she did so at the request of another Columbine family who saw the downward spiral my family was in. She remembers the story I told above about the grocery store visit a bit differently than I told it.

Katherine: 

My recall of the story you tell about the grocery store visit is a bit different than mine. Since you mentioned it I feel it is okay to speak to this event. While at your home for a session with Anne Marie I noticed her diet was consisting of a Costco size barrel of cheese puffs, soda, tootsie pops and McDonald's fare when she could con Nathan and Jayson into picking it up for her. Given the amount of meals being brought to your family at the time and from what I had seen the great quality of the food I couldn’t understand why she was choosing junk! We had had more than one conversation with regard to the type of diet that was necessary for her body and it's healing; foods high in protein, fibers for digestion, vitamin rich sources, etc., and the energy foods that would aid, not hinder her progress. The only explanation she offered was an emotion tug, if you will, to dismiss my repetition on the subject, "It's not my mothers cooking". I will admit this did back me up for a minute or two until I realized the ploy. When I asked her what her favorite meal was that her mother had prepared and she couldn't think of one, I started to get the picture. When I asked her what she would eat she explained her father wasn't doing any shopping and nothing in the house appealed to her. It was then that I handed her a piece of paper and a pen and asked her to make a list of groceries. She wrote a few items on the list; bologna, Kraft singles, some white bread. Nothing major but at least she was making an effort. It was then that I proceeded to the family room where you, Ted, were watching TV and asked you to take an inventory of the fridge and pantry to determine what might be needed. By the look on your face at the time I am pretty sure you were thinking either I was over stepping or losing it. You did however do what I had asked and added to the list Anne Marie had started. It was then that I handed you your shoes and explained I wasn't going to do it for you but that I would accompany you to the store if you were not up to making the trip alone. Again judging by the look on your face at the time, while you agreed, you were not pleased. And by the way you did just fine. Having been a single parent myself for sometime your argument that it was all too hard and too much for one person to me seemed far from realistic, you were now a single parent and given all the bases that needed covering anything other than rising to the occasion was a waste of time. Oh, and the comment you made about "just don't ask me to bring out my feminine side", as I remember my response to you was along the lines of "I didn't ask you to paint your toe nails and wear pantyhose.” Rather, it was to accept the dual role you would need to fill both as nurturing caregiver and father.

So, it was shoes she ‘tossed’ (just kidding) at me, not keys! Yeah, I deserved everything she threw at me, no getting around it. Like I said above, she saw things I basically chose not to see. She told it like it was. The thing is, everything she said helped me realize I wasn't being honest with myself. She didn't pull any punches, and, at the time, I guess maybe I did resent her honesty and candor a bit if I'm truly honest with myself. I had edginess, rawness about me back then that I can only hope has diminished with time.

She often times told me I was in a ‘comfort zone’, that my ‘protective mode’ was always on high alert. And, she was absolutely right. I even got pretty good at feeling sorry for myself, too. So, thank you, Katherine, for your honesty, your integrity, and your grittiness. Thank you, too, for loving me.

And I still ain't gonna paint my toenails and wear pantyhose.

So, was the move to Bailey the best thing I could have done for my family? I guess that depends on one's perspective. In the end, Anne Marie chose to estrange herself from my side of her family including Nathan. I suspect that outcome may have happened whether we stayed in Littleton or not. The details of why that happened aren't something I will discuss in any forum. That, and many other things, have been difficult by anyone's measure, to be sure. But we have survived, and we continue to strive for healing and the highest good of all.

The healing journey continues…..

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

How Did You Feel the 20th of April, 1999?

It's been 20+ years now since the school massacre known as 'Columbine'. It is very difficult, even now, to revisit a lot of what happened that day, although I still get asked that question more times than I care to remember.

The emotions surrounding the events of that day can be, and sometimes still are, visceral, palpable, raw. They'll likely remain that way for as long as I live.

I reference 'events' of the day in the plural form because the massacre was not a single event. April 20, 1999 did not begin, nor did it end, with the onset and cessation of this violent conflagration. Not even close!

Even after the last explosive devices were detonated and the last shots were fired, the 'events' of the day continued and multiplied for everyone involved in this incident...families of those who were murdered, families of those who were injured, families of those who were there that day and survived with no outward physical injuries, the Columbine Community, and beyond.

For so very many, the journey through those events, the labyrinth that was to become a maze of twists and turns, some good and some not so good, had just begun.

So, the emotions associated with those events are also referenced in the plural.

Things like:

• Ups, downs and everything imaginable in between
• Facing up to seemingly insurmountable obstacles
• Bucking up and surmounting at least some of those insurmountable obstacles
• Wanting to beat our heads against a wall because of the almost constant high anxiety
• Breathing sighs of relief in the few moments where the anxiety levels were almost bearable
• Facing fears for the future of our children, our families, our community
• Dealing with the disgust being felt toward the shooters and their families (it wouldn't be until later that I, personally, came to a personal acceptance that their families were not to blame for what the shooters had done)
• Welcoming anything....anything at all that gave rise to feelings of hope for the future
• Anticipating (with anxiety) all the bad news that brought dejection...dejection bordering on abject hopelessness
• Welcoming the kindness, compassion, and love shown by family, friends, community, and beyond
• Getting frustrated and sometimes angry with some of the self-centeredness exhibited by some folks
• And more....much, much more

Each and every one of those emotions are presented here in very broad, general terms. That's the way they'll stay for now. For me, personally, I must also add dealing with my first wife's mental illness....her fear, her loathing, and her delusional paranoia with psychotic episodes simmering just below the surface, all of which she was feeling and trying so very hard to keep in check

I know how all the emotions in the above list affected me. I do not pretend to speak for others on how those emotions, when bundled together, affected them.

In fact, for those whose family members were murdered that day, emotions were, I'm pretty sure, far different than the emotions experienced by those whose children were injured. Far, far different.

And, for those who were there...the 'survivors'..., emotions also were, I'm pretty sure, far different than the emotions experienced by those whose children were murdered or injured. Far, far different.

Those individuals have just recently begun coming to the fore and their feelings, their emotions, their trauma are being expressed by them more publicly than before both personally and in various groups. The Rebels Project is just one example of a trauma support organization that also has a trauma survivor/support group (The Rebels Project: Mass Shooting and Trauma Support).

The latter group is a private group and membership is limited to those who've suffered trauma as a result of gun violence and/or mass shootings. It's also by invitation only, so, if any readers of this blog post who meet membership requirements would like to, or need, trauma support from some pretty incredible members, please let me know and I'll nominate you through the group admins.

But I digress.....

For me, when bundled together in a day that seemed to have no end, those emotions rendered me numb, almost to the point of being mindless.

• Just go with the flow
• Let things fall where they may
• Rely on the professionals to do their jobs
• Stay in the background as much as possible
• Don't get in the way
• Look to the future no matter how premature that might be, plan for the worst, but also hope for the best
• Try to stay focused
• Above all else, be strong (yeah, right)

How does one realistically address the maelstrom swirling around everyone affected by this shitstorm? Seriously....how does one go about doing the things and making decisions about those critical things that fall solely on one's own shoulders....no one else's shoulders, one's OWN shoulders....that could mean the difference between life and death for a loved one? Seriously....

Taken individually, handling these emotions one by one might actually have been possible. Taken in the aggregate, especially with what was going down, they were, quite literally, mind numbing!

A psychological self-defense mechanism kicked in for me from the moment I first heard there was a school shooting taking place at my kids' school...one of numbness. It was my own personal coping mechanism. It pretty much lasted throughout the day and far into the night, but the next day.....

The details of that specific day have become somewhat hazy.....not forgotten, just hazy.

But the one word that best describes all the feelings above that I've tried to explain in such a manner so people will be able to understand, to accept, to be able to wrap their heads around, to empathize somehow and then all rolled into one for me is numb.

I felt numb.

When the day after April 20, 1999 dawned cold, rainy, and heavy laden with misery for so many families whose lives were irrevocably altered by 'Columbine', reality took on a whole new meaning:

It was after that first day, April 20, 1999, that reality began to set in, a reality that a lot of folks struggled with in trying to describe their own situations in such a way that others might understand, might be able to comprehend, might be able to even begin to wrap their heads around.

Cliches and analogies became commonplace:

• New normal
• Wheels fell off
• Runaway freight train
• Worst school massacre in history (although it wasn't)
• It DID happen here
• We are Columbine
• We are ALL Columbine 

....to name a few.

Little did any of us know on that day that all those descriptors...all the cute, trite cliches and analogies would come to be associated with 'Columbine' and kind of even become a baseline of sorts for other school massacres.

There were massacres prior to 'Columbine', and there have been many massacres after 'Columbine'.

Every single one of those massacres deserves to be remembered in their own right and to be recognized for their own unique place in the unwelcome, unwanted 'community' of those affected by these atrocities.

None is more or less tragic than another.

And I'll end this blog post on that note.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

How Can People With Suicidal/Homicidal Ideation Be Helped?

Three years ago I was asked a series of questions by a high school student from Medellin, Columbia. One of those questions was "How Can People With Suicidal/Homicidal Ideation Be Helped".

Because September is National Suicide Prevention Month, I decided to reprise the blog post I wrote then in response to her question with some revisions/updates.

Disclaimer: To be very clear right from the get go on this blog post.....

I am NOT a medical professional, nor do I claim to have any medical training in the areas of mental illness and criminology. I'm not a doctor, a psychologist, a psychiatrist, a therapist, a social worker, or any other member of the medical community anyone can conjure up. I'm not a member of law enforcement of any kind, either.

I am merely someone in the lay community having a modicum of personal experience as a direct result of the near homicide of two of my children and the successful act of suicide of my first wife, Carla. As such, what I'm about to present must also be taken with that old proverbial grain of salt.

My experiences do not, in and of themselves, make me a 'subject matter expert' by any stretch of anyone's imagination. They do, however, give me a basis or platform from which to be able to speak to the issue of mental illness and the role it may play in causing some to engage in the acts of suicide and homicide, and I do so strictly from my own personal perspective and biases.

Random Sputterings

The quote above is something I came across in my random surfing on the Internet (some things out there are actually useful in some ways). This quote goes directly to the heart of what's being asked in the blog post title.

If one approaches trying to help someone exhibiting symptoms of suicidal or homicidal ideation, both of which I believe are symptoms of a mental illness in some form, does trying to help 'someone' mean someone else, or does it mean ones' own self? This is an extremely important distinction in my opinion.

Mental illness takes many forms. We've all heard of depression as one of the more common mental illnesses. Many have also heard of schizophrenia as another. Bipolar disorder is just one more in what could ultimately be a very long list.

But when it gets into more complex and pervasive psychoses such as delusional paranoia with psychotic episodes, what we do know is that we know very little!

I can tell you that when delusional paranoia and psychotic episodes manifest together, the symptoms basically consist of hallucinations during what might be compared to a very bad trip on LSD...sans the LSD. At least that's the modality Carla presented from her initial diagnosis in 1996 forward.

She also suffered from severe depression, very...severe...depression. But that's about all I can tell you other than it was incurable according to every single one of her medical caregivers.

I do not know what caused it. I do not know what treatment regimens might have been more effective than the ones she was on. Neither did the medical profession. They were quite literally flummoxed by not being able to effectively treat her symptoms and in formulating a treatment regimen they knew would need to be consistently re-evaluated and tweaked as symptoms ebbed and flowed. They told me the disease of mental illness is pretty much fluid in its manifestation, and, as such, it demands flexibility in treatment regimens being designed and used.

Because Carla suffered from delusional paranoia with psychotic episodes accompanied by severe depression, that will be my focus from this point forward in this blog post relative to suicidal ideation. Those details are details of my own reality in trying to help her to at least be able to cope enough to be able to live a reasonably 'normal' life.

Please note, however, as the quote in the meme above should be interpreted, 'normal' is a relative term applicable to any number of situations. After all, we all define our own 'normal' as being unique to ourselves, do we not?

In the final analysis, when we talk about mental illness we're basically talking about mental capacity affected by an illness that no one I'm aware of, not even in the medical community, can actually pinpoint a cause of, much less prescribe a treatment regimen that will control it with 100% efficacy, a treatment regimen that may include both medications and hospitalization with intense therapy. Medical professionals know there is no cure for this malady. They also know helping control the symptoms of it is on the order of being a crap shoot of sorts.

To be fair, I believe the medical community was stymied by Carla's condition. She was on what they called a medical cocktail of 9 different medications when she put that gun to her temple and pulled the trigger to end her life.

And, to be brutally honest, I struggled for a very, very long time wondering if I did everything I possibly could have to help her cope, to help her so that she would have chosen life over death.

She was smart. She was meticulous in her planning. She was almost diabolical in the methodology she chose to end her life. But, most of all, she was determined.

Nothing was going to stop her from carrying out this act. Not the medical profession. Not me. Not the knowledge her kids would grow up without their Mother there to attend those special events in their lives and to watch them as they matured into adulthood. None of those things were considerations for her. That is not a condemnation. It is simply how it was.

To those having a more 'normal' mental disposition/capacity, this is almost beyond comprehension, and therein lies the frustration in trying to effectively answer the question posed by the blog post title from my own personal perspective because I failed to prevent her from taking her own life. The question I must ask myself is what makes me qualified in any way, shape, or form to speak to this issue with any modicum of knowledge when the end result of my efforts was failure?

Pretty morbid thinking, eh? It's my reality, though...like it or not.

Ultimately, though, I've come to accept that the decision to end her own life was hers, and hers alone....sort of like the decision made by the shooters of Columbine to wreak such havoc on the lives of so many others when they did what they did. Their decision to carry out an act of homicide was theirs and theirs alone.

Speaking of homicidal ideation....

This area is more nebulous, especially for me. The shooters of Columbine were both homicidal and suicidal. I don't know if they started their mayhem being suicidal, but that's how it all ended.

Honestly, I don't know if I can even provide any insight whatsoever into helping someone with homicidal ideation.

In many respects, the same treatment regimens might apply to homicidal ideation as apply to suicidal ideation as long as those ideations present themselves and a clinical diagnosis can be made in which case evaluating and implementing a treatment regimen takes place.

Medical professionals are supposed to be consulted and they are supposed to be relied upon to provide their best, most professional help possible. Or so the thinking goes, but, once again, in reality it's almost a crap shoot.

In the case of the shooters of Columbine, the ensuing investigation revealed certain indicators, red flags if you will, that were definitely missed by many professionals in their respective fields. Those red flags, had they been acted upon, may ultimately have prevented this massacre, but no one knows with 100% certainty that they would have. I say this only from the perspective there's also no way I am 100% certain that had I done anything different I would have prevented Carla's suicide.

With Carla's mental illness, I had the advantage of basically knowing she was suicidal. I'm still not so sure that knowledge was evident with anyone involved with the shooters of Columbine, at least not blatantly so.

And, if none of the above seems to offer any modicum of how to help someone presenting with suicidal or homicidal ideation, perhaps what we should really be discussing is a pervasive negative stigma that is all too often associated with virtually any form of mental illness. Perhaps understanding that negative stigma associated with mental illness should be the first step in being able to effectively help those suffering from this malady.

Negative stigma associated with mental illness is arguably the single biggest stumbling block preventing those who suffer from this malady from seeking the help they may so desperately need.

Far too many of those who consider themselves to be 'normal' do not understand, much less know how to acknowledge, accept, and interact with someone suffering from mental illness. That is simply a statement of fact.

Those who consider themselves to be 'normal' often times react to aberrant behavior of any kind as the perpetrator being 'crazy' or perhaps 'bonkers' or perhaps some other derogatory label. Every single one of those labels contributes to the negative stigma associated with mental illness in any form. That, too, is simply a statement of fact.

In all the research I've done since my own family's trauma, in all the heartache associated with that trauma one thing stands out: There is an almost unrelenting ignorance of those on the outside looking in.

Ignorance is bliss.

Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson for May 20, 2012

Being ignorant doesn't equate to stupidity. Rather, it just means someone isn't knowledgeable about something if they are ignorant of, or ignorant in, that something. That's all.

So, when people hear or read things about the shooters of Columbine, as just one example, their reaction is one of disgust, anger, and sometimes even a modicum of fear of 'the crazies' who did this. A fear of 'the loonies' who commit other massacres.

But to so casually refer to the shooters in massacres as 'the crazies' also displays not only a sense of ignorance of the disease of mental illness, but an insensitivity toward those who suffer from it.

That...that right there is what needs to be addressed first and foremost in a very long process of increased awareness and self-education necessary in overcoming the negative stigma associated with this disease. If we choose not to do this, we may very well end up like Calvin and Hobbes did in the cartoon above....being careful so as not to have learned anything from our own experiences regardless of how traumatic those experiences might be.

So, in the end, have I answered the question posed in the blog post title? I guess it depends upon one's own perspective.

If readers of this blog post were looking for a clinical diagnosis or dissertation on how best to go about helping those suffering from mental illness, this question will, by virtue of the fact I am not a medical professional, remain unanswered.

If, on the other hand, readers of this blog post choose to take what I've provided based upon my own experience with that proverbial grain of salt I talked about at the very beginning, then perhaps the question has been answered...to a degree.

No one ever promised anyone a rose garden. Mental illness in any form is a complex disease accompanied by complex issues. How anyone approaches providing help to someone else or seeking help they, themselves, may need is a very personal choice.

One final thought....any choice made to follow whatever treatment regimen one might come up with is going to be fraught with inherent risks. It's ultimately going to be up to the individual suffering from mental illness to decide which risks to address.

Perhaps some of them.

Perhaps all of them.

There are no easy answers....a simple statement of fact.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Emergency Management - What Is It?

Emergency management....what the heck is it and why should anyone care?

I don't know how many times when people ask me what I do and I tell them I'm an emergency management specialist, they look at me like what planet are you from? Well, in the interest of full transparency, I'm a retired emergency management specialist, but I still get that same look no matter how I couch it.

For those who've never really thought about or heard of emergency management it's nothing more, really, than managing emergencies...or trying to as it were.

On a broad societal scale, the definition in the graphic above applies and it takes someone with a certain skill-set to be able to 'game the system' in order to make it work.

On an individual level, though, we've all done it, and we're all gonna continue to do it....especially if we have accident prone kids or we're responsible for accident prone adults like me.

We manage cuts, bruises, scratches, broken bones - you know, those common-place emergencies some of us are faced with more often than we'd like to admit. It's when we do really stupid things like putting a running chainsaw across our knee (like I did a few years back) that those who know how to sew that sucker back up get to work their magic to save the day!

Some will tell you Moms are generally better at the 'garden variety' types of emergencies, especially when it comes to their kids.

Some guys will tell you no way - men are inherently better at it for whatever egotistical reason(s) they can come up with.

In actuality, it can go both ways.

When Moms respond if their kids (or idiotic husbands like me with a chainsaw) are in danger, they usually do so with a calmness and strength unmatched anywhere. Many Dads in the same situation become quivering piles of useless jello (myself included).

Emergency management is a very simple concept, really. Emergencies occur, we respond to them based upon our own level of expertise and knowledge. Simple as that. Some people might even consider getting up in the morning to be an emergency situation - at least until the coffee is made and in a cup within reach!

It's when the emergencies get too big to handle by ourselves that we often times run into trouble. The old adage, 'sink or swim' often plays a much larger role in our response than most of us would be willing to admit. That's also when most of us have enough sense to call in reinforcements to help.

We call the fire department if we have a house fire...well, we call 911 and they dispatch the fire department.

We call the police (again, we call 911) if we experience a break in (unless we have our own self-defense planned for and implemented - well, we eventually have to call the police anyway).

We rely on EMTs to save our lives if we have a heart attack.

And the list goes on.

That's how the 'system' is supposed to work.

Regardless of the scenario, we use a process to arrive at whatever decisions we must make in order to survive. Our own personal level(s) of preparedness often dictate how well we actually respond if, and when, the time comes to do so.

Government is no different in this regard....ALL levels of government.

It's when the everyday 'garden variety' emergencies get out of control that more help is needed and calls go out for assistance.

What's a 'garden variety' emergency, you ask? It's one that a local jurisdiction can handle all by itself...or should handle all by itself, the operative word here being 'should'. Minor discipline problems at school ring a bell as just one example? This is an issue that's getting a LOT of attention here lately what with more calls for increased law enforcement presence in our schools.

But I digress.....

When this occurs, depending upon the response readiness and capability of the next higher level of government, assistance can be immediate or it can be the opposite. In this regard, emergency management can actually be considered a sort of art form if it's done right. Unfortunately, more often than not, emergency management falls far short of what it should. Why is that? The answer(s) may surprise you.

For one....lack of preparedness (everyone, not just first responders). How many times have we heard lamentations that someone never thought it could happen to them in their safe, close-knit community?

If that's the lamentation it also means little to no preparation took place before the emergency slapped them upside their heads with a heavy dose of reality....that IT CAN HAPPEN HERE...and EVERYWHERE!

It's the IT that we need to figure out and get ready to respond to, and that ain't happening as much as it needs to.

Another one....no mitigation activities, not even an analysis of what MIGHT be done to reduce the likelihood of an event's occurrence, much less trying to eliminate the possibility.

Yet another....response deficiencies in the form of inadequate equipment, lack of appropriate and intensive enough training.

And, finally....problems with recovery including such things as disaster relief, rebuilding infrastructure, insurance issues, victim's assistance, and counseling.

Those are just a few in a very long list of things that come into play and need to be considered when preparing for emergency and disaster events.

Bottom line, emergency management consists of five preparedness missions:

REMS TA Center Webinar 'THE ROLE OF DISTRICTS IN SUPPORTING SCHOOLS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH-QUALITY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLANS

If any single mission in this cycle is left out or given less attention than it deserves, the entire process literally falls apart.

Compare the emergency management cycle to the following one below illustrating an 'illogical' gun violence cycle (which, by the way, can be applied to virtually any scenario and/or hazard), and you might just get a better idea of the obstacles we all face in this process:

Add to this the reality many organizations do not recognize, much less accept, their moral, ethical, and legal responsibilities regarding emergency management, and we're looking at a serious recipe for disaster.

So, what's the big deal when it comes to emergency management? Well, it pretty much boils down to a process, a 'system' as it were. Emergency management is the entire process...the whole shebang!

Each individual 'preparedness mission' is an individual phase of an emergency management 'process' that falls under the umbrella of the emergency management 'program'.

For example, response (which is what many of us pay the most attention to because it's also the most visible of all the phases when the proverbial kaka hits the fan) is an action.

And that's where the art form comes in.

We hail our heroes when their response goes above and beyond, and deservedly so. They risk their lives in order to do what they do.

Emergency managers, however, work behind the scenes in an effort to try to make sure the responses go as planned.

That requires every single responder, every single response organization, every single government agency at every level that may have a role in a response and recovery operation, every volunteer organization, and every single organization responsible for providing for the safety of an 'at risk' group (like school children, maybe) must work together beforehand to try to:

1. Communicate their ideas with each other,
2. Coordinate their plans and activities with each other,
3. Cooperate across agency and jurisdictional boundaries with each other, and
4. Collaborate with each other.

There's a ton of information out there to help in this process (here's a partial list of resources for school safety I've compiled for my own blog as just one example: School Safety Resources).

If it's done right, response to emergency and even disaster events can be pretty seamless and efficient.

If it isn't done right, there will be hell to pay.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.