Active Shooter Training Part One
Recently I was asked to interpret the term “justice” as it relates to a suspect that is a survivor of a critical incident that person was responsible for committing. This post is a basic Q&A style response that will be the start of a series on active shooter training sessions for “everyone else.”
How does the interpretation of the term justice change from the point of view of the victim, the offender, society, and the criminal justice system?
Justice in the eyes of the victim typically means demanding someone “pay” for a wronging to them. The victim wants vengeance, retaliation, answers to why they were a victim, and who is doing something about it?
Justice in the eyes of the offender varies from my side of the interrogation table. If they have some type of remorse about the crime (they ALL have remorse about getting caught) they ask for justice to “help” them. They are sorry for the victim and families etc… If they are not remorseful for the crime, they tend to be arrogant and think the justice system is going to get “beat” or “stick it to them”, either was, usually a narcissistic view. Sometimes the offender shares the view; “means demanding someone “pay” for a wronging to them.”
These thoughts are common in each incident of surveyors who perpetuated critical incidents or active shooter events.
Typically, society views justice by the amount of crime they see on TV or in the news. Whether a police officer made a difference by saving 50 people or punched someone in the mouth they are the taxpayers and they want answers. Most people in society just want to know they are safe and as long as they do not become part of the victims class tend to walk through like thinking police will handle evil and bad people will go to jail and the courts are the solution to both.
Justice is viewed within the criminal justice system as evolving and rarely satisfying. The criminal justice system sees justice as smooth and efficient operations of time and resources like most businesses. Justice is best served when the parties involved are satisfied and to achieve that there as simply too many variables to get a consistent bench mark. Therefore, it will remain evolving…
It is a must since this was directed toward an active shooter incident, that the evolution must include training for everyone within events that will be there the 1 minutes that the incident occurs (by average) and waiting the 14 minutes for police to respond (as the national average backs these response times). Further, we must seek out to recognize people with issues that are obvious and try to help them through. It is true you may never know what you stop, but that should not stop you from trying to do the right thing…
Filed under Chris Grollnek 530 D.Q. 9873