It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Safe School Initiative, an extensive examination of 37 incidents of targeted school shootings and school attacks that have occurred in the United States beginning with the earliest identified incident in 1974 through June 2000. The focus of the Safe School Initiative was on examining the thinking, planning, and other behaviors engaged in by students who carried out school attacks. Particular attention was given to identifying pre-attack behaviors and communications that might be detectable--or “knowable”--and could help in preventing some future attacks.
CONTENTS
JOINT MESSAGE FROM THE SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND THE DIRECTOR, U.S. SECRET SERVICE 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5
CONTENTS 7
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION: THE SAFE SCHOOL INITIATIVE 8
The Safe School Initiative 8
Defining “Targeted” School Violence 9
The Secret Service Threat Assessment Approach 10
The Prevalence of Violence in American Schools 11
Methodology 13
The Study Population 14
Sources of Information on Incidents of Targeted School Violence 14
Analysis of Responses to the Coded Study Questions 15
Organization of the Final Report 16
Overview of Safe School Initiative Findings 17
CHAPTER II: CHARACTERISTICS OF INCIDENTS OF TARGETED SCHOOL VIOLENCE 19
Target and Victim Characteristics 20
CHAPTER III: FINDINGS OF THE SAFE SCHOOL INITIATIVE 22
Characterizing the Attacker 22
Conceptualizing the Attack 27
Signaling the Attack 28
Advancing the Attack 30
Resolving the Attack 31
CHAPTER IV: IMPLICATIONS OF SAFE SCHOOL INITIATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE PREVENTION OF TARGETED SCHOOL VIOLENCE 33
The Implications of Key Study Findings 34
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION: THREAT ASSESSMENT AS A PROMISING STRATEGY FOR PREVENTING SCHOOL VIOLENCE 41
Threat Assessment and Targeted School Violence Prevention 41
APPENDIX A: Incidents of Targeted School Violence by State 43
APPENDIX B: Incidents of Targeted School Violence by Year 44
APPENDIX C: Resources 45
Key features of the Safe School Initiative were its focus on “targeted” school violence and its adaptation of earlier Secret Service research on assassination for its examination of incidents of school-based attacks.
The focus of the ECSP study was an operational analysis of the thinking and behavior of those who have assassinated, attacked or tried to attack a national public official or public figure in the United States since 1949. The ECSP defined “targeted violence” as any incident of violence where a known or knowable attacker selects a particular target prior to their violent attack.
Threat assessment is a process of identifying, assessing and managing the threat that certain persons may pose to Secret Service protectees. The goal of threat assessment is to intervene before an attack can occur. The threat assessment process involves three principal steps–all before the person has the opportunity to attack: identifying individuals who have the idea or intent of attacking a Secret Service protectee; assessing whether the individual poses a risk to a protectee, after gathering sufficient information from multiple sources; and, managing the threat the individual poses, in those cases where the individual investigated is determined to pose a threat.
To put the problem of targeted school-based attacks in context, from 1993 to 1997 the odds that a child in grades 9-12 would be threatened or injured with a weapon in school were 7 to 8 percent, or 1 in 13 or 14; the odds of getting into a physical fight at school were 15 percent, or 1 in 7. In contrast, the odds that a child would die in school–by homicide or suicide–are, fortunately, no greater than 1 in 1 million. In 1998, students in grades 9-12 were the victims of 1.6 million thefts and 1.2 million nonfatal violent crimes, while in this same period 60 school-associated violent deaths were reported for this student population
The findings of the Safe School Initiative’s extensive search for recorded incidents of targeted school-based attacks underscore the rarity of lethal attacks in school settings. The Department of Education reports that nearly 60 million children attend the nation’s 119,000+ schools. The combined efforts of the Secret Service and the Department of Education identified 37 incidents of targeted school-based attacks, committed by 41 individuals over a 25-year period.
For the purposes of this study, an incident of targeted school violence was defined as any incident where (i) a current student or recent former student attacked someone at his or her school with lethal means (e.g., a gun or knife); and, (ii) where the student attacker purposefully chose his or her school as the location of the attack. Consistent with this definition, incidents where the school was chosen simply as a site of opportunity, such as incidents that were solely related to gang or drug trade activity or to a violent interaction between individuals that just happened to occur at the school, were not included.
*the attacker’s development of an idea to harm the target, and progression from the original idea to the attack;
*the attacker’s selection of the target(s);
*the attacker’s motive(s) for the incident;
*any communications made by the attacker about his or her ideas and intent, including any threats made to the *target(s) or about the target(s);
*evidence that the attacker planned the incident;
*the attacker’s mental health and substance abuse history, if any; and,
*the attacker’s life circumstances/situation at the time of the attack, including relationships with parents and *other family members; performance in school; and treatment by fellow students.
*Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely were sudden, impulsive acts.
*Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.
Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack.
*There is no accurate or useful “profile” of students who engaged in targeted school violence.
*Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.
*Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Moreover, many had considered or attempted suicide.
*Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted or injured by others prior to the attack.
*Most attackers had access to and had used weapons prior to the attack.
*In many cases, other students were involved in some capacity.
*Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
In almost three-quarters of the incidents, the attacker killed one or more students, faculty or others at the school (73 percent, n=27). In the remaining incidents, the attackers used a weapon to injure at least one person at school (24 percent, n=9). In one incident, a student killed his family and then held his class hostage with a weapon.
More than one-half of the attacks occurred during the school day (59 percent, n=22), with fewer occurring before school (22 percent, n=8) or after school (16 percent, n=6).
Almost all of the attackers were current students at the school where they carried out their attacks (95 percent, n=39). Only two attackers were former students of the school where they carried out their attacks at the time of those attacks (5 percent, n=2).
All of the incidents of targeted school violence examined in the Safe School Initiative were committed by boys or young men (100 percent, n=41).
In most of the incidents, the attackers carried out the attack alone (81 percent, n=30). In four of the incidents, the attacker engaged in the attack on his own but had assistance in planning the attack (11 percent, n=4). In three incidents, two or more attackers carried out the attack together (8 percent, n=3).
Most attackers used some type of gun as their primary weapon, with over half of the attackers using handguns (61 percent, n=25), and nearly half of them using rifles or shotguns (49 percent, n=20). Three-quarters of the attackers used only one weapon (76 percent, n=31) to harm their victims, although almost half of the attackers had more than one weapon with them at time of the attack (46 percent, n=19).
In over half of the incidents (54 percent, n=22), the attacker had selected at least one school administrator, faculty member or staff member as a target. Students were chosen as targets in fewer than half of the incidents (41 percent, n=15).
In nearly half of the incidents, the attackers were known to have chosen more than one target prior to their attack (44 percent, n=16).
Most attackers had a grievance against at least one of their targets prior to the attack (73 percent, n=30).
In almost half of the incidents (46 percent, n=17), individuals who were targeted prior to the attack also became victims (i.e., individuals actually harmed in the attack). However, other individuals at the school, who were not identified as original targets of the attack, were injured or killed as well. Among these non-targeted individuals, over half were other students (57 percent, n=21) and over one-third (39 percent, n=16) were school administrators, faculty or staff.
The findings of researchers’ analysis of the 37 incidents of targeted school violence that were examined under the Safe School Initiative fall generally into five areas:
characterizing the attacker;
conceptualizing the attack;
signaling the attack;
advancing the attack; and,
resolving the attack.
The attackers in the largest grouping were doing well in school at the time of the attack, generally receiving As and Bs in their courses (41 percent; n=17); some were even taking Advanced Placement courses at the time of the incident or had been on the honor roll repeatedly.
Fewer of the attackers were receiving Bs and Cs (15 percent, n=6), or Cs and Ds (22 percent, n=9).
Very few of the attackers were known to be failing in school (5 percent, n=2).
Almost two-thirds of the attackers came from two-parent families (63 percent, n=26), living either with both biological parents (44 percent, n=18) or with one biological parent and one stepparent (19 percent, n=8).
Some lived with one biological parent (19 percent, n=8) or split time between two biological parents (2 percent, n=1).
Very few lived with a foster parent or legal guardian (5 percent, n=2).
The largest group of attackers for whom this information was available appeared to socialize with mainstream students or were considered mainstream students themselves (41 percent, n=17).
One-quarter of the attackers (27 percent, n=11) socialized with fellow students who were disliked by most mainstream students or were considered to be part of a “fringe” group.
Few attackers had no close friends (12 percent, n=5).
One-third of attackers had been characterized by others as “loners,” or felt themselves to be loners (34 percent, n=14).
However, nearly half of the attackers were involved in some organized social activities in or outside of school (44 percent, n=18). These activities included sports teams, school clubs, extracurricular activities and mainstream religious groups.
Only one-third of attackers had ever received a mental health evaluation (34 percent, n=14), and fewer than one-fifth had been diagnosed with mental health or behavior disorder prior to the attack (17 percent, n=7).
Although most attackers had not received a formal mental health evaluation or diagnosis, most attackers exhibited a history of suicide attempts or suicidal thoughts at some point prior to their attack (78 percent, n=32). More than half of the attackers had a documented history of feeling extremely depressed or desperate (61 percent, n=25).
Approximately one-quarter of the attackers had a known history of alcohol or substance abuse (24 percent, n=10).
The only information collected that would indicate whether attackers had been prescribed psychiatric medications concerned medication non-compliance (i.e., failure to take medication as prescribed). Ten percent of the attackers (n=4) were known to be non-compliant with prescribed psychiatric medications.
Approximately one-quarter of the attackers had exhibited an interest in violent movies (27 percent, n=11).
Approximately one-quarter of the attackers had exhibited an interest in violent books (24 percent, n=10).
One-eighth of the attackers exhibited an interest in violent video games (12 percent, n=5).
The largest group of attackers exhibited an interest in violence in their own writings, such as poems, essays or journal entries (37 percent, n=15).
Finding
Most attackers had no history of prior violent or criminal behavior.
Explanation
Fewer than one-third of the attackers were known to have acted violently toward others at some point prior to the incident (31 percent, n=13).
Very few of the attackers were known to have harmed or killed an animal at any time prior to the incident (12 percent, n=5).
Approximately one-quarter of the attackers had a prior history of arrest (27 percent, n=
Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely are sudden, impulsive acts.
Explanation
Several findings of the Safe School Initiative indicate clearly that the school-based attacks studied were rarely impulsive. Rather, these attacks typically were thought out beforehand and involved some degree of advance planning. In many cases, the attacker’s observable behavior prior to the attack suggested he might be planning or preparing for a school attack.
For those incidents where information was available to determine how long the attacker had an idea to harm the target (n=33), the analysis showed that a little over half of the attackers developed their idea for the incident at least a month prior to the attack (51 percent, n=17).
In addition, almost all of the attackers planned out the attack in advance of carrying it out (93 percent; n=38).
Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.
Explanation
In most cases, other people knew about the attack before it took place. In over three-quarters of the incidents, at least one person had information that the attacker was thinking about or planning the school attack (81 percent, n=30). In nearly two-thirds of the incidents, more than one person had information about the attack before it occurred (59 percent, n=22). In nearly all of these cases, the person who knew was a peer–a friend, schoolmate, or sibling (93 percent, n=28/30). Some peers knew exactly what the attacker planned to do; others knew something “big” or “bad” was going to happen, and in several cases knew the time and date it was to occur.
Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack.
Explanation
The majority of the attackers in the targeted school violence incidents examined under the Safe School Initiative did not threaten their target(s) directly, i.e., did not tell the target they intended to harm them, whether in direct, indirect or conditional language prior to the attack. Only one-sixth of the attackers threatened their target(s) directly prior to the attack (17 percent, n=7).
Experience using weapons and access to them was common for many attackers. Nearly two-thirds of the attackers had a known history of weapons use, including knives, guns and bombs (63 percent, n=26). Over half of the attackers had some experience specifically with a gun prior to the incident (59 percent, n=24), while others had experience with bombs or explosives (15 percent, n=6). However, fewer than half of the attackers demonstrated any fascination or excessive interest with weapons (44 percent, n=18), and less than one-third showed a fascination with explosives (32 percent, n=13) prior to their attacks. Over two-thirds of the attackers acquired the gun (or guns) used in their attacks from their own home or that of a relative (68 percent, n=28).
Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most attacks were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
Incidents of targeted violence at school rarely are sudden, impulsive acts.
Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack.
Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack.
There is no accurate or useful profile of students who engaged in targeted school violence.
Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.
Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Moreover, many had considered or attempted suicide.
Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted or injured by others prior to the attack.
Most attackers had access to and had used weapons prior to the attack.
In many cases, other students were involved in some capacity.
Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention.
Nov. 19, 1999
Deming, N.M. Victor Cordova Jr., 12, shot and killed Araceli Tena, 13, in the lobby of Deming Middle School.
Cordova Sr. said a doctor prescribed medication for his son's temperament two years ago, but the boy stopped taking it shortly thereafter when he grew more depressed.
Cordova Jr. was living in Palomas and was commuting to school in Deming. He has dual citizenship, because he was born in Deming. He is one of scores of American children living in Palomas who are allowed to cross the border each day to attend classes in Luna County, a practice that has been around for decades.