active shooter, school shootings, violent intruder, workplace violence, workplace shootings, alert, lockdown, inform, counter, evacuate, columbine, virginia tech, beslan, defensive strategies, intruder response, intruder defense, alice, shootings, terrorist attacks, terrorism, school safety, school security, security in school, security in schools, guns in school, a.l.i.c.e. training, alice training, greg crane, violent shooter experts, terrorism in schools, violent in schools, school violence, school security training, threats in schools, school bullying
© Response Options 2012-2013.
We are a full service, critical incident response training company, specializing in active shooter and violent intruder events. We are prepared to train your organization, or speak at your event, and provide an experienced, professional level of support.
ALiCE Training is offered in the following modules:
Leadership: Why should pro-active response procedures be considered, and what are the policy options for a violent intruder event? Administrative level personnel. 2-8 hour training by our experienced consultants
Management: What are the ALICE options, and how do we implement the program? Management level personnel. 2-8 hour training by our experienced consultants
User: What do I do if I am faced with a violent intruder? All personnel levels. 45 mins - 2 hour (multiple trainings per day)
Instructor: Become a certified ALICE Instructor. This two day ALICE Instructor Course is designed to prepare you to teach the ALICE concepts.
Some ALICE Training objectives include:
1. Present truths and statistics regarding Active Shooter events.
2. Explore Active Shooter profile myths.
3. Review and evaluate past active shooter situations.
4. Present the ALICE (Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate) system advantages.
5. Liability comparison of teaching proactive vs. passive strategies.
Find a Partner
Become an Partner
Frequently Asked Questions
1.How do I begin to implement the ALiCE program?
The first step in implementing the program should always be a presentation to any and all persons and groups within the community who will be affected by the event. This means practically everyone within the organization. All local emergency response organizations should also be advised of the plan. It is important that everyone hears the reality of what is to be taught, not the sensationalized version.
2.If we recommend people get proactive, couldn’t they get hurt?
Yes, they could. But being passive and static has not shown to be an effective response in most Active Shooter events. The differences of tragic outcomes in some of the classrooms at VT versus much higher survival rates in other classrooms are a good example explaining the difference of passive and active in determining survival chances.
3.How much is this going to cost?
Once the Instructor base is established, actually cost is minimal. Response Options provides all necessary training materials to the Instructors. Public Sector organizations are invited to send personnel to any open ALiCE Instructor Course. Private Sector organizations typically conduct Administration, Management, and User level trainings before sending personnel to the Instructor Course.
4.How much time will the training take away from learning?
The training will result in life-long lessons to be utilized by people of all ages if they should ever be confronted with extreme danger. This training is educational. Actual training time varies between from an hour to all day depending on ages, demographic, and type of training requested. The ALiCE Instructor Course is 2 days.
5.Why change what has always worked?
Has “Lockdown” really worked, or have just the practice drills always worked? We know the names of many towns, schools, hospitals, companies, and churches around the world precisely because “Lockdown”, or a passive response plan, did not meet their needs during the violence, and tragedy ensued.
6.Will teaching people to be proactive increase our liability?
Regardless of what policy is in place, should a violent event occur in the facility or on the grounds, all involved agencies, and individuals, could be sued. How should we set ourselves up to defend our actions: We set out a precise set of procedures for potential victims to follow, they followed the plan, but it didn’t work? Or, we provided information prior and during the event, and a range of options that those in danger could follow based on their situation at any given moment during the event. We strongly believe, and have legal opinion that supports the belief, that by requiring adherence to a failed policy exposes any organization to much greater civil liability.
7.Isn’t this what the police are for?
Obviously the police cannot be at all places, all of the time. Hundreds of rounds can be expended in just mere minutes. There will a period of time when the building occupants will be responsible for their own safety.
8.Should we be teaching aggressive action in our facility?
This training is about teaching critical thinking and proactive, survival skills. Aggressiveness is a mindset that will assist a person in putting those skills to work.
9.Could we be training our future “enemy”?
Yes, we could. But there could very well be a deterrent effect caused by this training if the future attacker knows their goals of a body-count will be very limited at this institution. Target hardening in all its forms is a basic tenet of crime prevention.
10.Won’t we lose control of the event if people make their own decision and do whatever they decide they need to do?
Yes, there will be a time when centralized Command and Control will be lost. But in actuality, there is anyway. During the initial attack, the attacker is in control. Proactive action on behalf of the targets, will quickly remove his Command and Control. Also, Command and Control ability of the Administration and Police is secondary to the ability of those under attack to survive.
11.Isn’t there a possibility of secondary attacks if people are trying to leave the area?
There is always a possibility of a secondary attack, no matter what the event. But our fear of the unknown should not interfere with our manner of dealing with the known. Since 98% of Active Killers act alone, common sense says a shooter inside the building should dictate getting out, much more than the fear of perhaps another shooter outside should dictate staying inside with the known shooter. Any shooters outside will be contacted and neutralized by police much quicker than one inside the building.
12.Do we want the bad guy to know that we know where he is?
What could we tell him that he doesn’t already know?
13.Won’t proactive actions agitate the gunman to commit violence?
It is accepted that these people seek one thing – as big a body count as they can achieve in the time afforded to them. How can a determined killer be made more violent? Over 85% of these events since 1966 have ended only through an act of violence against the intruder by police, citizens, or suicide. Which result should we be cultivating? A resolution by the citizens because that always means a shorter duration of the attack.
14.Who should make the decision as to what is the best option to take?
Those under attack should make the decision that is best for them given the situation. It is unrealistic to think we can write a policy that ten years down the road will precisely fit the violent situation we are experiencing. Information and training is what will allow those under attack to make an informed decision to Fight, Flight, or Freeze, and that will lead to their survival.
251 SW Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 124, #550
Burleson, TX 76028
(817) 582-0080 Fax
PREPARED PROACTIVE PROTECTED