Homeland Security has advice for confronting mass murders: scissors

Those cynics who claim the Department of Homeland Security is more concerned with expanding government power than with the safety of Americans need to read this handy advice about what to do if a madman attacks your workplace. Step one: Cower. Here’s how:

“To protect your hiding place, lock the door if you can. Block the door with heavy furniture,” recommends the male narrator, speaking in measured, authoritative tones.

Other survival strategies promoted in the video include hiding “behind large items such as cabinets or desks. Remain quiet. Silence your cellphone or pager. Even the vibration setting can give away a hiding position.”

That’s great advice. However, my new cell phone and I do not get along very well. Even when I’m not being fired at by a lunatic with a gun, I have difficulty figuring out how to set my phone to vibrate. No matter what I push, I get the message “You have selected AT&T’s Premium Text Messaging Service. A charge of $6,000.29 will appear on your next bill.” So I can just imagine myself fumbling with my cell phone while Omar Thornton is stalking the cubicles searching for co-workers to aerate.

The DHS video even provides this tip on how to take a stand against your murderer:

“If you are caught out in the open and cannot conceal yourself or take cover, you might consider trying to overpower the shooter with whatever means are available,” says the narrator in the video, which shows an office worker pulling scissors out of a desk drawer.

Because, obviously, no one would have something as icky and scary as a handgun at work. So behold the weapon of choice of Metrosexual America:

But then, it’s just a matter of time until liberals and Neocons start demanding scissor registration. Me, I’m stocking up on these babies. Let Diane Feinstein try and stop me. Molon labe!

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

7 thoughts on “Homeland Security has advice for confronting mass murders: scissors

  1. Kirt Higdon

    I’m certainly no partisan of the Department of Homeland Security, one of many government departments and agencies which I would like to see abolished. That said, I’m puzzled at the ridicule heaped on this video here and elsewhere. What’s wrong with suggestions on how to either escape/evade or fight an aggressor in a situation where one is not armed with a firearm. And that, BTW, is the situation in which the vast majority of Americans find themselves the vast majority of the time. Even where it is legal to own and carry guns, most people do not carry them at home or carry them or even have them handy at the work place. Many commercial establishments ban them and have a legal right to do so.

    So what do you do if you’re unarmed and attacked or about to be attacked? You try to either escape or fight back with whatever ad hoc weapons are available and yes these would often (especially in an office) include scissors, some of which could do a lot of damage. There are private courses in self-defense which include use of ad hoc weapons and there should be more of these. Defense of the right of gun ownership should not include the concept that a gun is an absolute necessity for self-defense and you are completely helpless if you don’t have one.

  2. HarrisonBergeron2 Post author

    Kirt Higdon,

    But DHS ASSUMES no one will have a gun. There’s a message there. Just as the DHS guidelines for emergency preparations DO NOT include storing food and water. Helplessness must be taught.

    I wonder how much was spent telling folks to turn off their vibrator while under terrorist attack?

  3. Hawthorne


    What is your feeling on military recruiting videos, NASCAR sponsorships, and ads which are proven by their own metrics to have no effect on the traditional metrics of advertising? I mean, even if you believe in all that, that ads do not work–yet they serve another purpose of course.

    It’s tax payer funded propaganda for faith in the system.

    We are against that.

  4. Kirt Higdon

    HB2 & H,

    I’m opposed to government advertising and government financed advertising in general. But the objection to this video seems to be to its substance, as well as to its financing. Would you all object to it if it was privately financed? As far as the assumption that people will not be carrying firearms, that’s correct the overwhelming majority of the time. In most offices it’s correct 100% of the time. I strongly object to the notion that not carrying a firearm equals being defenseless or that people should not be taught means of escape and evasion or self-defense with ad hoc weapons.

  5. Matt Weber

    Where I work you would be in much trouble if you brought a gun in and were caught, so assuming that there are no guns in the office is probably a safe bet.

  6. RedPhillips

    Kirt, even if we concede, for the sake of the argument, that it is sound advice, it is still remarkably tone deaf. Here we are in the middle of a big discussion about guns and people being disarmed, etc. and they produce this with reference to scissors. The response was entirely predictable. They should have forseen this.

  7. C Bowen

    A sensible PSA would encourage the masses to storm the shooter knowing their reward would be a seat in Valhalla, or the earthly reward of hero.

    Might have helped on 9/11, when they all sat in their seats hoping it was just a hijacking.

    It’s always hard to figure out whether a video like this is incompetence, or calculated humiliation agitprop.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>