Recon Team
Regrettably, a business or organization with a poor plan of action, which is designed to outline potential catastrophic predicaments, will likely be more disastrous in its follow through or execution, rather than proactive. In this disastrous stage of development, this indirect action plan which has been set into motion to desensitize the disaster; of which has most likely never been tested prior to its implantation, will in all probability leave that business or it organization virtually limitless; if not defenseless, during an actual emergency situation.
When comparing the emergency action plans that were utilized during the September 11, 2001 towering inferno attacks, to that of the domestic terrorism of school shootings; in many of those cases, it seems that when a profound crisis emergency occurs, it takes the organization/s by bombshell. One of the worst cases of circumstances is usually determined later to be a blaming game, when in reality; the responsible party is who ever outlined the irresponsible plan of action in the first place. It is relatively evident that certain crisis disasters could have been prevented if there were more attentive actions plans outlined; however, what is not evident is how early warning systems can be predicted and then put into effective practical use, when obviously there is too much opportunity for error.
The unsurpassed management action plans and also reliable disaster tools, are only promising when managers recognize and consider the potential and calculated faults during disasters; and therefore, they can identify them under manageable difficult resources, rather than permit them to burst into flames.
In wake of the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 initial attacks on the twin towers, the outline for emergency responders was obviously ineffective. For starters, the Command Center for crisis negotiations’ was located in one of the towers. While predictions are just as the word sounds, an outlined plan of action based on calculations is designed to have a response team on call for similar disasters; however, while there are fueled arguments on both sides of the pendulum; whether it was known or not that there might be an imminent attack on American soil, the likely hood of an exact location of attack is without merit.
Consequently, the location of the command center was in a location that was designed by some genius(s) somewhere who decided that one of the towers was an idealistic place at the time; however, since that crisis, new action plans have been implemented to predict and prepare for another emergency situation. When the attacks occurred, and the command center was obviously destroyed, the secondary command center which consisted of a few Red Cross triage tents, and emergency vehicles; and naturally, that was a bad idea as well.
While reminiscing of the horrifying and deadly school shooting in the Columbine, Colorado disaster; the police were called and rushed to the scene. Much like the poor outline for a search and destroy of assailants, the police reacted as if each of them were individual superheroes. There were many arguments that the police department could have limited some of the fatalities if they had a proper plan of action and communicative response team that would have allowed them to alert other officers on scene of potential hazardous situations. Sadly enough, followed by an astronomical number of high fatality school shootings, there has been almost a solid decade that has passed since a strategic plan of action has been re-implemented. This new outline, which fell short during the Virginia Tech disaster, now has first responders (police officers), along with state and federal law enforcement agencies enforcing a (4) four man recon team that is mandated as Rules of Engagement during a school shooting.
This four man team is actually what many SWAT, military, and other tactical search teams implement during a crisis intervention. Basically, four officers enter a building or structure that is under-siege, and they position themselves with their backs centered to each other, while standing next to each other in a (90) degree angle. They are there to have an open line of communication with the “mobile” command center (which is generally located several miles away from the point of attack, to prevent a break down in the chain of command, should another attack occur. They are also there to search the school for potential survivors while maintaining surveillance of any suspected shooters. The current general rules for engagement here (also known as the strategic plan), are to shoot and kill any possible terrorists, foreign and domestic.
Shoot first, ask questions later – this maybe a harsh assessment in this sort of situation; however, when public safety is an issue; the few will not outweigh the many. In comparison to a disastrous earthquake that crumbles many infrastructures, – many people, who have already experienced similar unearthed attacks, are ready for the aftershock. Sometimes, the best defense is little or no offense; and not the other way around. When implementing new and hopefully, improved plans of actions’, it is potentially less hazardous when the plan is tested, and retested. Many local and federal agencies are implementing mock disaster situations. This assessment is beneficial to those participants who are acting in these situations, so that they will act accordingly in a realistic or similar situation. While at the same time, the agency or agencies that are testing out the bugs of the new outline will be more prepared in the future as situations arise.
About the Author:
BS: Criminal Justice
Minor: English
MS: Criminology
Emphasis: Research, Statistical Analysis, and Writing
Article Source: ArticlesBase.com – Organizational Disaster: a Plan Assessment
transformers cybertron basic recon team
No comments yet.