# Evac Not Always Best Option with Bomb Threats?



## The Bread Guy (23 Apr 2007)

Found this in my 'net travels, and it made me wonder:  how would this approach (don't evacuate unless you SEE/FIND a suspicious package) go over in today's CYA, litigious environment?  Also, once you tell a crowd over the PA, "hey, there might be a suspicious package around," I think most packages will look suspicious shortly after the announcement, no?

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*Bomb Threats: Evacuations Not Always the Best Course of Action*
Stratfor, Terrorism Brief. 20 Apr 07 
Permalink

The April 16 massacre at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va., has generated a spate of bomb threats against schools and universities across the United States. In many cases, school authorities react to such threats by ordering the evacuation of students and faculty from buildings on campus. Evacuations, however, could expose students to a real danger lurking outside -- and should be used only as a last resort.

The University of Minnesota evacuated eight buildings on its Minneapolis campus April 18 after a student reported having found a typed bomb threat in a chemistry building's bathroom. All classes  and meetings in those buildings were canceled and bomb-sniffing dogs were brought to search for explosives. A six-hour search of the campus, however, turned up nothing and the buildings were  reopened the next day. Similar evacuations have taken place at numerous schools and universities in the four days since the Virginia shooting spree.

Ordering an evacuation tends to be the first response to any bomb threat, whether one occurs at schools and universities or public buildings and private businesses. The vast majority of these threats, however, turn out to be hoaxes, usually called in by pranksters or mentally disturbed individuals.

Although an evacuation can provide emotional reassurance that something is being done about the threat, it is not the best action to take when a nonspecific bomb threat is received. In cases in which the threat does not identify a specific classroom or building, sending people out into the open air can put them in more danger than keeping them in place. In a nonspecific threat, the bomb could be anywhere, including outside of buildings. Moreover, there is always the risk that a gunman called in the threat in order to shoot down a crowd of people gathered outside. In Jonesboro, Ark., in 1998, two students aged 13 and 11 set off the fire alarm at Westside Middle School and shot at people as they evacuated, killing four students and a teacher.

Of the bomb threats called into universities and high schools since the Virginia Tech massacre, none was connected to an actual bombing attempt. History has shown that people who intend to kill with explosives are unlikely to give any kind of warning. Furthermore, most cases of school violence involve guns rather than bombs.  Although the two students who carried out the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., included pipe bombs in their arsenal, all of their victims were killed with guns.

The safest way to respond to a bomb threat against a campus or compound is to notify people over a public address system, providing only information that might assist in a search. Although the normal response would be to evacuate a classroom, dormitory or office that had been threatened, it is important to remember two things: Most bomb threats are hoaxes and the real danger might lie outside of the threatened area. Ideally, then, people in the threatened area should first search their immediate area, starting under tables and desks, then move to desktops and finally to shelves and cabinets. The people best suited to search for anything unusual in a room are those who use it daily and are familiar with potential hiding places -- and thus would be able to spot anything that was not there the day before.

Only if a suspicious object is found should an evacuation be ordered. Once such an order is given, students or workers should gather at a prearranged rally point or secondary location. There, a head count can be made and authorities notified of the status.  Meanwhile, a cordon should be established around the affected building to keep people away from it.  

Threats of bombing and other violence against schools and universities will likely continue as long as the Virginia Tech massacre remains fresh in the public consciousness -- and as long as schools provide students with time off every time one occurs.  While evacuations can calm jittery nerves, they are not always the best course of action.


----------



## duke5307 (23 Apr 2007)

I'm having a hard time buying into this theory. If you evac the buildings, the people then scatter and therefore are not as bunched up and as easy for a nutjob to do as much damage because not everyone is in as close of proximity to one another.

Just my $0.02!


----------



## Bzzliteyr (23 Apr 2007)

Look at it this way.. if a bomb is placed in a building evacuating it might help out the people inside.  However, have you though of how compartmentalized a building is? If a bomb threat is called in, everyone remains in the building and an immediate warning is called over a PA system instructing everyone to account for their "areas or responsability".  Everyone opens their eyes (locally) and reports anything suspicious.  Then we can dispatch the proper authorities to that or those locations while evacuating the needed areas.

 What if the bomb was placed outside then called in or as stated, there is a sniper lying outside in waiting?  I see more security if people remain inside.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Apr 2007)

When working for CCG which is attached to DFO, the building we were in received several bomb threats, mainly directed to the compensation staff (why am I not surprised….) Upon receiving one of the threats, they evacuated the building asking people to use the stairs. However in the process they came upon a suspicious package in the stairwell. This caused a lot of confusion. Luckily all turned out to false and almost everyone lived happily every after. However the incident does show the weakness of the evacuation plan. In order to make it work, the plan must be as public as possible, giving an opportunity for some not so nice person to cause either mass confusion or a very bloody mess to deal with. In a building that is not public, evacuation plans and procedures should have some protection, although any semi-smart person could figure out the likely plan.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Apr 2007)

Bzzliteyr said:
			
		

> Look at it this way.. if a bomb is placed in a building evacuating it might help out the people inside.  However, have you though of how compartmentalized a building is? If a bomb threat is called in, everyone remains in the building and an immediate warning is called over a PA system instructing everyone to account for their "areas or responsability".  Everyone opens their eyes (locally) and reports anything suspicious.  Then we can dispatch the proper authorities to that or those locations while evacuating the needed areas.
> 
> What if the bomb was placed outside then called in or as stated, there is a sniper lying outside in waiting?  I see more security if people remain inside.
> 
> Just my 2 cents.



Quite right Bzz,

I recall that the usual drill in NI was to immediately suspect a 'come on' or a secondary device. The tremendous damage that can be caused to body tissue by even small blasts suggests that staying behind a sound wall is a good idea. For example, if you get 20 or 30 people in a staircase with a secondary device at the bottom, you can pretty much kiss them goodbye - the effect of a bomb going off in this situation is similar to being shot from a cannon. Rather than immediately evacuate, a good drill is to take cover inside (as you would for an earthquake etc) and designated search parties move to locate the device or threat area while recceing an evacuation route to make sure there were no secondaries or suspicious packages etc on the exfil route.  This may be easier if the description given in the warning was more specific, for example, you may be able to determine that the north side of the building is the threat area. You would then cordon off the area with mine tape - out of line of sight of the suspect device - and lead the evacuation (if warranted) at a 90 degree angle to the threat, being careful to keep out of line of sight of the suspect device. The escape route can be marked with glo sticks, mine tape, flagging tape, or even spray paint. This does not need to take alot of time and can go very smoothly with a well trained staff. This also helps the bomb squad and cordon troops figure out safe approach routes etc more effectively. Sometimes, if the bomb is a small one and the structure sound, you may not need to evacuate at all, just shuffle people around a bit in the building. 

We used this type of drill successfully during a mortar attack once. In that case, in addition to several bombs that had gone off, several unexploded mortar bombs were scattered about. Recce parties scouted a route around them, in dead ground to the devices, while we stayed put and the ATO was brought in via the safe route to deal with the UXBs. We had to remove part of a blast wall too, I think. Took a few hours but we were inside, safe and sound, drinking coffee and watching the action on the CCTV.

Can civilians be trained to do these device location and route recce tasks? You bet. Is it better to have fully trained military/ paramilitary personnel do it? Of course, but they are not always available.


----------



## GAP (23 Apr 2007)

Is not the insurgency in Iraq utilizing the model of multiple bombs/IEDs, etc to great effect? 

I believe the Palestinians use it also in targetting the Fire & Security members who respond to a bomb.


----------



## duke5307 (24 Apr 2007)

All good points that I had not thought of...kinda changing my mind a little.


----------

