In an era when school safety is one of the most pressing concerns in education, one strategy has become the national standard for active shooter response: Run, Hide, Fight. This protocol, endorsed by the Department of Homeland Security, was developed with good intentions—but as more tragic incidents unfold, many safety experts, educators, and military veterans are asking: Is this really the best we can do?
As a combat veteran who understands both the chaos of violence and the importance of rapid decision-making, I believe we need a more proactive and empowering approach—one that reflects how real people respond under stress and gives them tools to act decisively.
Let’s explore why the “Run, Hide, Fight” model may fall short—and how a better alternative could save lives.
⸻
The Problem with “Run, Hide, Fight”
The concept seems simple:
1. Run if you can escape safely.
2. Hide if escape isn’t possible.
3. Fight only as a last resort.
This sounds logical on the surface, but in practice, it encourages passivity and sequences human instinct into a rigid checklist. Real-life situations don’t follow a script. Here’s why that matters:
• Not everyone can run. Children, individuals with disabilities, or those caught off guard in confined spaces may have no viable escape.
• Hiding often equals trapping. Locking a door and turning off lights may work—but it can also create a false sense of security. Hiding without a plan can lead to victims being cornered with no way out.
• Fighting “last” is often too late. By the time a shooter reaches a hiding place, the opportunity to resist effectively has often passed. Teaching that violence is only acceptable as a last resort may discourage the kind of decisive action that saves lives.
Perhaps most concerning: the “freeze” response—often unaddressed in training—can render any plan useless. Under extreme fear, humans don’t always fight or flee. Many freeze in confusion or panic.
⸻
A Better Model: “Cover. Assess. Counter.”
After years of observation, study, and firsthand experience, a more adaptable, proactive strategy is emerging. I propose a refined model for schools, public spaces, and training environments: Cover. Assess. Counter.
1. COVER: Take Protective Action First
Get out of the open and into a protected position—not just hidden, but shielded. Understand the difference between cover (which stops bullets) and concealment (which merely hides you). This mindset teaches people to think tactically from the start.
2. ASSESS: Don’t Panic—Process
Encourage students and staff to stop and assess their surroundings. Where is the threat? Are there safe exits? What objects can be used as improvised tools or weapons? Is the attacker reloading or distracted?
A two-second mental assessment can shift a person from helpless to empowered.
3. COUNTER: Act With Purpose
If you cannot escape and the attacker closes in, fight back with everything available. This is not about teaching violence—it’s about teaching survival. In classrooms, this may mean using chairs, fire extinguishers, books, or coordinated group resistance. In many real-world incidents, attackers were subdued by courageous civilians who acted decisively.
⸻
Why This Approach Matters
The “Cover. Assess. Counter.” model trains individuals to override panic with purpose. It addresses the full spectrum of natural human reactions to fear—fight, flight, freeze, and fawn—and provides a clear, flexible response plan for any environment.
Most importantly, it restores a sense of agency. Students and staff should never be taught to wait for rescue; they should be trained to act in ways that increase their chances of survival while protecting others.
⸻
A Final Word: Training Saves Lives
No strategy is perfect. But the best defense in a crisis isn’t hiding—it’s training. Let’s teach our students and staff not just to survive—but to think, move, and act.
Lives depend on it.
⸻
Author Bio:
Dave Cloft is a U.S. Army combat veteran, school safety advocate, and educator. With experience in crisis response and tactical training, he is passionate about preparing communities to respond effectively in emergencies without fear or helplessness.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
“Most importantly, it restores a sense of agency. Students and staff should never ****be taught to wait for rescue;**** they should be trained to act in ways that increase their chances of survival while protecting others.”
Similar to what police agencies changed after the Columbine massacre, the officers initially on scene did what they were trained to do, secured the scene and waited for back up. Now we engage immediately with whatever we have. Very good article, sir.