Tom,

I think your perspective is probably balanced for the threat level we currently perceive in the US. If I thought that things were ever getting so bad at home as they were in Baghdad, you can bet that I'd be toting the same body armor with me today that I had in most of 2005. I never really thought that body armor was that much of a protector anyways. It seems to still get penetrated fairly easily and does almost nothing more for you in an explosion like the mortars and roadside bombs we faced.

I guess it is playing the odds, but in the war zone, we took precautions I don't ever want to have to use back home. The risks were simply much greater there, and you took the threats a lot more seriously. We are forced to measure our response to the perceived threat around us, and for now that threat is minimal, albeit fragile.

While I wouldn't compare an American classroom to soldiering anywhere, I did compare it to classrooms in Iraq, where I saw some of the bravest families I've known walking their kids to school each day. For them, school is a most valued privilege that is really worth risking your life for. How much could we use a dose of perspective like this, but for the reduced quality of life that goes with such a condition. We may be in a seemingly safe society, but I would caution folks not to believe that it is terribly secure. That veil can be pierced very easily and deeply, and will be some day if things don't change. If someone like me can recognize the impact attacking our children en masse would have, then doubtless it has crossed the minds of those who would seek to do us the most harm. However unlikely, the threat remains and the severity is horrendous. I've been to third world countries, and I've seen the weeping of parents over murdered children, and it is the worst suffering imaginable.

As far as flakpaks and other such implements go, I am forced to quote an old cliche: "The best defense is a good offense". The assailants big advantage is that his victims are captive and have relatively no offensive capabilities whatsoever. As we discovered in Iraq repeatedly, when BGs start shooting, the best way to get them to stop is to shoot back. Nothing disrupts an attack quicker than a surprise counter attack using like or greater measures. I would much rather my daughters shoot to kill than to risk jumping out a 5 story window, barricading themselves into a room with only one entrance or exit, or boldly charging blazing guns. The best, most effective way to deal with a nutso psycho in such a situation is from a good distance with the drop on him; a sure eye, a steady hand, and a gutful of determination to stop this lunatic in his tracks. I happen to believe that the law of survival will always trump criminal law. So I will disagree with you and say instead that it is a combination of the right tools and the right mindset that allows you to best determine the outcome of a confrontation. Remove either, and your chances diminish considerably.

As for the deep slash on the wrists, I should have specified as well that it is at the base of the palm I would aim for, not higher up where the bones can displace the blade some.

By the way, you may not have seen it in the news, for some reason it is being supressed, but on friday two bombs went off at my daughter's high school south of Denver. One was apparently equipped with a charge of C-4 that failed to detonate. They caught the idiot that set them off, and likely he will give up his buddies who helped him, but no firearms were involved. Just goes to show that taking away the guns won't do much to stop diminish the threat I guess.