Washington Post: “Fort Hood shooter showed 'no sign of likely violence,' probe finds” This i

If “prevention” is your objective than putting more guns on base will not prevent, it will only react to violence. Also, Mental Health evaluations are not good predictors of violence . . .
 
 
Spread the Word
Listed Under

Tags:
• Breaking News

Industrys:
Defense
Government

Location:
US

April 6, 2014 - PRLog -- Winter Park, Florida – While security is on high alert due to the recent shootings both at Fort Hood in Texas and Kent State University in Ohio, the question on everyone’s mind is “why” and “how”.  There is a lot of “finger pointing” and not enough problem solving.  Answers like more armed security, more psychological evaluations, and/or higher level of Threat Assessments are not solving the problem, these answers are only reacting to the violence not preventing it.  Prevention is key in ending these types of tragedies.

“Threat Assessment, by its definition, is an assessment of a threat that has already taken place”, John D. Byrnes, Founder and CEO for the Center for Aggression Management.  The hope of its user is to identify an initial lesser threat and thereby prevent a subsequent greater threat; but there is no assurance that this initial “lesser” threat will not be a threat to life or limb. Traditional Threat Assessment (widely used by many institutions) is not preventative, it is reactive.

Mental Health evaluations are helpful in identifying precursors to violent behavior however, not all “flagged” individuals get the proper help or discipline. Many psychologists for fear of litigation or losing trust with the individual will forgo reporting their findings.  The reports of these attackers are only released after a violent incident has occurred.

Increased security is again, reacting to a situation after it has taken place. “If ‘prevention’ is your objective than putting more guns on base will not prevent, it will only react to violence.” Byrnes.

The Critical Aggression Prevention System (CAPS), developed by Byrnes is the answer to how we can prevent violent attacks such as these.  CAPS’s Cognitive Aggression Continuum is based on intent-driven cognitive precursors and is an effective deterrent in preventing acts of violence and even terrorism. Rather than only being based on indictors of “anger”, CAPS is based on levels of “aggression” which have been scientifically shown to precede acts of violence. The only accepted means of predicting violence is identifying someone “on the path to a violent attack.”  That is what CAPS does and it is the only validated tool that reliable can predict future violence.

More information on preventing aggression and the CAPS program can be found by visiting www.AggressionManagement.com.

Media Contact
Center For Aggression Management
kwood@aggressionmanagement.com
End
Source:
Email:***@aggressionmanagement.com Email Verified
Tags:Breaking News
Industry:Defense, Government
Location:United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse



Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share