Finally Responding to a Legitimate Threat?

Duck and cover. Sit in quietly against the wall. This is not a joke. Stop talking. Those are the words ringing in my head as we prepared for emergency drills in elementary school. As if sitting in the bottom floor of my school would protect from a nuclear bomb. The author of this article in the NY Times said new drills to prepare for a gunman roaming the hallways hearkens back to the 50's when the threat of a nuclear war with Russia seemed imminent. But I remember these drills in the 80's, when the perceived threat was still there. I'm surprised that after 9/11 the same tactics to scare parents (aka voters) into practicing safety measures against some imaginary danger such as "communism, "terrorism" or "Islamism"
In the case of school shooters, however, it appears we have something legitimate. Unfortunately, this approach is reactive, not proactive. What security consultants (who know doubt want to gulp up contract money provided through tax dollars) are advocating is how to react in case a violent visitor comes to school. Well what about addressing the problem at its root? Why are these kids acting violently in the first place? Why are they being ignored? How do they get guns in the first place?
Maybe it's because addressing these questions gets too close the heart of problems in our schools and society. It's easier to identify some mysterious threat and plan to react than discover why we have this threat in the first place. And maybe it's easier for apathetic guidance counselors to refer troubled students to a psychiatrist administering anti-depressants than to actually get involved in the lives of children and try to help them. And of course it's too easy for politicians to acquiesce to the gun and pharmaceutical lobbies than to protect the lives of citizens.
Yeah it's a great idea to train people who work at schools to be prepared for emergencies, but let's look at these problems and answer them thoughtfully.