School Security....

[bssage]

While I don't believe a answer will come as one single resolvable issue. Be it Mental Health: Gun Control: or school security A solution if there even is one. Would more likely be a grouping of many issue that have been brought to our national attention. I think we "parents" should not be idle on the sidelines waiting for the "Professional's" to tell us what we are going to do. So as I anticipate discussions about these issues on this board. I think they should be located in the debate section. The fact is that most if not all the "issues" will involve some level of compromise. So if we agree for the sake of clarity lets post them here.

I also think using this forum to discuss some of these issues. May hopefully prepare us for when we are in a position to provide our input with our local schools.

Keep the issues in the debate forum.

Keep the issues as separate as possible. I.E. Gun Control. School security, Mental health,,, or whatever else you can think of.

Avoid personal attacks

I bring up security at the school first. Just because to me it seems the simplest to address. I say that knowing school security is not Root Cause. But since I feel addressing root cause will be both complicated and time consuming. And that proving the effectiveness of interventions dealing with root cause would also involve a significant amount of time. I think the immediate protection of our kids needs to take place without delay.

I have worked or visited many places throughout my adult life that entrance to the property involved passing through a guarded gate. A turnstile with a guard shack. I assume some were armed: some were not. You have to slow and pass through. Most had some type of surveillance that I could be viewed approaching the gate. It seems to me that this would not be a huge expense. That it would not be a great infringement on our rights or civil liberties. And that it would go a long way in protecting what we parents hold dear.

Currently in my location: the police dept has an officer: a school liaison officer. Who drives past the schools and maintains a presence in the high school. I really don't think that is enough. And at the same time I wonder if its too much. I think that this system it is so easy to defeat. That even a person of limited intelligence could simply avoid a confrontation with very little effort. And while I absolutely believe formal training has to be in place. I am not sure a full blown police officer is unnecessary.

The argument's against are not without merit. What I am hearing today is that the guard would simply be the first person shot. And otherwise not change anything. While that may very well be true. I think someone trained to look for the body language. Someone who's task and training is to identify a threat. Will be better equipped to do so. And I believe a person who has the resources available to defend that position is the best person for the job.

To me I don't understand why this is not common sense. I'm really not a big NRA dude. But I heard a quote from the president of the NRA today that I thought was a sound argument. "The only way to stop an evil man with a gun. Is a good man with a gun" or something to that effect. I don't think there is really much risk having a armed: trained: and skilled person at the school for protection. I also think we have plenty of solders who would be prime candidates for the job. I don't understand why an airport: a local nightclub: or factory that makes weather stripping for automobiles can be a secure environment when our schools can not.

 

[mom2many]

When I went to school, twenty plus years ago in LA, we did have armed police in our schools. Now in my case it was because I lived in a pretty heavy gang area, and gang related activity was pretty common, so it was a normal thing for me growing up. One officer even had a crazy crush on my mom lol

I can honestly say that I don't know what the right answer is. Our elementary school is pretty wide open. I'll post a few pics to show you what I mean, bus there is one building that, when you really think about it, is safer then even the recently built.added onto high school/junior high. It's round, made of solid brick and the only windows are in the doors. In the center of the building is the library, a perfect place to hide, but that building only houses 1st, 2nd and maybe 3rd grade. The other grades are so open nothing would stop someone hell bent on creating mayhem.


Here's a good shot of the round building.

And a street shot, you can see that there is not fence on this end.

 

[PandoraSpocks]

How do they send kids to stand in the corner in a round building? ;-)

 

[cybele]

I am so glad that school security isn't a thing we need to worry about here.

My younger kid's school has none. No security measures, well, they have a fence (which is possibly a step up from the one mom2many posted... which has me curious, do they have an issue with kids just wandering off school grounds?)

The only kind of emergencies the kids are aware of is plain old fire drill, a bushfire lockdown and a bushfire evacuation to a fire shelter, the latter two specific to schools in the immediate area because our area has chronic bushfire problems. They have an underground basement area in case of bushfire lockdown (if the fire is surrounding the school and there is no way to escape, as the school backs on to dense, dry national park, this is necessary)

Anyone can just wander in, local police station is skeleton staffed and they have better things to do than supervise the schools in the area and there are no security guards (if there are any in Australian schools, those schools are a vast, vast minority) but it is a non-issue, the biggest adult conflicts schools tend to deal with here are due to custody arrangements, and as guns are near impossible to obtain here, they tend to not involve weapons.

 

[bssage]

Cybele

The way I understand it. The reason guns are hard to get there is because of mass shootings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Schwab
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoddle_Street_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Street_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strathfield_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Coast_Massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia[/url])
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting

And it is also my understanding that the new gun laws are being cited as the reason these incidents have been reduced (even though one of those links involved a knife) But Gun control should be another thread. This one is about School security.

But IMHO its kind of like the "child predators" fear. Most parents or even the general populations believe only a zero is acceptable number.

The school at Sandy Hook for example had zero mass school shootings up to this point. I think its unlikely they would get behind the "its so rare we probably don't need to do anything. And IMHO the same would be true for you. If something like this were to take place in a rural community in your country. The search for a correction would be on the table.

I just see so many places that are "non critical" that have what appears as sound protections in place. I just dont understand why we can do some of these things. Why we overlook how attractive a target schools make.

I also think specifically in the US we have such a large number of people who already have training (exe military) that would be great candidates for the job.

You do bring up another good argument against. Which is statistically these are: even in the states so rare. Should we do anything??

 

[mom2many]

LOL Cybele, they don't really play down on that end so no one has really tried to escape. The junior/high school is also open campus.

 

[singledad]

I have a few points to add..

First, I'm sure I read somewhere that he shot his way in through the glass door. Really - there is very little point in locking a GLASS door. Glass is no security at all. The door should be solid, or should have a locked security gate in front of it.

Second, it doesn't sound like there was any kind of response plan. I remember when I was a kid, we had security plans at school. It was SA in the 80s, there was a very real "terrorist" threat (let's leave the debate about that word and it's context for another day). We had intercom systems in the school, that was used for general announcements or for communicating with individual glass rooms. All announcements started with the same greeting, but there were also two other greetings - one was code for ignore whatever command is given and crawl under your desk immediately. The other was code for ignore whatever command is given and follow standard evacuation procedures. These were practiced regularly, just like a fire drill.It's scary, being 7 years old and being taught what to do if terrorists should invade the school, but the reality is that it was all over the news anyway, we knew about the treat. At least we had the comfort of knowing what to do, and knowing that the teachers would keep us safe.

I can imagine a plan of this type could have come in handy.

 

[PandoraSpocks]

We had intercom systems in the school, that was used for general announcements or for communicating with individual glass rooms. All announcements started with the same greeting, but there were also two other greetings - one was code for ignore whatever command is given and crawl under your desk immediately. The other was code for ignore whatever command is given and follow standard evacuation procedures. These were practiced regularly, just like a fire drill.

That's a really good idea. I can't imagine something like that happening in our school in my town, but the idea to have something in place to let kids know that the person making the announcement is probably being forced to say it is brilliant!

 

[bssage]

There seems to be some discrepancy as to how he entered the building. Our schools have that glass/chicken wire lamination thing going on.

I do like the prerecorded coded Idea. And I would think there could be a "panic" button strategically located to keep someone from having to risk their life making the announcements.

I think people misunderstand. The deterrent's like the cubed entry and reinforced glass are intended to slow or hamper entry. Its just that slowing entry will only be effective if that allows a proper response. If the only response is waiting for the barrier to fail. The no: they absolutely will not be effective.

 

[singledad]

I think people misunderstand. The deterrent's like the cubed entry and reinforced glass are intended to slow or hamper entry. Its just that slowing entry will only be effective if that allows a proper response. If the only response is waiting for the barrier to fail. The no: they absolutely will not be effective.

Absolutely agree. There has to be a response plan. The access security is to give those inside time to respond. Yes, it seems ridiculous to plan for something that has such a small chance of happening at your school, but then again, any chance at all, even 1/million, is reason enough to plan for it if the lives of children (or adults) are at stake. That's why we have fired drills. (Anyone ever been in a building that burnt down?)

My DD's school has a contract with a private security company with armed response. The main reason for this is to deal with break-ins (eg. to steal computers, etc), but I can see it being really useful, should someone attempt a school shooting there. I picture the scenario as follows -

The shooter approaches the double, reinforced entrance, and is recorded on camera. He starts shooting at the door/window. An alarm trips. An announcement goes out - school-wide - for all classroom doors to be locked and kids to hide under their desks. Armed response is contacted, police is contacted. Armed response likely to arrive before police (yup, that's the way it is here ). Perhaps, by the time they arrive, he has breached the entrance, but no one is in sight or in the line of fire. Armed response confronts shooter, and holds him in a citizen's arrest until the police arrives and arrests him.

Damage: Two broken doors/windows, some bullet holes in the walls, and bunch of scared kids and teachers. No lives lost.

Perhaps, in the US, the police have the capacity/ability to do their jobs properly, so private security + armed response isn't necessary...

PS: The announcement wasn't prerecorded. The idea was that if the baddies were in the office, forcing the secretary or someone else to make the announcement, he/she would be able to do so, but simply start with a different, though still official-sounding, greeting and everyone except the baddies will know what the real message is...

 

[ElliottCarasDad]

Second, it doesn't sound like there was any kind of response plan. I remember when I was a kid, we had security plans at school. It was SA in the 80s, there was a very real "terrorist" threat (let's leave the debate about that word and it's context for another day). We had intercom systems in the school, that was used for general announcements or for communicating with individual glass rooms. All announcements started with the same greeting, but there were also two other greetings - one was code for ignore whatever command is given and crawl under your desk immediately. The other was code for ignore whatever command is given and follow standard evacuation procedures. These were practiced regularly, just like a fire drill.It's scary, being 7 years old and being taught what to do if terrorists should invade the school, but the reality is that it was all over the news anyway, we knew about the treat. At least we had the comfort of knowing what to do, and knowing that the teachers would keep us safe.

I can imagine a plan of this type could have come in handy.

I may be wrong but Im pretty sure I heard that they did have a response plan, as most schools do especially since Columbine. I think it was something simple like locking the classroom doors but it would still slow someone down. I heard one account of a teacher there that wouldnt unlock the door for the police until he shoved a badge under the door.

I like the coded announcement idea, even if just for the teachers. In the Navy on the subs I was on, we had coded announcements for a variety of things.

I dont think we need to over-react and put armed security in every school. Think of the "TSA" Does anyone really think they are preventing anything? Especially with a 70% FAILURE rate? I can see it now, little Timmy getting sent to secondary screening for a strip search after waiting in line for an hour before school because his banana looked like a gun in the xray scanner.

 

[mom2many]

Sandy Hook did have a response plan, a plan they practiced a few weeks before the whole incident. As great as plans are, sometimes there are variables that just can't be figured into the equation.

Again when I went t school we had armed police in our schools, it was never a big deal.

 

[akmom]

As I understand it, Sandy Hook had a response plan (a new one even), but it only took into account threat awareness, not enforcement. The shooter was not allowed to roam freely into the building, but he forced his way in and there wasn't a thing they could do about it. Security that relies on compliance, in my opinion, does nothing but inconvenience everyone.

The thing about gunfire is that it's loud. I don't know how much good a silencer does, but I imagine it is still audible. After the first gunshot, all the classrooms should have gone into lockdown. So really, if you can prevent a person from getting past the office, you can assure that the first gunshot won't happen in a classroom. It'll happen near the office, where the sound will alert teachers to secure their own classrooms. There should be a panic button that the office staff can use to alert classrooms if there is a breach, but no gunshots. It has to be separate from a fire alarm sound, which would trigger a mass evacuation instead. I'm not sure a verbal announcement would suffice, since it would be so easy for a shooter to interrupt it (even without gunfire).

The NRA proposes arming all the teachers. Or at least having one armed guard at every school. I have a problem with the former. Mass shootings are very rare. Who is to say that teachers are immune from being one? We've had a military psychologist and a med student become mass shooters; I'm not sure any particular "group" (such as teachers) are wholly immune from violence or even mishandling accidents. And I doubt most teachers would even want to have a gun at school. Armed security is great, but also no guarantee of safety, as we know from Columbine. I was just thinking how useful it would have been if one of the front desk staff simply had a Tazer to stop people from bursting into the school without permission.

But I always think of myself when I try to imagine perfect security. Would I be able to breach it? Because if I can outwit security, I'm sure any one can. And yes, I'd definitely be able to sneak a gun into my child's school. I would have absolutely no desire to do so, but the fact that I could... means there's a vulnerability. And I don't think there's any easy solution to that.

 

[singledad]

From what I've read about Sandy Hook (and it's all a bit confusing, to be honest, so I might be wrong) whether or not there was a response plan, it failed. IMO the purpose of a response plan is so that if and when the proverbial sh.. hits the fan, every person knows what do to, how and when, and does it quickly and efficiently. Children where locked into classrooms and store rooms, which is good, but to me it sounded like individual teachers thinking on their feet. And they should absolutely be commended for it. But there were also kids running out of classrooms and getting shot, etc, not to even mention the principle and school councilor trying to confront the attacker - that should never have happened. Don't get me wrong - I don't doubt the courage or the determination of those two or think that they deserve anything but the highest respect to putting themselves in danger to save those kids - I just think that they shouldn't have felt the need to do that. They needn't have died.

You will never be able to keep an armed assailant with enough determination out. But you should be able to detect an attack early, preferably before the building security has been completely breached, and act to alert the police and keep those inside safe until the police arrives. I don't believe that such an attack can be effectively prevented. I do believe, however, that with the correct plan of action, the lives of at least some of the 26 victims, if not all, could have been saved.

No, spoken announcements may not be the perfect solution, I just remembered those drills and thought it might be a good place to start. Panic buttons with alarms that can't be confused with fire alarms also sound like a good idea.

I don't believe that arming teachers is the answer. Teachers aren't cops or security guards. It is one thing to know what should do, it is a completely different thing to stay calm and act decisively when you have a gun pointed at you. The kind of person I want teaching my child, isn't the kind of person who can calmly aim a gun at a teenager and pull the trigger.

 

[akmom]

The kind of person I want teaching my child, isn't the kind of person who can calmly aim a gun at a teenager and pull the trigger.

Good point!!

The thing that gets me about the principal and counselor at Sandy Hook was that they more than likely had no idea what they were doing. Initial reports say they went out to see what the noise was, and later they started reporting more heroic intentions. Honestly, we can never know what they had in mind. But running out into a shooting situation unarmed and without cover doesn't sound like a strategy for anything useful. And that's fine, because they were educators, not a SWAT team. No one expects them to take down a shooter. But it's worth noting that the principal - who was clearly unprepared for the incident and demonstrated poor instincts - was credited with designing the school's new security system.

I doubt she drew the building's blueprints or programmed the computer network. She may have weighed in on these things, but she didn't design them. These tasks were contracted out to professionals. Maybe it's time to be thinking about security protocols the same way, and hiring professionals to advise schools on how to prevent and handle security issues. Not principals. (Unless they have security training or experience that makes them uniquely qualified.)

I agree with you that there didn't seem to be a cohesive, planned response to the incident, because there were an awful lot of casualties. I am anxious to hear exactly what happened, because it just seems absurd to have that many students killed by one shooter. Every classroom should have been secured after the first shot, and what school has 20 kids roaming the halls at once? (And even if they did, how did the shooter successfully and lethally pick off so many?)

 

[ElliottCarasDad]

I think this is all an emotional overreaction to an unpreventable tragedy. Its kinda funny how the NRA is getting the most press to push their agenda. You simply cant project and prevent every mass killing by anyone, including terrorists. Unless of course we want to surrender all of our freedoms and live in a police-state. How much is enough?
Maybe we should put a ban on kids riding in cars. Seems like a lot more die by car than homicidal maniacs. Or do we care more about HOW they die, than by how many die?

 

[akmom]

I agree that it was probably unpreventable. I disagree that the NRA is using it to push their agenda; I think they are just defending their long-standing positions against the knee-jerk reaction some people have to the tragedy.

I don't think our concern as a society is HOW kids die, but rather what kinds of risks are acceptable. Do kids die in cars? Yes. Can we live without cars? Not easily. Do kids die because of guns? Sometimes. Can we live without guns? That's the question, I guess.

 

[NancyM]

A few days after this tragic incident, the news said that Adam Lanza killed his mother because she was making arrangements to have him committed into a mental institution and he was aware of it.

He killed the children because he thought his mother loved them better than him, and she had worked as an aide, or substitute teacher in the class room he shot into.

Come to think of it, I think this information was given by Adam's brother, I can't swear on that but I believe so.

I haven't heard anything else about that theory.

 

[TabascoNatalie]

100% agree with ECD.
As for arming the teachers - who could guarantee that one of them won't lose it at some point? Most insane idea ever.

 

[bumpersticker]

<SIZE size="125">I think teachers should be taught self-defense for close quarters combat. Years ago there was church shooting (possibly the one in Texas) well allegedly a young man who played paintball was able to save multiple lives before eventually losing his own. </SIZE>
<SIZE size="125"></SIZE>
<SIZE size="125">I said that to say this, teachers should be trained tactically to save students’ lives. They should learn how to find cover and how to lead the students to safety. They should also be taught some hand to hand self-defense. That might seem like a lot but it is well worth it, while of course not all teachers will not be experts in either of these facets I do believe this could help save lives. </SIZE>
<SIZE size="125"></SIZE>
<SIZE size="125">Possibly implementing this as part of an aspiring teachers college curriculum would be the cheapest way of doing this. With seminars every year or two. </SIZE>