How Can Technology Enhance School Safety?

[jedishrfu]

Initially I thought what if the fire alarm had been pulled or what if the sprinkler system could have set off to make it more difficult for the shooter. This got me thinking what about fogging system to end visibility. Next would be a lockdown capability of hardened classroom doors.

Other thoughts included a piercing sonic alarm or blinding flash system to render it more difficult to find and shoot that could be activated when a gunshot is heard.

 

[justsomeguy]

I like the concept, but you'd have to make sure that whatever methods you use will not hinder first responders (Police/Fire/EMS). I think this takes the fogging system out, but the others could be worked around.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I would be interested in discussing building lock systems too. Most schools in my area you have to be buzzed in via a web cam looking at ya. Still I think it's too easy for someone to piggback in.

I know in ships and subs are built with certain areas of the ship that can be locked down in case of a fire or flooding. As long as there is a way out for everyone maybe there could be automatic gates that lock away much of the school.

 

[jedishrfu]

We have technology today that can detect and pinpoint gunfire. Perhaps if it were tied to classroom door lockdown with hardened doors that would be an effective deterrent. If each classroom were equipped with tear gas that went off when a gunshot was fired nearby that would limit the shooters ability to shoot.

In the latest case in Newtown, the shooter attacked the office first and the principal was able to activate the speaker system before she was killed a very brave act of courage. With a lockdown system that one act would have allowed the gunshot to reverberate thru the school and lock the doors.

My feeling is that while gun control laws are important like limiting the sale of "cool" military style weapons favored by shooters. Perhaps we should sell only revolvers to the general public instead of glocks and sig sauers and eliminate the extended clips.

In the case of background checks, it seems its flawed for so many reasons. The guns are bought by someone else or are stolen. The shooter exhibits no obvious indicators or if the y do people deem them as idle threats so the only solution remaining are technological deterrents as an a immediate remedy.

Gun control won't help in the short term because there are so many weapons within easy reach. Debates on gun control will effectively bring so many other parties into the fray and nothing will get accomplished or the laws still won't solve the problem. There's real money at stake, there's the assault on personal freedom, there's the NRA unwilling to compromise or even be helpful in solving this problem., its not in their best interests.

Another thought was the use of laser counter weapons to blind the shooter something the teachers could have in each classroom. Strong enough to temporarily blind the shooter. I thought this type of deterent could have been effective in the theatre shooting since it would upset his nightvision. The downside is that it makes you a target. Maybe something like a scancode laser zigging back and forth making the counter weapon cover a larger area.

In WWII there was a similar weapons system for tanks known as the Coastal Defense tank where a carbon arc lamp and speakers were mounted on a tank for night attacks. Tank infantry would advance under the cover of these tanks while the enemy was blinded by the sight and sound.

It was never used when it was discovered that flanking positions could pick off the tank infantry without being blinded and the position being attacked could counter with welders glass to see the attacking tanks. Early tests had shown that a gunner couldn't target the tank because the blinding light.

I really hope we can come up with something here and present it to our legislators, school boards and state / local police and get past this gun problem we have.

THANKS Greg for making this a separate thread!

 

[justsomeguy]

I don't think these particular ideas are good ones. Any indiscriminate area denial weapon is going to end up hindering a lot more than it helps, because if the attacker knows they are there, he is going to come prepared. A gas mask and a pair of sunglasses and now the innocents are far more hampered in efforts to hide or flee than the shooter in his effort to do harm.

I do like the automatic gunfire detection, though pinpointing wouldn't work inside it wouldn't have to. Locking all the doors and alerting the school and authorities would be enough, as long as it were resistant enough to false alarms. CCTVs in the school would help first responders get a handle on the situation when they arrive and have secondary benefits as well WRT theft, vandalism, fights, etc.

There are some things that any automatic response system needs to be designed around.

1. It needs to hamper the attacker as much or more than the potential victims.
2. Fire escape and rescue must not be hindered.
3. False alarms must be low.

I completely disagree with your position on guns in general, but that's probably a topic for another thread. I will say simply that the converse of the "no guns" position is true in all cases, while the position itself can only ever be true in most cases. If the principal had been armed and trained, there would probably only be one dead body on the news, not thirty.

 

[AlephZero]

No society can protect itself from people who don't buy into its values, or from people who don't even realize that there is such a thing as "society" and that it HAS values.

IMO the real issue here is a matter of anthropology. The "interesting" fact to me is not that the US population at large is outraged by an inciident like this. It is that the US population at large is NOT outraged by the fact that about 90 people are killed by firearms in the US every day, and that number is no more newsworthy that the fact that 90 or 100 people die in road accidents every day, or even that over 100 people commit suicide every day. (Of course there is some overlap in the numbers here, since more than half of male suicides involve the use of firearms).

The USA collectively agrees that 90 road deaths a day is an acceptable price for everybody having the "right" to operate a vehicle (subject only to minimum checks on physical and psychological competence, which have a pass-rate close to 100%), and that isn't way out of line compared with many other cultures around the world.

The USA also collectively agrees to treat gun possession and use in pretty much the same way as vehicle possession and use, and apparently doesn't mind the consequence, most of the time. That IS way out of line compared with many other world cultures. That doesn't make it "wrong" - just "different".

Public attitudes do change over time (examples are too obvious to need quoting). It's possible the USA might changes its collective attitude to a position where 10 deaths a day by firearms is "too many" - or even that 1,000 deaths a day is no big deal. Without that change, everything else is just rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic IMO.

 

[Evo]

I've always worked in secure locations. You had to enter and leave through "man traps". These can be built to spec, but basically, you enter a small room when you come into the buliding, then either you have a pass key to let yourself into the mantrap, or security will let you into the trap. Once you set foot into the trap, the door you came into locks behind you, the door in front of you is also locked. The glass is bullet proof, you get weighed, you get scanned by a metal detector, the security guard is watching you on survielance cameras. If you pass inspection, then either you have the key card or pass code to let yourself out, or the security guard does, you will pass by the security desk and show them your badge,then in my building after all this, you had to use your card key again to leave the gaurd area and get to elevators, etc to get into the rest of the builiding.

If you didn't register as an employee inside the mantrap, a security guard greets you to find out who you are there to see and you remain with him until the person you're seeing comes to get you.

If you don't pass, you remain inside the trap until the police come to take you away.

Never had anyone get through one of these systems in all the years I worked, (since they started installing them. Thousands of people would pass through these every day.

This is a very simple mantrap setup.

 

[CAC1001]

The technology to protect schools is plenty available, the issue is do the schools have the budgets needed to implement this tech. I mean, are they going to put armored glass (transparent armor) in place of all the windows too? Because someone could always just shoot through the windows.

 

[jedishrfu]

The difficulty with the mantrap is that it is easily subverted. The shooter will accounted for it and gone into the school via a janitors door or something. The other problem is letting the kids in one by one will be very timeconsuming. Its possible the shooter could enter without a gun and have some kid bring it in in his backpack. We've already seen where some kid brings his Dad's gun to school for show and tell or in the case of one kid his Dad's stash.

I keep thinking we also need to empower the teacher with some sort of non-lethal countermeasures that can be deployed to protect and disable the shooter like the laser blinder and we need to lockdown classrooms to limit the shooters access.

 

[CAC1001]

One thing that might work, although not technology-related specifically, could be to let people with concealed carry permits have their guns in the schools. I'm not saying arm all the teachers, but I mean for people who have such permits, why not let them have their weapon inside? In Connecticut, you have to get a permit to purchase a handgun, you have to get a license, and then to carry it, you have to get another permit.

 

[jedishrfu]

I don't think these particular ideas are good ones. Any indiscriminate area denial weapon is going to end up hindering a lot more than it helps, because if the attacker knows they are there, he is going to come prepared. A gas mask and a pair of sunglasses and now the innocents are far more hampered in efforts to hide or flee than the shooter in his effort to do harm.

I do like the automatic gunfire detection, though pinpointing wouldn't work inside it wouldn't have to. Locking all the doors and alerting the school and authorities would be enough, as long as it were resistant enough to false alarms. CCTVs in the school would help first responders get a handle on the situation when they arrive and have secondary benefits as well WRT theft, vandalism, fights, etc.

There are some things that any automatic response system needs to be designed around.

1. It needs to hamper the attacker as much or more than the potential victims.
2. Fire escape and rescue must not be hindered.
3. False alarms must be low.

I completely disagree with your position on guns in general, but that's probably a topic for another thread. I will say simply that the converse of the "no guns" position is true in all cases, while the position itself can only ever be true in most cases. If the principal had been armed and trained, there would probably only be one dead body on the news, not thirty.

Having the principal or any teacher armed is probably more dangerous consider the many police accidents where a gun is dropped or falls out of a holster onto a park bench (happened in Austin with K9 officer and special leg holster commonly used)

The other problem is the shooter comes prepared to ambush the first person he/she sees giving that person a poor chance of countering if the shooter is a good shot. Before others can respond he/she could take out 3 or 4 people with a semi-automatic.

Again, gun control aside, I'm looking for effective deterrents that can slow or stop an assailant before they can do too much damage that can't be easily co-opted and that don't hinder police. Lockdown seems like the best so far with wirelessly controlled locks.

Thinking out of the box, flying robots that could follow the gunshots and swarm the shooter attacking with laser blinders can overwhelm him with panic. However I think the technology isn't there yet, since the robots can't carry much of a payload or enough battery to stay in the air for long not tomention keeping them charged and ready for use.

Next what about pellet guns or paintball guns for countermeasures for teachers.

 

[jedishrfu]

One thing that might work, although not technology-related specifically, could be to let people with concealed carry permits have their guns in the schools. I'm not saying arm all the teachers, but I mean for people who have such permits, why not let them have their weapon inside? In Connecticut, you have to get a permit to purchase a handgun, you have to get a license, and then to carry it, you have to get another permit.

My feeling is that this wouldn't fly again because of the idea of guns in the classroom, the possibility of a teacher doing what this shooter did or that a child gets the gun or it gets dropped and discharges.

The teachers countermeasure might accidentally hurt a child but it shouldn't be able to kill. The key is to have something the teacher can use to defend her class and herself.

Another thought was the use of light-weight fire extinguishers with special adjustable nozzles to spray fire retardant on the shooter to blind him/her effective to a range of thirty feet.

 

[Evo]

One thing that might work, although not technology-related specifically, could be to let people with concealed carry permits have their guns in the schools. I'm not saying arm all the teachers, but I mean for people who have such permits, why not let them have their weapon inside? In Connecticut, you have to get a permit to purchase a handgun, you have to get a license, and then to carry it, you have to get another permit.

That wouldn't be a good idea. Carrying a weapon doesn't mean the person would have the skill or nerve to use it. Do you propose the teacher walk around wearing a holster with a loaded gun around small children? Also, the element of surprise is with the killer, most likely to take out the "armed" teacher before they could figure out what to do. Their first duty is to get the children out of the way, not start playing Rambo inside a room full of kids.

Mantraps can be at all entrances for adults. The children can go through metal detectors in a secure area with a security guard.

The high school I attended briefly was a very dangerous one, due to zoning, everyone in my neighborhood went to private schools, I decided to go to an out of district school that my parents had to pay for, I just couldn't handle the environment at that school, it was all mexican gangs. There were so many violent attacks, killings, and murder threats against the assistant principle that they only had two entrances we could use. There were armed gaurds standing on each side of the entrance, one side of the hallway was blocked with piles of desks and chairs, and we'd have to enter and walk single file sideways with our backs to the wall. So it can be done with a low budget and no physical modicfications, but of course it was like a war zone. Police helicoptors flew overhead during lunch.

 

[CAC1001]

That wouldn't be a good idea. Carrying a weapon doesn't mean the person would have the skill or nerve to use it. Do you propose the teacher walk around wearing a holster with a loaded gun around small children?

If carrying the gun, it would be concealed carry. Open carry is a whole different ballgame. Plenty of states have concealed carry licensing for handguns. You don't open carry it anywhere. But even then, the teacher could keep it locked in a special safe of some type or something in the classroom. Also, make sure the person with the gun has a permit, and knows how to use it. I'm not saying just let anyone bring their gun to the school.

And if the person is of the mindset to run towards the shooting, to try and stop the shooter, I believe that, upon seeing the guy doing something like gunning down children, they very much will have the nerve to use the weapon. If they do not have the nerve to use the weapon while witnessing that, then they probably would never have run in that direction in the first place.

Also, the element of surprise is with the killer, most likely to take out the "armed" teacher before they could figure out what to do. Their first duty is to get the children out of the way, not start playing Rambo inside a room full of kids.

Six people ran towards the shooter and couldn't stop him. If one of them had been able to grab a firearm, the whole thing might have turned out differently. I know if I have a gun and see a maniac gunning down children, I'm not going to just let him keep shooting them because of a fear of accidentally shooting one of them myself (or at least I hope I wouldn't).

The high school I attended briefly was a very dangerous one, due to zoning, everyone in my neighborhood went to private schools, I decided to go to an out of district school that my parents had to pay for, I just couldn't handle the environment at that school, it was all mexican gangs. There were so many violent attacks, killings, and murder threats against the assistant principle that they only had two entrances we could use. There were armed gaurds standing on each side of the entrance, one side of the hallway was blocked with piles of desks and chairs, and we'd have to enter and walk single file sideways with our backs to the wall. So it can be done with a low budget and no physical modicfications, but of course it was like a war zone. Police helicoptors flew overhead during lunch.

Wow!

 

[drizzle]

Is there any study on noise that can affect human balance and focus temporarily? I was thinkig noise alarms.. Sigh.

 

[justsomeguy]

Having the principal or any teacher armed is probably more dangerous consider the many police accidents where a gun is dropped or falls out of a holster onto a park bench (happened in Austin with K9 officer and special leg holster commonly used)

This will go off on a long tangent if we let it, but I disagree. When you become lazy or complacent, negligence happens. When you "clean" a loaded gun, negligence happens. When you assume that because you are a police officer that you automatically are an expert on firearms since you carry one every day, negligence happens. In the shooting world we have a saying : there is no such thing as an accidental discharge, only a negligent discharge.

The other problem is the shooter comes prepared to ambush the first person he/she sees giving that person a poor chance of countering if the shooter is a good shot. Before others can respond he/she could take out 3 or 4 people with a semi-automatic.

This would be worse than 30 or 300 defenseless innocents being taken out how, exactly?

Again, gun control aside, I'm looking for effective deterrents that can slow or stop an assailant before they can do too much damage that can't be easily co-opted and that don't hinder police. Lockdown seems like the best so far with wirelessly controlled locks.

They should not be wireless. Wire them into the building, and make sure they can run off internal power if there's an outage. All they need to do is lock the doors so they can't be opened from the outside, on every classroom, bathroom, etc. This will trap the shooter in the hallways and prevent them from entering other rooms, but allow people to escape a fire, or temporarily open a door to allow fleeing classmates in who also got stuck outside.

Obviously of course the cheap safety glass on the classroom doors will have to be replaced with bullet resistant stuff.

Thinking out of the box, flying robots that could follow the gunshots and swarm the shooter attacking with laser blinders can overwhelm him with panic. However I think the technology isn't there yet, since the robots can't carry much of a payload or enough battery to stay in the air for long not tomention keeping them charged and ready for use.

There are a lot of other problems as well. Mobility, identifying the gunman, and so on. Maybe one day, but I don't think it's today. ;)

Next what about pellet guns or paintball guns for countermeasures for teachers.

There is zero chance you're going to catch me (or any sane person without a death wish) facing down an armed attacker with a paintball or pellet gun. Thousands of kids play paintball and airsoft every day and are used to the discomfort of being hit, and just wearing an extra layer of clothing negates the whole thing.

Now on the other hand, other less lethal options are available that are proven effective in most cases. Tasers, "bean-bag" rounds in shotguns, things like that.

 

[CAC1001]

My feeling is that this wouldn't fly again because of the idea of guns in the classroom, the possibility of a teacher doing what this shooter did or that a child gets the gun or it gets dropped and discharges.

As said, put the gun in a special safe. As for the possibility of the teacher doing what that shooter did, allowing a gun in the classroom isn't going to result in a teacher suddenly becoming a killer like that. If a teacher really is intent on committing such an act, they'll just disobey the law as this shooter did. And so long as the gun is unloaded and has the safety on, it is virtually impossible to get an accidental discharge.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Six people ran towards the shooter and couldn't stop him. If one of them had been able to grab a firearm, the whole thing might have turned out differently. I know if I have a gun and see a maniac gunning down children, I'm not going to just let him keep shooting them because of a fear of accidentally shooting one of them myself (or at least I hope I wouldn't).

Yeah and how many academics do you know that have a barbaric side capable of shooting and killing a human? It is easy to talk about what you are capable of and what you WOULD do but that means absolutely nothing. Oh..and another thing what were those people called again...uh...security guards I think right? I think they still exist.

 

[CAC1001]

Yeah and how many academics do you know that have a barbaric side capable of shooting and killing a human? It is easy to talk about what you are capable of and what you WOULD do but that means absolutely nothing.

A barbaric side is not required. If after having run to try and save children from being shot by a guy firing round after round, I do not think the academic with the firearm is just going to stand there and let the guy keep killing children because he can't muster the ability to shoot the shooter?

 

[justsomeguy]

As said, put the gun in a special safe. As for the possibility of the teacher doing what that shooter did, allowing a gun in the classroom isn't going to result in a teacher suddenly becoming a killer like that. If a teacher really is intent on committing such an act, they'll just disobey the law as this shooter did. And so long as the gun is unloaded and has the safety on, it is virtually impossible to get an accidental discharge.

I can't agree with this. Out of sight is one thing, but unloaded and locked in a safe is next to worthless -- for the first classroom anyway. When the kid walks into the room with his trenchcoat and shotgun, you aren't going to have time to open a safe and load a gun -- even if you can master the fine motor skills needed to do both tasks while under that kind of threat.

In this particular case, maybe, since it started in the principals office and people had decent lead time, but in most of these incidents the shooter starts in a crowded area like a classroom or lunchroom.

It's better than nothing of course, but still. Carrying concealed by someone who isn't afraid of the tool and is familiar with how to use it is a far better option if saving the most amount of lives is the primary concern.

 

[Evo]

Ok, this is about technology that can be added to a school, not about teachers toting guns, so, gun discussion over.

 

[jedishrfu]

Justsomeguy while I appreciate your comments please start thinking about things we could do that haven't been done to protect the school. I won't debate gun control no good comes of it until people are willing to do something about it. I am seriously looking for local solutions because this will happen again and again and again.

Tell us what would you as MacGyver would do:

An intruder comes into your classroom. What can you use to defeat him? What could you do short of bringing in a weapon to counter his weaponry? What tools are available to you? What strategies could you use?

 

[justsomeguy]

Justsomeguy while I appreciate your comments please start thinking about things we could do that haven't been done to protect the school. I won't debate gun control no good comes of it until people are willing to do something about it. I am seriously looking for local solutions because this will happen again and again and again.

Of course. I didn't mean to, and didn't want to turn it into that. I've abstained in the other thread. It's difficult to let some statements go unanswered though, so I'll resort to the 5 years old defense: "He started it." ;)

Tell us what would you as MacGyver would do:

An intruder comes into your classroom. What can you use to defeat him? What could you do short of bringing in a weapon to counter his weaponry? What tools are available to you? What strategies could you use?

The best option in this case is the most difficult to actually enact. Bum rush him. Everyone at once. The prisoners dilemma tends to keep people from doing this unless they are absolutely convinced they're going to die otherwise though, as happened on UA93 over PA.

I did have some other non-gun related comments in my other response though. The ideas I like so far are..

- Fire doors that automatically close and lock. My old apartment had these on every floor. Electromagnets hold the doors open (unless you close them manually) but during a fire, the power cuts, and they swing shut. If you ensure they lock when they shut, like any good "push to open" door, then you reduce the number of potential targets substantially.

- Tasers and other less-lethal devices. Paintball and airsoft guns are not going to work, but tasers do. With any kind of device like this it's terribly important that those with them have them on their person at all times. It does no good in a safe or desk drawer unless you're very lucky.

- Sirens and lights. You have to let the whole building, and the outside world, know that something has gone horribly wrong. It's sickening that more than once these incidents weren't even properly reported until some scared kid under a desk grabbed a phone. I don't know if that's the case in this one or not, I have not read all the details. First responders are used to these so they will not be hindered, the shooter may or may not be.

Now.. if I were MacGuyver and couldn't bum rush the guy (obviously makes no sense in the kindergarten class!). I'm going to try to throw heavy things at him to distract him, then rush him myself. Grab a fire extinguisher if I can, use it to cover my approach, then bean him with it. In that situation I can't say what I'd try without knowing what's at hand, but I can say that I'm not going to sit there and wait for dozens of kids to get shot, nor myself, nor pray that the guy has a change of heart. :)

 

[CAC1001]

What about armored doors for each classroom? A lot of classrooms have thick wooden doors, and they make armored doors nowadays that look like wood, for people's homes for example who want a safe room but where it doesn't look like a safe room. This way if teachers hear shooting, they could close and lock the doors, thus locking out the shooter from going classroom to classroom.

And also maybe a special "911" button in each classroom and the main office that the teacher could hit if they hear shooting start up? If there could be a problem with students trying to pull a prank by hitting the button, maybe just in the main office at each desk?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

What about armored doors for each classroom?

I know my fiance said the school she works at, the doors can't be locked form the inside.

 

[phosgene]

How about more firearms control. It's a lot harder to get your hands on a firearm in Australia than it is in America. Coincidentally, there are very, very few school shootings here compared to the USA.

 

[K^2]

How about more firearms control. It's a lot harder to get your hands on a firearm in Australia than it is in America. Coincidentally, there are very, very few school shootings here compared to the USA.

It has nothing to do with gun laws. You can take shootings in USA by state, and see that the number of incidents is basically proportional to population. But gun laws are very, very different in each state. Here, in Ohio, we have less strict gun laws than Texas. You can carry a loaded gun on your person openly without any kind of a license. Concealed carry requires license, which state must issue. In California, open carry is illegal, and concealed license may be issued by state. More often than not, the requests for carry is denied. So we have a state where anyone can walk around with a gun in his pocket vs state where almost nobody can. Yet the shooting rates aren't that different. 3x the population in CA, about 3x the rate of school shootings.

And then there is the incident that happened in China on the same day. No legal guns, so the guy went ahead and stabbed 20-something kids.

It's something about culture. If you have a good environment, people will treat weapons responsibly and deal with their problems in other ways. If you don't, then whether or not guns are legal won't make any difference. Somebody will flip out and find a way to kill a bunch of people.

 

[Kuhan]

Beware of spending too much time thinking of inventions: I used to do that too, I guess. Even drew blueprints of stuff like a 'bottle which combines oxygen and hydrogen to form water using solar power' when I was a kid.
The thing is, there are expert engineers who know what's cutting edge, commercial, useful, etc.
If you have an idea, just shoot it off to an engineer and be done with it.
Of course, if you specifically want to improve your Physics skills by spending time exploring applications of your knowledge, then focus specifically on doing so.
Feynman did spend time on 'not important' things ( I think the spinning of a plate)
but... Hey, I like cats!

 

[OmCheeto]

I know my fiance said the school she works at, the doors can't be locked form the inside.

That should be looked into. When the shooting took place in the Oregon mall, security gates were closed and locked. Once closed, the occupants simply escape via an alternate route.

Then, following their agreed-upon plans, mall security officers placed the 1.4 million square-foot facility on lock-down, blocking the entrances.

Stores rolled down their security gates and hustled customers to safety, away from their doors.

Doesn't seem too complicated.

Even less complicated would be turning a dead bolt. I have dead bolts on all of my doors.

 

[Skrew]

Lockdowns are good so long as you aren't locking the prey in with the predator.

 

[Drakkith]

The problem here isn't that we don't have sufficient technology to protect a school, but that the cost for the most effective protection is FAR too high. This is in terms of both monetary and other things. I for one would not want children to attend a school where they were constantly monitored and had to pass through checkpoints everywhere. Would anyone here want schools to feel like prisons or bank vaults?

Large, sweeping changes simply aren't feasible. Having vault-like doors installed into every school is simply not an option. They are too expensive to purchase and install. I think the best solutions are common sense ones. If you KNOW there is a shooter in the school you need to either get out as soon as you can or keep them from getting to you. I don't really see anything feasible that you can buy or install that would help you significantly with either of these.

Keep in mind anything you do also has the potential for accidents and abuse. Alarms can be pulled by students, electronic doors can malfunction, people have to be trained to use equipment, practice drills must be performed, etc.

 

[mfb]

I agree with Drakkith. In addition, protection systems might help to protect all rooms except the one with the shooter inside - but if there are 20-30 students inside, that is bad enough. You don't want to flood that room with tear gas, right?

@K^2: There are so many school shootings per state that you can do a statistic analysis? Ok, there has to be something wrong.
It is illegal to shoot at others in every state, so I don't think laws about open/concealed carry matter much. The availability of guns does matter, however. Here in germany, it is difficult to get a weapon - you need a specific reason, like hunting or membership in a Schützenverein (interesting, it is the same word in english). You have to show some knowledge about the weapon you want to buy and how to handle and store it. You need to be at least 18 years old, and between 18-25 you need an additional psychological test.

 

[D H]

The problem here isn't that we don't have sufficient technology to protect a school, but that the cost for the most effective protection is FAR too high.

I agree with the latter, that the cost is far too high. I disagree with the former. IMO, we don't have sufficient technology to protect a school, and even if we did, those deranged killers would just go find some other soft target. Protecting every soft target is something we simply cannot afford to do.

Placing a security guard in every school won't solve the problem. The deranged killer will just kill the guard first or will attack some part of the school where the guard is not present. Lockdown systems won't solve the problem; this school was locked down. Putting a mantrap at the main entrance of a school won't solve the problem. Schools have many doors, many windows, all of which are easily breached. Gunfire detection systems won't help; once the gunfire has started it's too late.

There are no easy, short term technological solutions to this long term, non-technical problem. This is an aberrant psychology problem that is aggravated by far too easy access to weaponry intended to kill lots of people in short order, by far too much attention being placed on these egregious acts, and by the increasing difficulty for some people to fit in with modern society.

Far too much attention placed on these egregious acts: Had this killer only killed his mother and then himself he would have received 15 minutes of local posthumous fame. By killing his mother plus a few more other adults plus a bunch of little kids before killing himself he has achieved worldwide notoriety and fame. Disgusting fame, but fame nonetheless. Apparently these sickos think it is better to die remembered by all as a gruesome multiple murder than it is to live on as a nobody known by no one.

An increasing difficulty for some people to fit in with modern society: Modern civilization requires humans to interact with one another on an ever increasing basis. We work and live as members of teams, not as loners. Many of the former outlets for loners such as becoming a mountain man just don't exist anymore. Going it alone requires giving up modern comforts. These deranged killers want those modern comforts but they don't have the requisite human interaction skills to gain those modern comforts.

Since this is an aberrant psychology problem, the solution is to somehow learn to identify and correct the potential for mass murder before it escalates into mass murder. How this can be accomplished without unduly compromising civil liberties -- that's an even tougher problem.

 

[Evo]

These people look for easy targets, They're not going to go to extreme lengths to get inside, I've worked in many buildings where man traps at all entrances with security guards do keep out people, obviously you don't just block one door. Is it overkill on the astronomical chance that a public place will be the target of a mentally ill person, yes. And blocking entry into a school isn't really sensible unless the children aren't allowed outside.

 

[Chi Meson]

Six people ran towards the shooter and couldn't stop him. If one of them had been able to grab a firearm, the whole thing might have turned out differently.

Out of many maybe's , this is one thing that I'm certain is true.

In my high school where I teach, we have a "Student Resource Officer," a fancy name for a cop stationed at the school. He is the only armed person in the building. Perhaps one is enough.

Although I would trust myself as being "a teacher with a gun," I would NOT want to be known as "the teacher with the gun."

Restricted entrance, electronic locks, class doors that stay closed and locked at all times. That's my recommendation.

 

[Abdilatif]

Well in Toronto, in "high-risk" schools, there is a "school officer". One officer at a school with the ability to radio into HQ, faster than the emergency lines which would be bogged down by the numerous calls all at once, allows for immediate backup and someone who can at least pin-down the shooter until help arrives. In the US, this could be tried with the exception this officer has access to an assault rifle, in Canada, this variable is not accounted for, as I am going to assume it is very hard, if not illegal to obtain an automatic weapon.

 

[logically]

Additional factors to consider are schools that do not reside in a single building. An example is the school that my little brother (6 y/o) goes to. The school consists of 10 buildings; the main building (which houses the school admin and 50% of the students) has 8 separate entrances, the other 9 buildings have classroom doors lead directly outside. This situation is true of most Elementary, Middle, and High Schools in my area.

How do schools like that go about modifying procedures to optimize security?

 

[OmCheeto]

Out of many maybe's , this is one thing that I'm certain is true.

In my high school where I teach, we have a "Student Resource Officer," a fancy name for a cop stationed at the school. He is the only armed person in the building. Perhaps one is enough.

Although I would trust myself as being "a teacher with a gun," I would NOT want to be known as "the teacher with the gun."

Restricted entrance, electronic locks, class doors that stay closed and locked at all times. That's my recommendation.

Don't they have electronic locks on most all new cars nowadays? Seems like teachers could carry a key shaped device easily enough. Boop Beep! Locked. Beep Boop! Un-locked.

 

[justsomeguy]

I'm in favor of the KISS principal here. The detectors and automatic shutting doors are all nice, but now about a door that:

1. Is always shut. No propping them open.
2. Is always locked from the outside, like a 'push to open' exit door can be.

Most classrooms have doors like that already, all you need to do is keep them shut and locked. The only downside I see is inconvenience, really?

 

[BobG]

I've always worked in secure locations. You had to enter and leave through "man traps". These can be built to spec, but basically, you enter a small room when you come into the buliding, then either you have a pass key to let yourself into the mantrap, or security will let you into the trap. Once you set foot into the trap, the door you came into locks behind you, the door in front of you is also locked. The glass is bullet proof, you get weighed, you get scanned by a metal detector, the security guard is watching you on survielance cameras. If you pass inspection, then either you have the key card or pass code to let yourself out, or the security guard does, you will pass by the security desk and show them your badge,then in my building after all this, you had to use your card key again to leave the gaurd area and get to elevators, etc to get into the rest of the builiding.

If you didn't register as an employee inside the mantrap, a security guard greets you to find out who you are there to see and you remain with him until the person you're seeing comes to get you.

If you don't pass, you remain inside the trap until the police come to take you away.

Never had anyone get through one of these systems in all the years I worked, (since they started installing them. Thousands of people would pass through these every day.

This is a very simple mantrap setup.

These do work very well. We used to have many of these installed at the main entrances to the facility where I work. Only problem is the one that comes from having so many - the inconvenience that's created when someone (especially a visitor) botches the entry procedure, or one of the mantraps malfunctions, and ALL of the mantraps are disabled, trapping EVERYONE currently in one of the mantraps, until security police can investigate.

You don't want to be trapped in one of the mantraps if you've drunk too much coffee on the drive across the prairie to reach the facility. Not to mention the people waiting to enter the mantrap have nothing better to do than to laugh at the people stuck inside the mantraps.

Obviously, the effectiveness outweighs the inconveniences. The only real disadvantage is the initial cost, plus the maintenance. In fact, the maintenance costs are why the facility I worked eventually replaced them. Granted, they had this system for about 30 years or so, so they had a pretty good lifetime before they were so old the maintenance costs became too high.

 

[jedishrfu]

Of course. I didn't mean to, and didn't want to turn it into that. I've abstained in the other thread. It's difficult to let some statements go unanswered though, so I'll resort to the 5 years old defense: "He started it." ;)



The best option in this case is the most difficult to actually enact. Bum rush him. Everyone at once. The prisoners dilemma tends to keep people from doing this unless they are absolutely convinced they're going to die otherwise though, as happened on UA93 over PA.

I did have some other non-gun related comments in my other response though. The ideas I like so far are..

- Fire doors that automatically close and lock. My old apartment had these on every floor. Electromagnets hold the doors open (unless you close them manually) but during a fire, the power cuts, and they swing shut. If you ensure they lock when they shut, like any good "push to open" door, then you reduce the number of potential targets substantially.

- Tasers and other less-lethal devices. Paintball and airsoft guns are not going to work, but tasers do. With any kind of device like this it's terribly important that those with them have them on their person at all times. It does no good in a safe or desk drawer unless you're very lucky.

- Sirens and lights. You have to let the whole building, and the outside world, know that something has gone horribly wrong. It's sickening that more than once these incidents weren't even properly reported until some scared kid under a desk grabbed a phone. I don't know if that's the case in this one or not, I have not read all the details. First responders are used to these so they will not be hindered, the shooter may or may not be.

Now.. if I were MacGuyver and couldn't bum rush the guy (obviously makes no sense in the kindergarten class!). I'm going to try to throw heavy things at him to distract him, then rush him myself. Grab a fire extinguisher if I can, use it to cover my approach, then bean him with it. In that situation I can't say what I'd try without knowing what's at hand, but I can say that I'm not going to sit there and wait for dozens of kids to get shot, nor myself, nor pray that the guy has a change of heart. :)

This was more of what I was really looking for in this thread. Thanks.

The door seems to be the first line of defence for any teacher. It must be closed and locked and bullet proof. From there we could entertain the idea of a gunshot detection system that sounds the alarm alerts the teacher to shut the door or even automatically closes the door (as in fire alarm situations).

Thinking more actively, the door could be electrified or have intense strobe lights flashing into the hall and possibly other more exotic countermeasures (foam spray, pepper spray, sonic bursts). Anything to deter an intruder from opening it, non-lethal, designed to hinder but not permanently injure.

For the teacher, a stroboscopic gun to focus on the intruder to temporarily blind him perhaps even strobe guns for the kids as well activated by the teacher's gun (although I'd be afraid of some kid zapping his friends thinking its a game). They could be placed around the classroom disguised as ordinary items not to be touched but there just in case perhaps as books.

Alternatively, modified fire extinguishers would be another deterrent if you could direct the foam accurately at a shooter before you bean him/her with the cannister.

For classroom strategy, place the kids in multiple groups not huddled into one group.

Anyway, I am still thinking.

For those of us here who think of cost as the first decider... we must leave that out for the moment. Invention ideas are first brainstormed, attacking them from many different directions looking for weaknesses and out of the fray comes the key requirements and the central idea that eventually may address the problem or as often happens some other problem and then we deal with the cost of building and implementing the idea.

The door defense makes good sense economically in that schools can decide to implement it in stages protecting certain grades first or certain classrooms closest to school entrances...

For me I can't help but feel for the teacher, he/she can't run. He/she has a personal duty to protect the kids. The teacher is caught in the middle with no defence and yet he/she has a classroom full of possible countermeasures if only he/she had the MacGyver know-how to formulate a plan while keeping the kids calm. What else can we give the classroom to better defend it while not hurting the kids its trying to defend. (A smarter classroom).

 

[justsomeguy]

Up two or three posts I simplified the door "plan." I imagine the scenario that prompted the thread, and most like it, would have been averted if the classroom doors were simply closed and locked at all times except during class. As long as they're not locked from the inside (people can get out without a key) there's no problem here.

Training isn't a technology solution but it's something that needs addressed regardless. If you hear gunshots, your first reactions need to be shutting the door and getting on the phone.

I am not putting much faith into "slow" responses like macguyvering things up or getting the teacher and all the kids to rush to the bookshelf and grab flashing lights and sirens. You need to stop the attacker in a reliable fashion, not use some device that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, with unpredictable results, and not something that takes more than a second or two to deploy from wherever you happen to be.

Ideas like an electrified door, automatic foam sprayers, and so on are not only unreliable, they are indiscriminate. If one of the kids is running away looking for a place to escape and gets electrocuted by the door or teargassed and then shot, it's no kind of solution.

IMHO the focus should be on two parts.

1. Secure the rooms; prevent unwanted/unauthorized entry.
2. Incapacitate the attacker, and only the attacker, reliably.

 

[jedishrfu]

Up two or three posts I simplified the door "plan." I imagine the scenario that prompted the thread, and most like it, would have been averted if the classroom doors were simply closed and locked at all times except during class. As long as they're not locked from the inside (people can get out without a key) there's no problem here.

Training isn't a technology solution but it's something that needs addressed regardless. If you hear gunshots, your first reactions need to be shutting the door and getting on the phone.

I am not putting much faith into "slow" responses like macguyvering things up or getting the teacher and all the kids to rush to the bookshelf and grab flashing lights and sirens. You need to stop the attacker in a reliable fashion, not use some device that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, with unpredictable results, and not something that takes more than a second or two to deploy from wherever you happen to be.

Ideas like an electrified door, automatic foam sprayers, and so on are not only unreliable, they are indiscriminate. If one of the kids is running away looking for a place to escape and gets electrocuted by the door or teargassed and then shot, it's no kind of solution.

IMHO the focus should be on two parts.

1. Secure the rooms; prevent unwanted/unauthorized entry.
2. Incapacitate the attacker, and only the attacker, reliably.

Thanks for the comments. I'm throwing lots of ideas out to see how they float. I figured the main design principle has to be a deterrent and non-lethal and kid-friendly all at the same time.

I also think defense experts should look at and make recommendations to the teachers for how best to respond. The huddling in the corner is good for tornado watches... but maybe splitting up the groups all around is better or having the teachers and students move around to different classrooms each day like in high school (the shell game). I don't know but we need pros/cons counterpoint to find the answer.

I've also started to ask around about getting a University level Mechancial/Electrical engineering competition going to develop the smart classrom door and other protections to give the teacher a better chance at defending his/her class...

If there are other people here affiliated with Universities or Colleges here, you could do the same at your school. As I develop this idea more I will post it here.

Thanks for your help.

 

[D H]

All of these are after the fact proposals. IMO, prevention is a far better approach. Most of the solutions aren't technical. They're political and societal.

Here's one technical solution: Find out what abnormal blood chemistry, brain organization, genetics, and environmental conditions makes people commit these acts. Police prefer not to remove the bodies nowadays so they can get a better forensic picture. That militates against understanding what makes those killers tick. Too many of those essential blood and brain chemical decay into something else rather quickly. So, draw blood samples and brain tissue from the killer ASAP; these samples are for science, not forensics. Also for science: The brains of those killers. Remove the killer's brain once the police are satisfied they have collected enough forensic evidence.

Technical solution #2: Bolster funding for neuroscience, psychiatry, and psychology. We need to make psychiatry and psychology real sciences rather than the not-quite-sciences that they currently are. We need to know what make these killers tick, we need to know how to detect with reasonable accuracy those who are likely to commit such acts before they do commit them, and we need to know how to cure them of whatever it is that ails them so they won't commit those acts.

One obvious impediment to this cure, if it is found, is the fifth amendment. We would essentially be punishing people for crimes they might commit in the future. That's a problem, and I don't know the solution to that.

The fifth amendment issue isn't going to be solved technically. This a political and societal issue, one with no easy answers. Most of the issues related to this problem are political and societal. (Aside: There are also first and second amendment issues that have to be addressed.) While technology might be an aid in arriving at a solution, it will not be the driver. Changing our political views and societal norms is a much harder problem than is coming up with fancy, expensive doors.

Politics ain't rocket science. It's much harder.

 

[jedishrfu]

All of these are after the fact proposals. IMO, prevention is a far better approach. Most of the solutions aren't technical. They're political and societal.

Here's one technical solution: Find out what abnormal blood chemistry, brain organization, genetics, and environmental conditions makes people commit these acts. Police prefer not to remove the bodies nowadays so they can get a better forensic picture. That militates against understanding what makes those killers tick. Too many of those essential blood and brain chemical decay into something else rather quickly. So, draw blood samples and brain tissue from the killer ASAP; these samples are for science, not forensics. Also for science: The brains of those killers. Remove the killer's brain once the police are satisfied they have collected enough forensic evidence.

Technical solution #2: Bolster funding for neuroscience, psychiatry, and psychology. We need to make psychiatry and psychology real sciences rather than the not-quite-sciences that they currently are. We need to know what make these killers tick, we need to know how to detect with reasonable accuracy those who are likely to commit such acts before they do commit them, and we need to know how to cure them of whatever it is that ails them so they won't commit those acts.

One obvious impediment to this cure, if it is found, is the fifth amendment. We would essentially be punishing people for crimes they might commit in the future. That's a problem, and I don't know the solution to that.

The fifth amendment issue isn't going to be solved technically. This a political and societal issue, one with no easy answers. Most of the issues related to this problem are political and societal. (Aside: There are also first and second amendment issues that have to be addressed.) While technology might be an aid in arriving at a solution, it will not be the driver. Changing our political views and societal norms is a much harder problem than is coming up with fancy, expensive doors.

Politics ain't rocket science. It's much harder.

But none of it helps the teacher now! Not gun laws, not better mental health support, nothing...

There too many reasons why people commit these acts, the 1966 UT sniper had an undetected brain tumor, others may be due to drugs prescribed for sleeplessness that induce parnoia, suicide or delusion which are then suplemented with other drugs to combat these symptoms ...

I was looking for immediate ideas to make the school better protected and I think I found some here.

Thank you all for your comments and suggestions.

I'd encourage you to ask around to see if there are any other things that could be done to help the teacher or startup an Eng competition as I am trying to do.

 

[Drakkith]

But none of it helps the teacher now! Not gun laws, not better mental health support, nothing...

So? Did you really expect to find a solution? There isn't one. There isn't one at all. Life isn't fair and people do bad things. You CANNOT stop this and it's mostly pointless to try once you've reached a certain point where diminishing returns really start to kick in. It is my belief that we CANNOT allow bad people or bad things to make us so afraid that we start going overboard on safety. This does nothing but waste time, money, and freedoms.

 

[jedishrfu]

So? Did you really expect to find a solution? There isn't one. There isn't one at all. Life isn't fair and people do bad things. You CANNOT stop this and it's mostly pointless to try once you've reached a certain point where diminishing returns really start to kick in. It is my belief that we CANNOT allow bad people or bad things to make us so afraid that we start going overboard on safety. This does nothing but waste time, money, and freedoms.

If you believe there isn't one then there isn't one. Thanks.

 

[D H]

But none of it helps the teacher now! Not gun laws, not better mental health support, nothing...

Of course not. You want a bandaid solution to a severed artery problem. Even the most technologically advanced bandage won't fix a severed artery.

This is a problem that is 200+ years in the making, minimum. Part of the problem is billions of years in the making. It's going to take time to arrive at a solution. There are no immediate fixes.

 

[Evo]

So? Did you really expect to find a solution? There isn't one. There isn't one at all. Life isn't fair and people do bad things. You CANNOT stop this and it's mostly pointless to try once you've reached a certain point where diminishing returns really start to kick in. It is my belief that we CANNOT allow bad people or bad things to make us so afraid that we start going overboard on safety. This does nothing but waste time, money, and freedoms.

Got to agree, any place where there are large groups gathered, there is the danger that some angry and/or unstable person(s) might decide to kill. It's just that now it's easier to get lots of weapons to "do the deed". That's our fault as a society and not one which will be easy to completely undo, if ever. A big part of that is a lot of people don't want to undo it. IMO.

 

[Drakkith]

A big part of that is a lot of people don't want to undo it. IMO.

Of course. That's the heart of the issue. Many people simply don't agree that banning certain weapons is more beneficial than not. The reasons vary but are usually: Right to bear arms, safeguard from possible future tyranny, recreational use, and simple freedom.