How Can Technology Enhance School Safety?

[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.

 

[jedishrfu]

So while people debate on how to solve this problem, we grassroots door people can provide some added protection one door at a time. I know it's not a solution to every problem I just feel so bad that it was defenseless kids protected by defenseless teachers who were killed and only if the door could have fought back some of them would still be here.

I also realize that our PF here is not equipped to answer this kind of question but you have in ways you can't envision just yet. Thank you all.

 

[OmCheeto]

Require people with guns and assault rifles to also own a gun safe.

The incidents in both Oregon and Connecticut could have been nullified with this requirement.

The gun in Oregon was stolen, the gun in Connecticut was, I don't know. How did that guys mom have her guns stored?

 

[justsomeguy]

Require people with guns and assault rifles to also own a gun safe.

You would also have to require them to *use* them, and how are you going to enforce that?

 

[BobG]

Require people with guns and assault rifles to also own a gun safe.

The incidents in both Oregon and Connecticut could have been nullified with this requirement.

The gun in Oregon was stolen, the gun in Connecticut was, I don't know. How did that guys mom have her guns stored?

A gun safe would help in many situations, but probably not in the latest shooting attack. Why wouldn't she trust her 20-year-old son to the combo to the gun safe?

Aside from the fact that he may not have been mentally stable. I still get the feeling that she would have never dreamed of keeping the guns away from him, as the guns were for protection against the coming apocalypse; not protection against him.

 

[mfb]

There are ~40 million students in an age relevant for school shootings. Assuming one room with a single door in a school per 20 students, this corresponds to 2 million doors in schools. How expensive is a bullet-proof door or something similar? I found prices of 500$ or more, including installation, locking system and so on this looks like a reasonable lower estimate.

Adding a bullet-proof door to all rooms in schools in the US would cost about 1 billion US-dollar.

I don't know the lifetime of those doors. Based on this list, there was a total of 163 victims since 2000 and 66 between 1990 and 1999. Most of the attacks had 1-5 victims, probably within a single room, so bullet-proof / locked doors wouldn't have helped.

There are 3 school shootings in the list with more than 10 victims:
Columbine High School, 1999, 15 victims
Blacksburg, Virginia, 2007, 33 victims
Newtown, 2012, 27 victims

I am sure it would save more lifes to invest 1 billion US-dollar in prevention, programs to reduce the number of (available) weapons or something similar.

 

[jedishrfu]

There are ~40 million students in an age relevant for school shootings. Assuming one room with a single door in a school per 20 students, this corresponds to 2 million doors in schools. How expensive is a bullet-proof door or something similar? I found prices of 500$ or more, including installation, locking system and so on this looks like a reasonable lower estimate.

Adding a bullet-proof door to all rooms in schools in the US would cost about 1 billion US-dollar.

I don't know the lifetime of those doors. Based on this list, there was a total of 163 victims since 2000 and 66 between 1990 and 1999. Most of the attacks had 1-5 victims, probably within a single room, so bullet-proof / locked doors wouldn't have helped.

There are 3 school shootings in the list with more than 10 victims:
Columbine High School, 1999, 15 victims
Blacksburg, Virginia, 2007, 33 victims
Newtown, 2012, 27 victims

I am sure it would save more lifes to invest 1 billion US-dollar in prevention, programs to reduce the number of (available) weapons or something similar.

This is a good analysis however you can spin the numbers a different way and see that the investment is much lower.

I found these stats from the NCEF website: http://www.ncef.org/ds/statistics.cfm#

55 million students in school in US
4 million teachers

average lifetime of a public school building: 42 years

there 130,000 public/private elementary/secondary schools

cost to build an elementary school is $25k per student with 600 student capacity
cost to build a secondary shool is $30K per student
coust to build a high school is #30K per student

Annual cost of a student: $2300

Just looking at the annual cost per student with a $2000 hardened door in a class of 20 kids would cost $100 more and that could be prorated over 5 or 10 years making it not such an intolerable expense. That same door could be protecting for upto 42 years on average.

My $2000 door estimate is based on prices at this website:

http://www.pacificbulletproof.com/products/bullet-resistant-doors/

 

[mfb]

I don't see how your numbers are lower.
55 million students and $100/student gives $5.5 billions. Sure, you can install just 10% per year (I would expect that you have to, as 2 million doors are probably above the current production capacity), but that does not lower the total costs of the program. Distributed over 42 years, this is $100 million per year. Or ~$30 million per student/teacher killed in a school shooting with more than 10 victims.

 

[justsomeguy]

Also 42 years of protection on average isn't quite right. That's the average duration a schoolbuilding lasts. Unless they are not getting installed except in new schools, they will last significantly less time -- 42 years less whatever the average age of a school is.

From a practical standpoint, I'm in agreement with mfb here, that level of cost does not seem worth it vs. the risk considering the alternatives. I haven't heard of any of these psychos trying to shoot through closed doors, and if they do, well, bullets that will go through an average solid door will go through drywall even easier.

Perhaps (sorry, forgot the name!) was right; we may be well past the point of diminishing returns already when it comes to physical security measures.

 

[Curious3141]

as the guns were for protection against the coming apocalypse; not protection against him.

Something tells me he may not have been the only mentally unstable one in the family.