A solution to Newtown type tragedies....

steveinaz

I don't like to criticize without a solution in my hip pocket---otherwise it's just arm-chair quarter-backing, which any fool can do.

Secure schools like you do classified military offices/areas. Cypher lock doors that use an entry card, ONLY issued to the school staff (NOT the students). Early morning, teachers would be posted at entries for students coming in, at a set time, all doors would be secured as school gets underway. If a student needs to leave (appointment/sick, etc) a staff member would escort them out of the building to ensure the door is re-secured. Visitors would ring a buzzer at the entrance, and school staff would verify, then meet that person at the door, and escort them.

This way you don't have to have police patroling hallways, if you're uncomfortable with teachers carrying concealed--this is also addressed. While the initial investment will be costly---it would be far less costly than armed guards in the long term. This controls who is coming in and out, and school staff is always aware when a non-card holder is in the facility, because they will be escorted.

cowtrimmer

What happens in the parameter of school property ? The only reason I ask is (and I could very well be wrong here). At one of these school shooting/massacres that happened in the last 25 years. Didnt a student pull the fire alarm so while the kids were scurrying out of the building a cohort was waiting outside from a vantage point and shooting while them while assembled outside ? As mentioned earlier I could be wrong on the details, but for some reason I remember something along that scenario.

steveinaz

That is a possibility---there's no fool-proof solution that will address every situation. What if a shooter was posted at the bus stop? see what I'm saying---there's millions of "what if's."

cowtrimmer

I agree 100% with your "what ifs" scenario.

steveinaz

The key is to minimize the risk; people can spread out quickly outdoors, indoors---it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

dkg999

The key is to take whatever we need from the billions of $'s in worthless foreign aid we spend and do the best job of using that to make our schools safe!

wayne3burk

full stop

kevhed72

Fascinating...

markmarc

My school already does much of what you describe. Let us remember that Columbine had a resource officer on duty. He was outside at the time and even got off a shot or two but sadly missed. He is haunted to this day by the "what if's". Our best defense is rebuilding our mental health system in this country and finding a way to keep guns away from lunatics without trouncing the 2nd amendment rights of regular citizens.

Polkersince85

I have seen discussions of the current training of LE forces which encourage disruption of the shooter being proven to be effective. This involves firing shoots at the shooter whether the treat is eliminated or not. It appears to force the shooter to either hide or self-inflict. Either way, the unihibited threat is removed which may save lives and provides back-up time to arrive.

steveinaz

First, we have to eliminate opportunity.

Jetmaker737

Not a bad idea.

steveinaz

Security is about "layers." As a top secret security clearance holder for the last 35yrs, security is drilled into us. First layer is restricting access. Only people who need to be on school property should be there. Just because I have a clearance, doesn't mean I get to go thru documents and read the real story behind JFK...I don't meet the "need to know" requirement. If we can first secure the building, then our number one priority of protecting children will be met. Then we plan for contingencies; the "what if" scenarios, as best and realistically as possible. Limiting access cards to only select staff would be even smarter---the less people have them, the less chance one will get lost or in the wrong hands.

Secondly, verfying/allowing access to those who arrive at the school such as a parent. Procedures should be put in place that remove all doubt, that the person you are about to let thru the doors, should be allowed access. They should be escorted everywhere.

Third, come up with an extremely comprehensive plan when evacuations are required for fires or other natural disasters--as well as a breach of security, should it occur. There should always be a plan B, and plan C.

zingo

I am a gun advocate and user, but there seems to be only two solutions to this problem. There seem to be two different styles of gun control/rights in countries that are more successful. One is England/Australia which does not allow guns, and had significant drops in gun violence once those laws were enacted. The second is Israel in which nearly everyone is firearm trained, many people openly carry guns as most are required to provide military service in their career, and there are metal detectors and security check-points EVERYWHERE. I think if we want to allow anyone to carry a gun, we need to adopt the Israel style security (similar to the measures suggested by the OP) which I don't think most Americans would support.

steveinaz

Just my opinion, but I would NOT like to see a DMZ throughout the U.S. and I don't think it is necessary. We can strike a balance---we have for over 200 years. Education is key, and returning values and personal responsibility to our culture. This crap all started with the liberal progressive movement. The morphed into "we're going to tell you how/when you can discipline your child" which morphed into parents that were weak in both character, and couldn't run their own homes anymore. Get the damn the government OUT of our livingrooms, let our parents "PARENT." Re-establish discipline, standards, values, manners. And when the parents don't parent, then HOLD THEM accountable. We have become a nation of wussies, gridlocked from any original thought or action by our "wussiness." The herd is getting weak folks, that's no joke. Instead of being a culture of tough survivors and innovators, we're now whiney, under achieving discontents that can't tie our own shoes without help. The world laughs at us---for what we have become, and it pisses me off.

rpf65

Going back on the topic, I think most people are wrong. This was a senseless tragedy, and probably could not have been prevented. I'm sorry, but there is no way to make every given situation totally safe, and there are a lot of people who think we can. Weather it be a shooting, car accident, or something falling on somebody, the world is more dangerous than most think.

Guns have been around for a few hundred years, and are continuoously being improved on. That's just progress. Go back to Whitman at the University of Texas. He had a rifle firing on people from a fairly high vantage point. The part people forget is that many people on campus had hunting rifles in their vehicles,and started shhoting back. They didn't hit him,but probably saved a life or 2 before law enforcement arrived.

Is making schools an armed compuond a solution; No.
The security idea may seem a good idea, but it would never fly. Too much like incarcerating the innocent.

I may be wrong here, but I believe the mother tried to get help, but was unable to. It seems we can't force a mentally ill person to take medication,unless he/she is legally commited. This is probably the best starting point.

tonyb

Everything in life is about balance Steve.

I would more so lean on the side of allocating resources already available. That would cost next to nothing. Almost every major community has a police force. Sparing a couple seems to me to be a logical step along with better security measures as you outlined. Nobody is ever completely safe, even the police in their own station as we recently learned, but there are things you can do without suggesting taking away someones rights.

txcoastal1

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2004/04/the_depressive_and_the_psychopath.html

Here is an interesting 3pg article.

Our problem is about the source of the issues. As Steve mentioned in #15
We as a society are less involved with our children. We have lessened our discipline, and took away the rights of discipline in our schools. Children don't have respect for their elders as they did when most of us grew up. Most of the rights were stripped due to a few bad apples and media blitz's, which gets us here today with repercussion. The drugs to help control our children is another ludicrous story.

Polkie2009

Illegal drugs have done more to tear down the moral fabric of our society than anything else. When we took prayer out of public shools was just the beginning of the downard spiral, and we wonder how did we get here to where children are now killing their own parents and grandparents. Oh, and I guess the lame street media forgets to be upset that over a million babies were murdered last year by abortion.

PolkieMan

Oh I agree with steve and txcoastal. The kid was a known fruitcake the parents had just got divorced mommy dearest taught him how to use them and then left them out for him. What a mess of misjudgements.

tonyb

The case of illegal drugs is one thing, but I think the case for the abuse of legal drugs is even greater. More die from overdose of legal drugs than we care to admit and far more than from assualt weapons. So do we ban legal drugs then ? Of course not. In my view, it's a moral failing coupled with parental guidance that seems to be absent. We seem to turn our back on the obvious faults of society while demonizing the easiest targets. Build better men/women/parents is the ticket in my view anyway.

markmarc

PolkieMan wrote: »

The kid was a known fruitcake the parents had just got divorced mommy dearest taught him how to use them and then left them out for him. What a mess of misjudgements.

Bingo!!, Mom got an idea into her head that she could connect with him by taking him shooting with her. On one hand she wanted help for him, while the other hand gave him the skills to kill. Just plain stupid! Had the state mental illness system not been dismantled this lunatic would have been in a treatment facility.

The question now is: how do we pay for such a system at the state level to protect society from KNOWN unstable individuals?

jephdood

While it doesn't eliminate a nut job's ability to conduct harm, removing the public's access to military grade assault weapons would be a start in curbing the large-scale events we've been seeing more and more recently. I understand people's passion for owning guns (which, I personally don't get.. however, that's your right), but there are certainly models that are not needed by the general public for recreation and defense. A comprehensive ban on assault weapons needs to happen, IMO.

deronb1

jephdood wrote: »

While it doesn't eliminate a nut job's ability to conduct harm, removing the public's access to military grade assault weapons would be a start in curbing the large-scale events we've been seeing more and more recently. I understand people's passion for owning guns (which, I personally don't get.. however, that's your right), but there are certainly models that are not needed by the general public for recreation and defense. A comprehensive ban on assault weapons needs to happen, IMO.

Agreed. Lets start by banning those riduculous "gun and knife" shows. What a joke! Also, how about a 5k fine and 5 years in jail if your weapon is used in a crime. 10k and 10 years for a homicide.

potee

If you use a gun to kill some one then no long prison term when found guilty your put to death within 30 days. BTW I think all prisons should operate the way that the one in Phoenix does. Don't get me started on our sorry **** leaders.

tonyb

I just heard a quote from a movie that pertains to our topic of late.

Guns are like condoms, better to have one and not need it, than to need one and not have it.

I dig it.

mrbiron

If you use a gun to kill some one then no long prison term when found guilty your put to death within 30 days.

Most of these school shooters never get to this point and plan on offing themselves before letting this happen. Death penalties don't scare those who are prepared to die at a moment notice.

Background and Psyche checks need to be more stringent when registering for a firearm. Banning guns is a laughable non solution and will never happen. As far as high powered weapons, sure, one doesn't need them but then again one doesn't need a car rated at 210mph to drive on 65mph+- limit roads but money is the biggest kid in the playground.

Let's not get started on the leadership of this country because they are more corrupt than all the criminals and shooters combined.