School Shootings and Security Systems

By: John Honovich, Published on Dec 16, 2012

How do you stop your school from being the next tragedy? What improvements are needed for school security systems to deliver this? While national policy may change in the long term, schools must immediately determine what they need to do to make themselves as safe as possible. In this report, we examine the key options available and their advantages and disadvantages.

The Challenges

Dealing with this is incredibly difficult because:

  • School administrators are under immense pressure to make schools safe not only from parents and the community but literally for their own lives.
  • Many security sales people will see this as a gold rush and opportunity to push unrealistic or impractical solutions.
  • This threat places an incredibly dangerous adversary (a suicide shooter) in a historically lightly fortified facility (schools).

The Approach

When dealing with such threats, security solutions can be analyzed as such:

  • Deterrence: What can be done to convince the threat not to attack?
  • Detect: How soon and accurately can you detect that an active threat is present?
  • Delay: How long can you delay the intruder until response can arrive?
  • Response: How soon can you get responders on site to stop the attack?
  • Cost / Benefit: Can the projected reduction in risk / loss be cost justified?

Deterring School Shooters?

It is highly unlikely that any security system will deter a school shooter:

  • Since this is essentially a suicide attack, they do not care if they are ‘caught on tape’ or arrested. Indeed, you might argue that they want to be caught on tape to increase their notoriety (and the higher the resolution the better).
  • Since these shooters typically target a school they have an affiliation with, improving security at one school will not likely displace it (as a burglar might if one store had better security than another).

Whatever system one looks to deploy (access, intrusion, surveillance), justifying it as deterring an attack is likely wishful thinking.

Detecting an Attack

Since time in response is critical, one wants to detect the threat as soon as possible before someone gets shot. However, this is hard:

Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News
Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News

  • A traditional intrusion system is problematic as these attacks happen during the day when there are lots of activity and, therefore, lots of false alarms if the intrusion system was armed.
  • Video analytics is more magic than practical. Detecting the presence of a gun on a camera is theoretically possible but not available in commercial use. Alternatively, one could use facial recognition to alert against watch lists or anyone who is not enrolled but this is likely to suffer from very high false alerts.
  • The most practical solution is a checkpoint with a metal detector, preferably one that is a close to the perimeter and far from the main school buildings as possible.

Delaying an Attack / Access Controls

Stronger doors and locked entrances will likely not stop such an attack. However, they can be crucial in delaying the attacker and giving responders more time to stop the attacker before students and teachers are killed.

This is likely the most practical approach, given its relatively low cost. Many schools are fairly open and easy to enter. Schools may elect for more restrictive policies and hardened entrances.

[Update: Perhaps the most cost effective method is to add in 'classroom' locks.]

There are two main downsides to this:

  • Schools become like prisons, with students essentially locked in. Administrators and communities will need to determine how much of this is acceptable.
  • Hardening is typically done to the outside perimeter but once the attacker gets past that, unless each room or area is hardened and restricted inside, the attacker will have nearly unmitigated internal access. Do you defend against this? Doing so add considerably to the cost and operational complexity of such a system.

Responding to an Attack / Guards, Guns and Video

With such an attack, it will be critical to get an armed responder in the right place as soon as possible.

Overall, we think video surveillance has questionable value here but may help in getting responders to the right spot of the school quickly as well as directing those under attack away from the shooter's location.

To do this requires instant, simple mobile video access for teachers and the local police. While this is feasible, it does raise access/security risks. If access is only turned on when an incident occurs, this requires an authorized individual granting access which may not be possible or readily available if that person is under attack. To eliminate any delays in access, the most straightforward approach is allowing unlimited access. However, schools will have to accept or deal with potential misuse of the video during other times.

The other major question for responding is whether to wait for the police or to have an armed guard(s) on site. The huge advantage of the latter is cutting down response time, which could save many lives as the killings typically occur within minutes of the attacker being detected. The downside, of course, is the cost of having armed guards dedicated to the school.

Arming School Staff

In the comments, a number of readers have recommended arming school staff with guns. This has two major advantages - reduced response time and lower cost - but certainly a number of significant operational risks. See our review of arming school staff - pros and cons.

Cost / Benefit

Defending against such a deadly threat can be very expensive. In classical security system analysis, one would factor in the following:

  • Probability of attack: In the next N number of years, how likely is one’s school to being attacked? This is very hard to predict though typically historical trends are used (i.e., there are ~124,000 total schools in the US, 5-10 shootings per year, you could argue an average school has a 1 in 30,000 chance of an attack in the next 5 years, etc.)
  • Cost of attack: This is very hard to judge as it depends on valuing human life, especially children.

Multiply the probability and cost of attack to determine how much one should spend on measures that would stop this threat. For example, if the probability is 1 in 30,000 and the cost of an attack is $10 million, then you should spend up to $333 on security measures to stop this. Of course, you may estimate the probability and costs are higher (say 1 in 3,000 and a cost of $100 million) and then by such calculations you should spend up to $33,333.

This, of course, is what makes security spending decisions so difficult. The hard numbers typically justify spending far less than what is done and what people understandably feel needs to be done.

What Do You Think?

Related Reports

Help Security End Users Facing Coronavirus Improve Remote Access on Mar 24, 2020
Many end-users and integrators are struggling with the impact of coronavirus...
Facial Recognition 101 on Mar 18, 2020
Facial recognition interest, use and fear is increasing. This guide aims to...
London Live Police Face Recognition Visited on Feb 13, 2020
London police have officially begun using live facial recognition in select...
Uniview Deep Learning Camera Tested on Jul 14, 2020
Uniview's intrusion analytics have performed poorly in our shootouts. Now,...
Pivot3 Mass Layoffs on Mar 27, 2020
Pivot3 has conducted mass layoffs, the culmination of grand hopes, a quarter...
Convergint Coronavirus Cuts on Mar 25, 2020
One of the world's largest security integrators, Convergint, has made a major...
FLIR Screen-EST Screening Software Tested on Jun 30, 2020
In our FLIR A Series Test, the cameras' biggest drawback was their lack of...
Converged vs Dedicated Networks For Surveillance Tutorial on Feb 12, 2020
Use the existing network or deploy a new one? This is a critical choice in...
Vehicle Gate Access Control Guide on Mar 19, 2020
Vehicle gate access control demands integrating various systems to keep...
YCombinator AI Startup Visual One Tested on Apr 02, 2020
Startup Visual One, backed by Silicon Valley's powerful Y Combinator, aims to...
Faked Coronavirus Fever Detection, Athena Used Hikvision; Responds - Selling NDAA Compliant Cameras, Pledging 50% Of Profits to Victims on Mar 24, 2020
US company, Athena Security, faked its coronavirus fever detection marketing,...
Breaking Into A Facility Using Canned Air Tested on Jan 28, 2020
Access control is supposed to make doors more secure, but a $5 can of...
IPVM To Disrupt Trade Shows With Launch of Online Shows on Mar 17, 2020
IPVM is launching Online Shows, a series of ongoing events that allow sellers...
Add Door Operators To Fight Coronavirus on Mar 31, 2020
IPVM recommends that integrators advocate and end-users consider adding door...
Delayed Egress Access Control Tutorial on Feb 04, 2020
Delayed Egress marks one of the few times locking people into a building is...

Recent Reports

VSaaS Will Hurt Integrators on Aug 06, 2020
VSaaS will hurt integrators, there is no question about that. How much...
Dogs For Coronavirus Screening Examined on Aug 06, 2020
While thermal temperature screening is the surveillance industry's most...
ADT Slides Back, Disappointing Results, Poor Commercial Performance on Aug 06, 2020
While ADT had an incredible start to the week, driven by the Google...
AHJ / Authority Having Jurisdiction Tutorial on Aug 06, 2020
One of the most powerful yet often underappreciated characters in all of the...
SIA Coaches Sellers on NDAA 889B Blacklist Workarounds on Aug 05, 2020
Last month SIA demanded that NDAA 899B "must be delayed". Now that they have...
ADI Returns To Growth, Back To 'Pre-COVID Levels' on Aug 05, 2020
While ADI was hit hard in April, with revenue declining 21%, the company's...
Exposing Fever Tablet Suppliers and 40+ Relabelers on Aug 05, 2020
IPVM has found 40+ USA and EU companies relabeling fever tablets designed,...
Indian Government Restricts PRC Manufacturers From Public Projects on Aug 04, 2020
In a move that mirrors the U.S. government’s ban on Dahua and Hikvision...
Directory of 201 "Fever" Camera Suppliers on Aug 04, 2020
This directory provides a list of "Fever" scanning thermal camera providers...
Face Masks Increase Face Recognition Errors Says NIST on Aug 04, 2020
COVID-19 has led to widespread facemask use, which as IPVM testing has shown...
Dahua Loses Australian Medical Device Approval on Aug 04, 2020
Dahua has cancelled its medical device registration after "discussions" with...
Google Invests in ADT, ADT Stock Soars on Aug 03, 2020
Google has announced a $450 million investment in the Florida-based security...
US Startup Fever Inspect Examined on Aug 03, 2020
Undoubtedly late to fever cameras, this US company, Fever Inspect, led by a...
Motorola Solutions Acquires Pelco on Aug 03, 2020
Motorola Solutions has acquired Pelco, pledging to bring blue back and make...
False: Verkada: "If You Want To Remote View Your Cameras You Need To Punch Holes In Your Firewall" on Jul 31, 2020
Verkada falsely declared to “3,000+ customers”, “300 school districts”, and...