Thinking Out Loud: Protection from Active Shooters

[ChezC3]

Every time we have some nut job try to play shoot'em up people lose their minds and want to take the guns away from everyone. As this is a constitutionally protected right that makes it kinda hard to do. So, how do you help protect your kids at school or yourself and co-workers at the office without trying to rob people of their God given right?

Rolling Steel Shutters.


Automated rolling shutters, much like you see shop owners bring down when closing their business for the day in bad parts of cities could easily be customized and installed on every door in a school or office.

A system much like a fire alarm could be linked with the local police and the make the ability to unlock and roll open the doors only possible by the police.

This would protect students and teachers and isolate the aggressor. The steel barrier would limit penetration and so long as no one is standing in front of the door, there would be virtually no casualties.

The system itself could be designed to be aesthetically pleasing and could even be installed into the wall or ceiling itself on new builds.

As this would be a nation-wide effort so it would be costly but the scale alone would help in that regard. Countless jobs would be created in steel, manufacturing, engineering, electrical, installation, transport, design...

I'm no fireman but based on what I know this could help contain fires in buildings as well, limiting or at least impeding their spread.

Again, they can be designed in a way that you wouldn't even give them a second look.

This is only a thinking out loud idea, but it seems to me a better way of protecting people from a potential threat that doesn't involve penalizing legal gun owners with restrictions and costly burdens.

Comments?

 

[VanceMack]

So...while I agree with the premise that there are logical steps, the reality is this is totally unnecessary, cost prohibitive, and wouldnt impact most school shootings. Most school shootings occur in common areas during periods of high student density. All you are really doing is causing a shooter to alter their modus operandi.For that matter, there are some simple door locking mechanisms that will only allow a door to be opened from the inside that will keep shooters out of classrooms (short of expending hundreds of rounds shooting through doors). And then there are the logistics involved...350,000 public schools. Lord only knows how many doors. and the reality is that school shootings still only occur 2-3 times a year.

The best defense against an active shooter scenario is STILL an armed response.

 

[apdst]

I'm game for anything that hardens a soft target.

 

[ChezC3]

So...while I agree with the premise that there are logical steps, the reality is this is totally unnecessary, cost prohibitive, and wouldnt impact most school shootings. Most school shootings occur in common areas during periods of high student density. All you are really doing is causing a shooter to alter their modus operandi.For that matter, there are some simple door locking mechanisms that will only allow a door to be opened from the inside that will keep shooters out of classrooms (short of expending hundreds of rounds shooting through doors). And then there are the logistics involved...350,000 public schools. Lord only knows how many doors. and the reality is that school shootings still only occur 2-3 times a year.

The best defense against an active shooter scenario is STILL an armed response.

I agree with your last sentence but many politicians and school board members don't all the while I believe your detractions in the first sentence would actually be selling points to some of those same politicians and school boards. :lol:


Totally unnecessary is a relative judgement. Some might think having a loaded gun in every room of your house is totally unnecessary while others think it proper home defense.

Cost prohibitive, eh, like I said, it won't be cheap, but on a federal roll out, it won't be as much as you think, when I looked, they ranged from $650-2000 a door retail, on this scale that price would be significantly lower.

You want the shooter to change his M.O.

locking doors from the inside is a no brainer but then you deal with human error issues. Not to mention smart ass kids locking their teachers out of home room every day.

As for the number of incidents, well, how many school fires are there a year? I view this like a fire alarm/sprinkler system. Never probably need it, but glad you have it.

Thanks for your input.

 

[VanceMack]

I agree with your last sentence but many politicians and school board members don't all the while I believe your detractions in the first sentence would actually be selling points to some of those same politicians and school boards. :lol:


Totally unnecessary is a relative judgement. Some might think having a loaded gun in every room of your house is totally unnecessary while others think it proper home defense.

Cost prohibitive, eh, like I said, it won't be cheap, but on a federal roll out, it won't be as much as you think, when I looked, they ranged from $650-2000 a door retail, on this scale that price would be significantly lower.

You want the shooter to change his M.O.

locking doors from the inside is a no brainer but then you deal with human error issues. Not to mention smart ass kids locking their teachers out of home room every day.

As for the number of incidents, well, how many school fires are there a year? I view this like a fire alarm/sprinkler system. Never probably need it, but glad you have it.

Thanks for your input.

SO I think there is a balance in all things. Heres what I think is MOST effective. I think the student resource officers ought to hold drills where they teach Jr High and HS students how to rush an active shooter and just literally beat the **** out of them. Frankly...I think if we change the victim mindset to where would be shooters have this real world fear that their actions might cause 3,000 of their classmates to rain down hell on their testicles, the wet dream of shooting up a school might just stay a fantasy. And I dont think teachers should be 'armed'...I just think they should be ALLOWED to be armed. A would be shooter would have to contend with that possibility.

We have to face our realities. The police response has failed in pretty much every school shooting. Columbine HS HAD an armed officer on campus who was on his lunch break when the shooting started and he like all the other responding officers stayed out of the school for hours while the shooters went unchecked. The Parkland shooter also had an armed officer on site who hid outside throughout the entire ordeal. The cops at Sandy Hook took 18 minutes to respond...not breaching for a full 8 minutes AFTER the shooter had killed himself.

I cant recall if it was Smith or Cooper, but one of the old gunfighters best response about any shooting scenario is simply this...no one cares.

Throw your keys, a salt shaker, the remote, a bucket of rocks. Engage. Fight or die. People need to be taught to survive...not to look for the most convenient place to die.

 

[ChezC3]

SO I think there is a balance in all things. Heres what I think is MOST effective. I think the student resource officers ought to hold drills where they teach Jr High and HS students how to rush an active shooter and just literally beat the **** out of them. Frankly...I think if we change the victim mindset to where would be shooters have this real world fear that their actions might cause 3,000 of their classmates to rain down hell on their testicles, the wet dream of shooting up a school might just stay a fantasy. And I dont think teachers should be 'armed'...I just think they should be ALLOWED to be armed. A would be shooter would have to contend with that possibility.

We have to face our realities. The police response has failed in pretty much every school shooting. Columbine HS HAD an armed officer on campus who was on his lunch break when the shooting started and he like all the other responding officers stayed out of the school for hours while the shooters went unchecked. The Parkland shooter also had an armed officer on site who hid outside throughout the entire ordeal. The cops at Sandy Hook took 18 minutes to respond...not breaching for a full 8 minutes AFTER the shooter had killed himself.

I cant recall if it was Smith or Cooper, but one of the old gunfighters best response about any shooting scenario is simply this...no one cares.

Throw your keys, a salt shaker, the remote, a bucket of rocks. Engage. Fight or die. People need to be taught to survive...not to look for the most convenient place to die.

I can't argue with any of this...

Keeping with your theme I'll only add Clint Smith's immortal words, "Shoot'em in the crotch!"