The author easily smuggled these replica firearms through an improperly run metal detection checkpoint during a security assessment of a high-rise school board office building. He could have just as easily carried these items through every metal detection checkpoint he passed through in Washington D.C. last week.

Tempting Targets for Terrorists

I decided to stay over in Washington D.C. for the weekend after my keynote session at the National Campus Safety Forum on Friday.  There is always much to do and see in our nation’s capitol and I decided to spend some time visiting some of the city’s awesome attractions.  I could not fail to notice that the way metal detectors are utilized to protect the millions of visitors to many of these high profile venues is troubling.  As was the case when I visited some of the same sites last summer, it was readily apparent to me that the entry point metal detection approach used at each of the venues would not stop them from entering with not only one, but if they desired, several firearms and a large quantity of ammunition.  More importantly, my experience has been that it would be obvious to any reasonably intelligent aggressor that they could easily carry weapons through these same checkpoints.  This struck a cord as the problems I observed related directly to my keynote topic for the Campus Safety Forum.

Like some other tourist attractions I have visited in other cities, the weapons screening checkpoints provide only a façade of weapons screening.  For example, I was able to clear the weapons screening checkpoint at one site while carrying two umbrellas, a portable phone and several other metallic objects that set off the detector.  But like other patrons who had waited for half an hour in the rain to pass through the detectors, no effort was made to determine what metal objects I had on my person.  I observed a number of parents being instructed to push baby strollers through the detectors as well as other blatant breaches of proper entry point weapons screening.  An obvious cue that a metal detector checkpoint is not even remotely effective is when security personnel are not using handheld wands to conduct the secondary screening that is required to determine what metal objects have triggered the detector.  Almost every person I observed passing through the walk through units set off the detectors, yet no additional screening was taking place.

Terrorism Warnings and Public Trust

As we have seen in many instances, attackers have not had any trouble figuring out that they can smuggle firearms, knives and other weapons through these types of checkpoints.  Setting up and operating ineffective checkpoints involves either a serious lack of security expertise or more commonly, a conscious decision to put on an illusionary show of security with knowledge that people are not really being properly protected.   Such efforts also play well into the hands of terrorists and other types of attackers who plan attacks on places where people gather in large numbers.  For example, terrorists have often reveled in the opportunity to demonstrate government incompetence in protecting civilian populations.  For most K12 schools, implications for civil liability are enormous.  Whether the security approach involves dummy security cameras or woefully ineffective weapons screening checkpoints, intentionally presenting a false sense of security can be very problematic during the litigation following an act of violence.  High levels of concern relating to the potential for terrorism in Washington D.C. have been expressed by numerous government agency heads.  The potential for loss of life followed by a significant loss of public confidence should be a very real concern.

Deliver the Security that you Promise

Having extensive experience with entry point weapons screening for venues as large as the 2001 Winter Olympic Games, I understand that effective entry point screening for these venues would be extremely expensive and would create severe backlogs of patrons waiting to be screened.  For the same reason, many K12 schools have opted not utilize this approach.  We have a moral and, in many cases, legal obligation not to mislead people with illusions of security that are severely out of sync with reality.  If you cannot achieve a reasonable level of deterrence through appropriate security measures, it is often best not to employ them in the first place.

I just returned from a two week trip to South Africa. As with my previous trips there, I found it to be a fascinating journey. A beautiful country that I love to visit, South Africa also has its share of violence in and out of schools. A shooting rampage in Alexandria last Wednesday demonstrated that active shooter events can occur in any country. In this tragic case, a South African Police Services Constable attacked a police station and killed four people including his former partner. The officer also fired upon two other police officers but missed them.

Police Officer Becomes an Active Shooter

The officer had taken his girlfriend and a man hostage about a month earlier after he found them together. During the standoff, he threatened to shoot responding officers. Police seized his service pistol and he was not apparently able to purchase another one because of South Africa’s strict gun laws. Instead, the officer was able to convince an officer at the police station to give him another police service pistol which was then used in the attack. After the attack, the officer fled to a residence and killed himself with the weapon after firing upon responding police tactical team members.

Media Reporting on Active Shooter Events Distorts Reality

Like a number of active shooter events in other countries, this case received little if any national media coverage in the United States. In fact, I only learned of the incident when I read a South African newspaper on my flight home. The way media organizations cover active shooter events has considerable bearing on how we perceive the chances we will directly experience them. Active shooter events in many countries make it clear that any public or non-public school in the world could be the next school to experience and active shooter incident. No school official should ignore this possibility. At the same time, available data confirms that more than 99% of all deaths at American schools do not involve active shooter incidents. In fact, more than 90% of all homicides at school do not involve active shooter incidents.

Appropriate Responses to Active Shooter Events

Careful data evaluation reveals that it is exceedingly dangerous to focus most of our available time, energy, and fiscal resources on active shooter events. We urge our clients to thoroughly address the risk of active shooter incidents while devoting appropriate effort to address the array of hazards that claim far more lives each year than active shooter events. Taking the time to carefully review accurate school safety incident data can help to overcome the natural tendency to overemphasize active shooter risks for schools.

Student Suicides at School Require Our Attention

According to Campus Safety Magazine, an 18-year-old student committed suicide with a firearm at Corona del Sol High School in Tempe, Arizona in May. Two of our clients have experienced multiple on-campus suicides. Suicides on school property rarely garner national media attention unless they follow an active shooter situation. The reality is that there have been far more deaths from suicides on K12 campuses than from active shooter incidents.

School Suicides Result in More Deaths than Active Shooter Events

Steve Satterly’s 2014 report Relative Risks of Death in U.S. Schools  indicates that individual schools are eight times more likely to experience an on-campus suicide than an active shooter incident. His report also reveals that twice as many deaths resulted from suicides on campus than from active shooter incidents during a recent fifteen year time period. Suicide prevention measures take on even greater importance when we also consider that many active shooter incidents have ended with suicide by the aggressor. These incidents are extremely painful. They leave a lasting and very negative impact on families and the school community.

School Suicides Demand Appropriate Resource Allocation

Our analysts have seen a number of instances where school staff have received extensive training on active shooter response while staff development on evidence-based suicide prevention concepts has not been provided. While the very real threat of active shooter incidents should not be ignored, failure to address a far more common type of event that has caused twice as many deaths is not advisable.

With many on-campus K12 suicide attempts being public in nature, these types of incidents may are beginning to receive more media coverage. A number of mental health experts feel this may in turn increase the risk of on-campus suicide by students and staff. Graphic and public suicide attempts such as those where students have lit themselves on fire in schools could easily result in a sudden shift in media exposure just as we have seen with K12 active shooter incidents. Active shooter incidents were largely ignored by the national media until the deadly shooting at Pearl High School received unprecedented media coverage. A number of school shootings have received similar intensive national media coverage since that time.

With evidence-based approaches to suicide prevention available today, it makes sense to devote time, energy and fiscal resources to prevention strategies that have been validated as effective before schools tie up precious resources on questionable and perhaps even dangerous measures for less common threats. Fortunately, a number of school districts and non-public schools have done excellent work in this area. We urge school officials to take a close look at their suicide prevention measures.