The Cold Math of Securing Schools

Rune said:
Moron.
When you press the open bar an alarm goes off .
I described the doors at my high-school
. If they existed 40 years ago they certainly exist today.
Click to expand...

A door with a crash bar that opens the door is not locked with a key. And you think I am a moron? If no key is required to unlock the door than it is not locked with a key and not keyed on that side of the door. Those doors are keyed on one side since only one side requires a key before it can be opened. Fire code requires that any fire door is not locked with a key.


This is what keyed on both sides looks like. You will notice that the key is required to unlock the door on BOTH sides.
dcdeadboolt.jpg
 
Mina said:
After a school shooter kills a bunch of kids, people intent on diverting attention from gun control have a tendency to focus on enhancing physical security at schools, by way of armed guards, armored access points, etc. It can seem heartless to focus on the cost of those things when kids are dying.... but that's what I'm going to do.

First, installing one armed guard at a school is unlikely to do anything. Someone intent on mass slaughter could simply walk up to the guard and gun him down before he even had his gun unholstered. It would just be another body on the pile. If you're going to make any real difference, you'd need at least two on duty, with a multiple-checkpoint setup, such that if you attack the guard at the first checkpoint, the second checkpoint gets locked down by a second guard (probably manning a security camera feed some distance away) and the attacker can't get in. That's the kind of setup you see at secure facilities.

So, what would it cost, per school, to have a setup like that? Assuming you're not comfortable with untrained minimum-wage goons, let's say $50,000 per guard per year, minimum, fully loaded (counting benefits). And let's say 2.5 guards per school (some extra to cover absences). There are 130,930 K-12 schools in the US. So, about $16.4 billion per year, plus however much you need for those security cameras, remote locking doors, and other retrofits. We'll conservatively estimate those are fairly cheap and the whole thing can cost just $20 billion per year.

OK. And how many lives will that save? Let's give it every benefit of the doubt and imagine it's perfectly effective -- that these guards manage to completely stop school shootings, while never accidentally shooting the wrong person. So, let's say about 36 lives saved per year, average:

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/07/us/ten-years-of-school-shootings-trnd/

OK, that's a cost-per-life-saved of about $556 million per life.

Now, you might be tempted to say a life is infinitely valuable, so that's well worth it. But, as a practical matter, that's just not how budgeting is done in other contexts.

For example, in the Bush years, if a proposed EPA rule cost over $3.7 million per anticipated life saved (e.g., efforts to reduce arsenic in drinking water), it was considered too expensive to be worth it. With Clinton, they were more liberal about it and put the threshold at $6.1 million:

https://www.americanprogress.org/ar...-costs-and-benefits-of-cost-benefit-analysis/

Obviously, even the higher of those numbers is VASTLY below the $556 million level we're talking about here.

Some studies suggest that any regulation that costs more than, say, $15 million per life saved will actually hurt income levels enough that such a regulation will indirectly cost more lives than it will save:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1999.tb01450.x
https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...rall/d2010e118e2edcd1e2e0e99227af6047b66355e6

For example, people whose take-home pay is lower thanks to funding all this extra school security may skimp on vehicle maintenance or healthcare, and that will end up costing more lives than you're saving.

Some studies have put the number even lower, around $12 million:

https://law.vanderbilt.edu/files/archive/215_Value_of_Life_Legal_Contexts.pdf

The gap we're talking about is huge, between that hypothetical $12M-$15M/life point of being counter-productive, and the $556M/life we're talking about here.

Even if you think you can get all that benefit with only half as many guards with half the other security spending, we're still talking almost twenty times the cost-per-life-saved that studies say you can have before the cost is actually driving deaths UP indirectly.

Even if you're in the camp where money should be no object when it comes to saving the lives of kids, then spend those same billions on bigger subsidies for childhood healthcare, for instance, or regulations to make vehicles safer, or spending to make roads safer (more streetlights and guardrails, better signage), or enhanced childhood nutrition, etc.; you'd save many, many more lives of children:

https://books.google.com/books?id=L...ge&q="cost per life saved" guardrails&f=false

So, the approach of trying to prevent school shootings by way of more physical security is almost certainly a loser. Any spending in that area is likely to have a cost-per-life-saved so huge that we'd do better spending the same money any number of other places.... or not spending it at all.
Click to expand...

dumb
adjective
\ ˈdəm \
1a: lacking intelligence : STUPID
b: showing a lack of intelligence
c: requiring no intelligence
d: not having the capability to process data

gib•ber•ish (ˈdʒɪb ər ɪʃ, ˈgɪb-)
n.
1. meaningless or unintelligible talk or writing; nonsense.
2. talk or writing containing many obscure, pretentious, or technical words.
 
Truth Detector said:
dumb
adjective
\ ˈdəm \
1a: lacking intelligence : STUPID
b: showing a lack of intelligence
c: requiring no intelligence
d: not having the capability to process data

gib•ber•ish (ˈdʒɪb ər ɪʃ, ˈgɪb-)
n.
1. meaningless or unintelligible talk or writing; nonsense.
2. talk or writing containing many obscure, pretentious, or technical words.
Click to expand...

Reading's hard, isn't it? Well, keep trying. With practice you can become proficient.
 
Some FACTS for the fools who think disarming law abiding Americans is the answer to the criminally insane.

Columbine: Harris and Klebold had intended for the attack to be a bombing mainly, and a shooting secondary, but the failing detonation of the several homemade bombs they planted in the school caused the pair to launch a shooting attack. Two bombs were set up as diversions at another location away from the school, one of which partially detonated. The motive remains inconclusive; however, they had planned the attack for at least a year and hoped to have a large number of victims.

The weapons they used were illegally obtained.

Sandy Hook: [Adam Lanza murdered his mother and stole her guns to commit his crimes.

Basically, all these young male mental cases had one common thread. They all came from broken families where abuse, drugs or alcohol played a large part of their upbringing. All had shown signs of their mental state. They were ignored. Not all used AR15's and if those were not available, they would have found alternatives.

The notion that you can remove ALL the weapons held by law abiding Americans to make us safer relying on the police. who ONLY show up after you're dead, is naive and useless.

The notion that more laws on the books will prevent these insane mental cases from committing heinous crimes is naive and stupid. They are willing to commit heinous murders which are....ILLEGAL, they don't care about laws.

FACT: Fewer families have weapons in the home than they did in the 1970's through 1990's. So the claim that we are awash in weapons as the reason is a lie.

The NORC data shows that American household gun ownership hit its peak in 1977, when more than half of American households (53.7 percent) reported having any guns. By 2014, only 32.4 percent of American households had a gun in the home -- less than a third.

2015-05-21-1432225070-1642674-vpcnorcgraphicone-thumb.jpg

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fewer-and-fewer-americans_b_7382326

It's time to be honest with ourselves on the reasons these mentally ill criminals commit these crimes. Instead of suicide, they figure their lives are so useless, they would rather go out with a sensation. The more despotic, the better.

This isn't a "gun" issue. Focusing on "guns" will not end this carnage. Looking for the signs of mental illness and working with these young men before they get to the end game is the answer. Working with schools to ensure they only have a single point entrance, have armed police on campus and work to improve security measures using technologies will go a long way to saving lives.

But, if you want to remain a brain dead dumbass beholding to the PHONY media and Democratic Party of the Lying Jackass, blame the guns. It's all your simple little brains can comprehend apparently.
 
Shit

Poor Richard Saunders said:
A door with a crash bar that opens the door is not locked with a key. And you think I am a moron? If no key is required to unlock the door than it is not locked with a key and not keyed on that side of the door. Those doors are keyed on one side since only one side requires a key before it can be opened. Fire code requires that any fire door is not locked with a key.This is what keyed on both sides looks like. You will notice that the key is required to unlock the door on BOTH sides.
dcdeadboolt.jpg
Click to expand...
Shit Fer brains; how does the custodian lock the doors ?
 
The tens of millions of law abiding gun-owners who never use them to commit a crime will tell you that their guns never jump out of their gun-lockers and shoot someone.

A person fires the gun at someone else.
 
Rune said:
Shit Fer brains; how does the custodian lock the doors ?
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. You don't seem to know how crash bars work.
A door can be locked from the outside and the crash bar still works to open it from the inside. You don't have to ever unlock the door unless people need to enter through it.
I would bet in most schools they never lock the doors from the inside because activities can often occur after hours and locking the doors with a deadbolt would be a violation of fire code.
 
floridafan said:
Can an AR15 style rifle break through a lock in seconds? Or maybe the shooter chooses to wait until the kids are at recess and on the playground.
Click to expand...

Earth to dumbfuck, the are lots of high caliber rifles that don't look like ARs, and ARs for the public are not military issue, they are cosmetic twins:palm:
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
ROFLMAO. You don't seem to know how crash bars work.
A door can be locked from the outside and the crash bar still works to open it from the inside. You don't have to ever unlock the door unless people need to enter through it.
I would bet in most schools they never lock the doors from the inside because activities can often occur after hours and locking the doors with a deadbolt would be a violation of fire code.
Click to expand...

Yes I have said that repeatedly and after the students leave the custodian locks them from the inside with a key.
Idiot
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
ROFLMAO. You don't seem to know how crash bars work.
A door can be locked from the outside and the crash bar still works to open it from the inside. You don't have to ever unlock the door unless people need to enter through it.
I would bet in most schools they never lock the doors from the inside because activities can often occur after hours and locking the doors with a deadbolt would be a violation of fire code.
Click to expand...

Yes I have said that repeatedly and after the students leave the custodian locks them from the inside with a key.
Idiot
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Fire exits are required to be opened from the inside easily. That means they can't require a key to unlock the door before exiting which is what would be required if a door is keyed from both sides as Rune claimed.

Here is the NFPA requirement.
Locks and latches cannot require the use of a key, a tool, or special knowledge or effort to operate from the egress side.
Click to expand...

so why are you stupid enough to make an illegal fire exit when you could make a legal one........is it because you're a demmycrat?........they've been making fire doors since I was a kid......


remember these?....
SAR_80Series%203_cmyk%20(1).jpg
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
A door with a crash bar that opens the door is not locked with a key. And you think I am a moron? If no key is required to unlock the door than it is not locked with a key and not keyed on that side of the door. Those doors are keyed on one side since only one side requires a key before it can be opened. Fire code requires that any fire door is not locked with a key.


This is what keyed on both sides looks like. You will notice that the key is required to unlock the door on BOTH sides.
dcdeadboolt.jpg
Click to expand...

it is sad that you are an idiot.....
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
ROFLMAO. You don't seem to know how crash bars work.
A door can be locked from the outside and the crash bar still works to open it from the inside. You don't have to ever unlock the door unless people need to enter through it.
I would bet in most schools they never lock the doors from the inside because activities can often occur after hours and locking the doors with a deadbolt would be a violation of fire code.
Click to expand...

Richard finally outed himself as what he is. A janitor. Nothing wrong with that mind you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top