“A local company has developed a secure gun vault that would be used to store weapons in schools.” That’s the description underneath this video about the Templar Integrated Security Solutions‘ firearms storage system from Detroit’s wxyz.com. What it doesn’t tell you, what you can’t see: the holes in the system. I can spot a couple of major “challenges” straight away, starting with . . .
Rifles. Or the lack thereof. As a certified SIG SAUER Active Shooter Response Instructor, I can tell you that a modern sporting rifle is exponentially better for eliminating a school shooter than pepper spray, a TASER or a handgun. Easier to aim and easier to hit what you’re aiming at, making them more lethal. (Lethal is good.)
Going after a school shooter with a handgun is like trying to win an Indy Car race in a Ford Mustang: it’s doable and beats walking, but why use the wrong tool for the job? What other flaws do you see with this $100k+ system, ’cause there are plenty.
I’m sorry – I didn’t see $110,000 worth of product there. Was it the retina scanner? Is that where the other $105,000 went?
It will still be cheaper than the lawsuit.
Two words: Liberty safe. One more word: biometric.
Ummm…how long does it take to open? Under the stress of an active shooter scenario?
That was my first thought, too. That’s a whole lotta locks. Also, if the shooter is familiar with the school, as most of the school shooters are, then he knows where this room is and he can disable the door somehow, or keep you away from the room. Especially if there are multiple shooters, like Columbine.
The flip side of your question could be, how long would it take a thug with a baseball bat to get it open?
What happens when any part of the system fails, or if the pre-picked people get picked off before they access the uber expensive safe………”clearly something needs to be done “says the talking head in closing…………ironic no?
Just fir starters, why don’t they just print a bulls-eye on that neon green vest? And put a little beeping alarm on it so the Active Shooter can locate you more easily if the batteries lighting up the vest burn out.
Im going to take the high road. Yes, its over priced, yes it overlooks the best tool for the job, but its the right mode of thinking. Rather than relying on a metal sign saying ‘no guns’ they have a plan of action. Albeit an expensive and poorly thought out one.
I agree it’s a step in the right direction. Provided they don’t stock it with “time out” coupons instead of firearms that is.
I happen to agree with you in that it really forces school boards/parents/kids/etc. into having a conversation about having guns in a school setting. While I agree that a handgun is not necessarily the best tool for the job, a well-trained individual instantly becomes a force multiplier in the right type of situation.
That being said, I see a few problems with this system…Firstly, the fact that it is not easily accessible. Much like off-body carrying a concealed firearm, there are many fine motor skills and “unlocks” (to include mental and physical barriers) teachers and administrators will have to go through to get to what they need. They will probably first have to get to the area of the safe without being found a target of the mass shooter (let’s face it, there will be one main safe in an office behind about 4 locked doors and a locked safe, they can’t afford to have these in every classroom). Next, the school personnel have to unlock and gain access to the safe system and don all the gear while articulating what is going on over the hands free phone. Meanwhile, more people are dying.
Also, we know as an Armed Intelligentsia that firearms skills diminish over time. How much training on a regular basis are teachers and school administrators really going to get? At the very basic level, the taxpayers shell out dollars for teachers to be teachers, not gunfighters. I can see Teacher’s Unions getting their knickers in a twist over this if teachers are not compensated for time and expenses incurred with any training that would take place (especially if it came out of the teacher’s pockets) since the training could then be deemed “job related.”
Lastly, I am interested to hear how Active Shooter and “Lock Down” training would change for teachers if this were to be implemented. Not that I don’t like the idea of teachers and administrators being the first line of defense when it comes to these instances (God forbid we let them have a CCW weapon), but the mindset of teachers in these situations would have to change drastically. Right now, it seems that schools have adopted the classic Run, Hide, Fight response, whereas this system seems to institute the Stop the Threat role that Law Enforcement takes on. Again, the Teacher’s Unions will whine that, since you have essentially created a policy where teachers are now to stop active shooters via this system, you have created a new “occupational hazard…” Therefore, the District is now liable for any death or injury that befell any teacher in this response since they instituted this policy.
Ultimately, it will come down to the almighty dollar and whether or not teachers want to take on the role of first responder in these situations. Great system in ideology, but I feel the cost as well as the questions it would create would make it not worth it on a national scale.
Yes by no means is this perfect. There are obvious problems apparent and we could go on and on pointing out where this would fail or be inadequate to deal with an active shooter. The reason that I took the high road was simply in ideology. It is a step in the right direction in terms of realization. The school system realizes that should they be in grave danger of their lives, they are not going to be able to rely on a police department that is going to take a minimum of 10 minutes to get there, plus calling in SWAT, plus setting up a perimeter, ect ect. They are taking responsibility for their own safety until help can arrive and maybe if this is effective (doubtful) it may spawn more schools doing the same and expanding on the idea to make it better like adding rifles or on body carry of handguns.
“let’s face it, there will be one main safe in an office behind about 4 locked doors and a locked safe, they can’t afford to have these in every classroom”
Motels can afford to have a safe (not $110K worth) in every room, so can schools. For the cost of one of these, a school can put motel safes in every classroom and pay every teacher with a CCP an extra $100/month for several years. And to finance a press conference to announce to the world their teachers are armed. No more problem.
OOOps. This response was supposed to be to the post above the one I responded to. My bad.
Even if it was intended for the comment above mine, I completely agree. The cost associated with this is astronomical and you could have well trained veterans or security personnel for the same cost or less. Like you said, paying for handgun training for teachers would be even cheaper.
Moreover, after living with and looking at that gun safe for a couple of years the faculty and administration will start to think about:
– how comforting it is to know that they could do something if the SHTF; and,
– what the limitations of this kit might be.
If there is nothing present to remind them of the first point there is nothing to motivate them to consider the second point.
Agreed, this looks like a good approach to moving the ball along. All this high-tech will mute the complaints about access. Spending money will make it in someone’s interest to sell the idea.
Once one school gets one neighboring schools will begin to feel compelled to consider getting one as well. Why should our school remain undefended? Some crazy guy will bypass these schools and come to our school or one of the others in the area that remains undefended.
After several schools have spent the money on this expensive system others will install a simple gun locker with a regular key. Then, other schools will start a CCW program.
Most of the opposition is political; so, the first step is to mitigate the political opposition.
Why are the guns in the safe and not on the faculty?
Because that would be too cheap and sensible. What were you thinking?!
The only proper response to a bad guy with a gun is a [non-delayed!] good guy with a gun!
Bullsheet to the ‘sporting rifle’ argument as that ain’t EVER gonna happen!
Volunteer school employees qualified to handle a CONCEALED handgun will ward off shooters and drive them to other gun free[murder spree!] zones.
This is designed to make someone money and NOT to save lives!
So…… If I want to shoot up a school I just wear a bright yellow vest and the cops think I’m a good guy when they show up? Or… Post up outside the “weapons vault” and let the first responders run straight to me? And to be totally morbid, how does the iris scanner know the eyeball is connected to a living breathing person?
I could go on, point is just arm the teachers. Let them carry.
So your a teacher in class, and this guy with a AK burst into the room and tells you he doesn’t like dudes with pink suits (the shame of it all) and your going to be the first to go.
Scenario: OK buddy, hang on a minute, I’ll be right back, gotta go out the door here, run down the hall, go into the secure room, get my eyeballs checked, open the safe, grab a vest, put it on, grab the gun, rack the slide, run back out to the hall, and down to the class room, open the door, raise my arm to aim the pistol, and, and, and, where did the son of bitch go!
A student responds, “He said he couldn’t wait any longer, that he was gonna go to another classroom”
@Gunr: LOL, thanks for the laugh. Alternate scenario: You say “Wait a minute….” . He shoots you and your students and moves on to the next classroom. I know you were being sarcastic with your scenario of him waiting for you to return to make your point though.
you state the plan is full of flaws. you state one, and ask us for the rest.
you made the allegation, why don’t you share your wisdom with us undereducated readers?
if that cost includes the week of firearms and background training for 40 to 50 teachers, it doesn’t seem so outrageous
@Paul: Good point about the cost if training is included. I hadn’t thought of that aspect.
Much easier and less expensive solution would be to let teachers with CPLs carry concealed or store in a safe, or an easily accessible box but not advertise where it is. Also some HP rifles with scopes in several locked locations would be great. Most people are going to have to be very close to the threat with a handgun to be effective. Also limited stopping power with a handgun. Tasers and such are a crap shoot. If the Threat has a gun then the Defender needs a gun and preferably a rifle with a scope and a laser (for short distances). The teachers responsible for the weapons should have some kind of training to be effective and safe. Some states, like Washington, don’t require any classes or safety training for a CPL. In a situation like that that should be mandatory for the potential defenders. I think that some kind of planned response with weapons is a good idea but this system looks overpriced for what it offers. Weekend drills for the defenders with lasers, airsoft or other non-lethal means would also be an excellent idea. That part could be a fun way to train for those that want to participate.
I think it has been a while since anyone has spend time in a school. all the above is correct, but if you think that there will still be a firearm that box after two months, you are not giving these hooligans, sorry, I mean these outstanding young adults much credit.
I prefer my spare mags on my opposite side. Which reminds me of another problem. What about lefties?
Is the scan going to be good for all faculty? If so then just arm them to begin with. Or how about an entrance that a shooter can’t shoot his way into?
One more thing, did the reporter say that mass shootings in schools happen every year? I’m not sure that is correct.
“One more thing, did the reporter say that mass shootings in schools happen every year?”
Yep. She sure did… “Students and teachers die every year in mass school shootings…”
“I’m not sure that is correct.”
I don’t believe it is.
Can’t let pesky things like facts interrupt their propaganda…
I found a list of “mass shootings” that she may have referenced. I saw one on the list at a school near where I grew up. Turns out, a former student now attending an alternative school, returned on Home Coming and was shot dead after the football game in the parking lot.
Not what I say counts as a mass shooting in a school.
I was about to snark on this, but after watching the video- a couple thoughts-
1. At least its starting a real-world dialogue, with a real world solution that appeals to some of the fears of the non-POTG-
a. how do I know the kids or bad guys wont get into this?
b. how do I find teachers and staff who will take on the responsibility of learning to use a gun in extremis, but are dis-incentivized by the personal cost and time to carry carefully – and consequences for a boo-boo, remember the staff person who dropped a gun not long ago? What a fuss the left made over that!
c. how do I make it easy, in a real world situation. Even if this was in only one place, the supply closet in the principals office, it would have had the potential to save a couple of lives, and end the tragedy at Sandy Hook. If I were one of those staff relatives, I would rather they had THIS kind of training, and worst-case solution, if only for peace of mind.
2. Yea, there are a couple dozen things that would work better- but as a start, this is a very good solution, for scared school districts- and given the amount of money being wasted on other things, like the gigantic boondoggle in green subsidies in CA, with more than half of the intended funding in schools spent for consultants- http://freebeacon.com/issues/steyer-funded-california-green-jobs-measure-creates-less-than-one-tenth-of-promised-jobs/
Well, in comparison- $100K per unit is chump change. What is Bloomturd spending again to take down the NRA? What if those faux Moms Demanding Action asked for just 100 schools to be equipped with this, spread around the country. Thats just about 1/5 of what he said he was spending last election cycle, correct? What did he get for that, again? How many kids lives saved?
I would think we would find out real quick which School Board members are serious about protecting the children, vs protecting the Lefts Narrative on Gun Control. That ought to be worth $100K a pop, in any moderate leaning district, to get people off the fence, and take action.
There has to be dozens of wealthy, quiet conservative benefactors who could pony up to this company, when a School Board or a parent moves to bring it up for discusssion, as a test case, if nothing else.
Money walks and you know what talks.
Excellent points. Bonus if this floats, a dozen other me too companies will pop up with a similar system for $50k or less.
And several more for $50 or less, in every classroom. Combination set by the person using it. Good for storing all kinds of stuff, kids don’t have any idea what’s in it. Might be test scoring keys. Do schools still have tests?
So… guns aren’t in schools for defense, we complain it takes a good guy with a gun. A school plans on using guns for defense and you guys still bi+(h! I’m sorry TTAG but this is the biggest pile of smelly brown stain I have seen posted in months. Could the system be better, yes. Do you have to be such a Debbie downer?
A bad plan implemented for the right reasons is still a bad plan. Yes, it’s a ($100,000) step in the right direction, but would you have this in your house? Would you rely on it when the adrenaline is pumping and lives are at stake? We complain that “when seconds count, the police are just minutes away,” well thanks to the complicated method of obtaining your firearm, now so are the first responders. On-person carry is where it’s at.
The system is perfect. Perfect! Put one in every school. And when it doesn’t work and kids are killed because of it, then, maybe, the leftarded morons who administer the schools will be strung up by their heels and sodomized with a hot poker as they so richly deserve.
No. When it doesn’t work, anti’s everywhere will say, “See, we put guns in schools and it did not work. Guns in schools is not the answer.”
Everyone saying this is a step in the right direction might stop to consider that it’s designed to fail. For whatever reason (politics, money, etc).
Relevant movie quote:
“I had a guaranteed military sale with ED 209 – renovation program, spare parts for twenty-five years… Who cares if it worked or not? “
–Dick Jones
It’s a start in the right direction. In fact it’s the tiniest of victories. But just as the antis never rest, neither must we. Keep the pressure on, never yield, never compromise.
Instead of asking whats wrong, we should be asking what is right with this picture and what suggestions will improve this picture.
My solution is much simpler, WAY less expensive, and much more effective:
Install an inexpensive gun safe in most classrooms. The safe is only large enough for a single 20 gauge break-action shotgun with an 18 inch barrel. There is only one shell with a slug loaded in the shotgun. In order to open the safe, a staff member must turn a key in a lock while two students push interlock enablers that are spaced several feet apart and away from the safe. (This prevents a staff member from opening the safe by themselves. And it prevents students from opening the safe.) Finally, no one knows which safes are empty and which safes actually have a shotgun.
This has several advantages. A thief isn’t going to be very motivated to try and break into a gun safe for a short, break-action single-shot 20 gauge shotgun. Furthermore, since many safes are empty, there is no guarantee that the safe which the thief chooses will have anything. Given those details, thieves will find a better location to rob. Furthermore, no staff member can simply open a safe and go on a rampage because they would need assistance from students who would presumably refuse to cooperate unless there is an obvious attack happening. And even if a staff member somehow convinced students to help open the safe, there is no guarantee that a shotgun will even be in there. As if that wasn’t enough, should the rampaging teacher actually open a safe with a shotgun, they will only have one shell with a slug which isn’t enough to go on a “spree killing”.
More benefits:
A break-action shotgun is easy to operate — just point and pull the trigger. There is no action to operate and no sights to worry about or align. And it is easier to aim since it is a long-gun rather than a pistol. A break-action shotgun is extremely simple and therefore extremely reliable. And a 20 gauge shotgun slug will promptly stop any attacker if you put the slug in their center of mass — no matter how motivated they are or what drugs they injected into themselves. I cannot imagine any firearm that would offer a greater deterrent. And the icing on the cake: such a shotgun would be extremely inexpensive. (The only parts it would have is a synthetic stock, a tiny receiver to house the trigger, hammer, and firing pin, and a barrel. And because it is a shotgun, the barrel is nothing more than a steel tube since there is no rifling in the barrel.)
Now ask yourself: if you were a spree killer, would you charge into a school which has a gun safe in almost every classroom … and an unknown number of those gun safes have 20 gauge shotguns? Even a deranged spree killer would most likely pass up such a school.
Wow! I almost fell asleep before I got to the end of that!
Here’s an idea. Bolt a MA deuce to every teachers desk in the entire school. Give every teacher a key. Only half of which will let the big 50 fire.
When the bad guy burst in, tell him he’s got a 50-50 chance!
Don’t ask me, it’s late! My ‘ol lady thought it was funny, told me to get typing, or else!
Why not just allow licensed/legal carriers to carry as a first step? Costs exactly nothing.
Jesus, for that much money I’ll contract myself out to guard the school myself. I can even start immediately because I have the mentioned training and then some.
There are likely issues with this sort of setup but considering it’s something the US has never dabbled in it’s a step in the right direction probably. Where it’s going to succeed or fail will be when it’s needed. If someone stops someone mid shooting it will be a huge victory. If they fail or if the safe gets cracked and its contents redistributed it will make it a lot harder of an issue.
At some level the idea is to make as many people as possible comfortable with the notion that this is okay, acceptable and perhaps even common at some time It may not be everything here and now but it is a way to swing undecided people to our side which is important in the long term. It’s likely antis will always be antis, but being able to say “hey, the school has a gun locker in it and it’s worked out” is a great way to upset a lot of false and skewed truths they like to spew.
Good points ANdrew Lias.
When seconds count, a school biometric gun safe is just 200 feet away. (And by the time the staff member finally accesses the contents of the gun safe, the attacker is 500 feet away.)
The biggest problem that I see is that a gun safe significantly increases staff response time. An armed parent, visitor, or staff member can respond to an attack in less than two seconds. A staff member who has to access a biometric safe could easily take 10 seconds to get to a safe, 5 seconds to open the safe, 5 seconds to don the vest and rack the slide on the handgun, and then another 10 seconds (minimum) to find the spree killer and engage them.
In the absolute best case, a biometric gun safe will increase a staff member’s response time to 30 seconds … and more likely it will increase their response time to at least one minute and possibly even more. While a 30 to 60 second response time is much better than police response time (it would take every bit of 60 seconds for someone to call 911, describe the situation, and have the 911 dispatcher make sense of the report and send police), a spree killer can kill a lot of people in 30 to 60 seconds. A response time of 2 seconds is much better.
On the positive side, schools which implement this “solution” are tacitly admitting that waiting for police to show up and engage a spree killer isn’t good enough. I have to wonder how long it will take schools to finally admit that vetted armed staff and parents are an even better solution.
I don’t think schools should have vaults for guns. Guns should not be in a school or in the hands of a scholar in the first place. Why not just employ armed security guards at the school. This way you create jobs as well.
“Guns should not be in a school or in the hands of a scholar in the first place. “
Begging the question fallacy.
And it gets worse. If guns should not be “in schools,” how in the next sentence can you recommend armed guards? You are contradicting yourself.
Now, if you are going to allow “guns in schools” in the form of armed guards, why not just make the teachers/staff themselves the armed guards. Then you
(a) have the response to threat as close and immediate as possible..closest to the student victims you are trying to protect.
(b) you don’t have to spend more of OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY needlessly hiring superfluous personnel. (It’s not the proper role of an institution of learning to “provide or create jobs”).
Because it costs too damned much! Are you volunteering to pay the bill for all those “new jobs”? And recall, at Columbine, the armed guard ran away rather than engage the killers. It was just a job. I have a relative who is currently an armed guard (not for a school) who has never owned a firearm in his life, and admits if he needed to use it he would run and hide. It’s just a job. Hired help is not the answer. Someone with a CHL is far more likely to engage, especially if there are 10 or 15 of them instead of one guard..
Caucasian suburbanites with no actual clue as to how the hoodrats operate. Two hoodrats sneak on campus, grab and pistol whip teacher, force them to open the safe, take weapons and disappear. Time on target: 5 minutes. Mission complete.
So, if I kill you and steal you eyeball… Oh, wait, that means I already have a gun. Which are easy to make. Which are easy to get. And there’s nothing anyone, anywhere can ever do about it…
Does it mater how many rocks you lock in a box when I can pick them up off the ground pretty much everywhere? Guns and rocks are basically the same in that matter…
Or they can save themselves a whole lot of money by simply allowing teachers to carry…
Teachers in Utah schools have been carrying concealed for years. Utah teachers are armed
http://inresco.org/firearmsf/larry_corriea.html#armed_teachers Utah teachers are armed
Detroit’s municipal government is crippled by its pension bills for staff the city owes $9 billion to the pension fund. A plan devised in June called for city-employed retirees to accept less than 10 per cent of what they were owed under pension plans.
Yeah, that’s theft on the part of the city government. They’re breaking a contract they made with the employees. Same as if a failing business ripped off their employees’ 401ks.