Safeguards against attacks in schools should be first priority as is fire safety. Why don’t schools have gun alarms? Sound activated alarms that will immediately contact police and put school on automatic lockdown? Possibly isolating the shooter and tracking the shooters location in the building in real-time. Besides the obvious things like not allowing mentally ill people from getting guns, and having armed guards at schools, there must be a conversation about what can be done about the environmental design of the building itself.

And almost certainly those doors along with concrete walls would greatly reduce casualties.

Do any of you actually design schools? The firm I work for design schools, courthouses, and I've worked at a place that's done a bunch of jails. The schools have a $150/SF budget and the courthouses have a $300+/SF budget. Every county we design for requires digitally locked doors monitored on and off-site, security with a buzzing system to allow people in at the front door, etc. However, teachers and students prop open doors, trade keycards, etc all the time.

Your suggestion would effectively double the cost of schools and would still not work, because the staff/students wouldn't use the building properly.

I propose taxing guns at 1000% to pay for school security.

I agree that a gun tax for capital improvements on school security makes sense. In fact, I'll pretty much agree to any tax on anything that specifically is tied to building improvements. It's my profession! Infrastructure spending, more expensive and better buildings, tax on gas, tax on food, penny taxes tacked on to existing taxes. Let's make some dough and spend it on buildings!

I think you made an amazing point, Joseffischer, that staff wont use doors properly if they are installed. In your work, have you come across any effective gun alarm systems, or technology equipment that may work?

All the schools we've built recently provide the capability for 3rd party monitoring (local PD, fire department, etc) classroom specific alarms (VOIP, fire pulls, etc) overarching control of all devices and systems from FACP (located in lobby), administration office, FAAP (located in mech room or MDP room), off-site control and monitoring of all systems (down to what temperature the thermostat can be) from the facility HQ of the county. Beyond some automated way for the school to "detect" a gun on campus on its own, I don't really see how you get much better than this. A teacher/student notices a problem, and unless outside, is probably within 15 feet of a button to alert the whole school of the location and nature of the problem.

All the improvements above are really for fire emergencies during school hours and for break ins after school hours. Glass breaks, motion detectors, mag locks, etc are all implemented, but obviously many of these devices don't behave the same during school hours.

Yup. This is not an architectural issue but a political one.

Outside of the main reception on the 2nd level, you jest right? I've attended schools in Europe with tall barbed-wire fencing, armed patrols with guard dogs. It's not a conductive environment when fear is thrust upon you because a few are more paranoid than wise. What next, SAM sites in the baseball diamond?

What was the barbed wire for? My high school's "reception" was also on the second floor. My elementary school, it was on the third floor.

barbed-wire ontop of chainlink... rather obvious no? It gives students free haircuts and pant alterations during their morning climbing exercises.

I see.

Gotta keep those kids in school somehow I guess. ;)

That's another way to think about it.

Psychotropic drugs are with a doubt a factor. No one on such drugs should be allowed to own a gun or drive a car without a doctors clearance.

Totally agree. Unfortunately, the pharm industry makes too much money so this is not likely to change.

big pharm? really? Look at big murderous toys industry instead.

Yes, big pharm. Why not look at both? Really crazy thought here, but maybe there could be even more than 2 factors?

Trust me from experience with family members on psychotropic drugs. These people can go from depressed and docile to extremely dangerous in a very short period of time.

Amen.

Kids have been playing with toy guns for a long time. This mass shooting epidemic has only been happening for the last 20 years. What’s changed?

Pray tell Tinbeary why are you still here then?

And why is this largely a suburban issue. There has never been an urban school (to my knowledge) where this has happened despite the greater availability of guns in places like Chicago, Detroit, etc? There is maybe something about the isolation of suburban life that drives crazy/evil people over the top...

Yes there is a lot of gun violence in urban areas, but it’s usually tied to gangs, crime, etc. this random mass shooting scenario is much more nihilistic. So yeah, there is without a doubt a cultural and environmental element to this that is unique to the times.

Well it's a good thing your feelings aren't a priority to children playing with toys. America would be exponentially more screwed up if children had to walk around on eggshells their entire lives so you don't feel threatened.

Oh look! Here's some of the crazies now. Apparently it is a right to be able to point a gun at another person. Do say more.

I'm now getting spam. I should have known better.

But we need a trump wall to feel safe!

Tint wins best internet comment of the day

Who said anything about Trump? Who said people have a right to point a gun at someone? Quite the stawman you're building up. Either that or a spectacular troll job.

Yay I win!

That's because you still subscribe to the guns for self-defense bullshit. I am cleared for and deal with high security treats in some of my projects and believe me, it's damn frightening going through that process when designing buildings. Besides, there was a recent article floating around a few days ago that calculated the cost of adequate providing security to all US schools...somewhere in the order of a trump border wall for basic paranoia relief. I recommend you take that cash out of your army funding if you're going to go that route. See how many right-to-own fools will follow along then.

Well, if someone is shooting at you what do other than shoot back? Are you aware that people use guns for self defense all of the time? Recently a man stopped a mass church shooter in TX with an ar-15 before the police were able to respond. The notion that guns are not used in self defense is simply false. The hypocrite politicians that have armed security can attest to their necessity. Let them lead by example and fire their armed security. Never gonna happen.

I highly doubt you would board a flight without metal detectors and airport security. I certainly would not. I’m more than happy to take off my shoes and wait in line if it means I can fly with that peace of mind.

jla-x, yet somehow millions of uneventful flights happened without metal detectors before 911... and somehow they don't usually ask me to remove my footwear in European airports, or whenever I have to make an appearance in a local courthouse (which has airport level security protocol - metal detectors, X-raying your bags and all...)

The whole "good guy with a gun" isn't why I can roll down to the grocery store or work and come back without being armed. The thing that keeps us from not shooting each other in the US is the social contract and community values that say we don't want to live that way, not the threat of lethal force. I aspire to keeping it that way. We are better than this & we can figure out a way to reduce gun problems through education, health & economic support.

I hope you are never assaulted...if you just whip out a copy of that contract they will laugh at you. Don’t bother calling the police either. Their guns are ineffective according to your logic...

Just saying, yes that social contract works for the normal majority, but a psychopath/sociopath does not adhere to that contract.

Have you been assaulted? That's not something to wish on someone. Nor is it something that we should "expect" as part of our daily lives. I am not naive. There is a place for weapons, but they deserve discretion and oversight, far greater than currently mandated. Do you disagree with my previous comment? Do you feel public safety in the US is based on the threat of lethal force?

There is no reason to change society to suit a psychopath/sociopath. That's the tail wagging the dog. As I said earlier, we're better than that. There should be consequences, just not changing the canal for a rock that falls in it.

I would never wish that on anyone, and I didn’t imply that. What I said is that crazy people do not follow that contract that normal people follow. Yes, I agree that mutualism keeps the majority of us in line, but the only thing that stops a manic is force, the only thing that stops a criminal is the idea of jail...it’s why we have locks on doors and vaults for our money. And yes, deadly force needs to be countered with deadly force. If this where not the case police would have no need to carry guns. I do not believe that assault rifles should be in the hands of anyone, they are dumb. A handgun or shotgun is sufficient for self defense. I would gladly be willing to ban them...I really just doubt that alone will solve this problem we have.. believe me, I wish we lived in utopia...I hate violence. I literally don’t even kill bugs in my house...I put them outside...but if I had to defend my fam I would. I want to maintain that right.

I disagree that the only thing that stops a "<"enter bogeyman here">" is personal weapons. We aren't going to see eye to eye on this. I hope you do defend your property and family. Just understand there are more ways than one to do this.

The idea that police wouldn't have to carry weapons is preposterous and based in a similar naïveté that you've accused me of.

never said police wouldn’t have to carry weapons. I said that we want them to because we know that it’s necessary.

yes, you did...poor reading comp on my part...my apologies

Also, the difference between Safety and Security has been blurred so much in post-911 policy discourse, that I think it's a huge part of the overall roadblock to dealing with the culture of violence. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140831152519-11537006-understanding-the-difference-may-soon-save-lives-safety-vs-security/

The whole "good guy with a gun" deterrent concept is based on the sense of Security that is associated by some with having a gun, whereas the real Safety of citizens is directly related to how many (or few) firearms are in any given place at any given time...

Wrong. I don’t believe anyone who says that if a maniac with a gun was in their home they would rather not have a gun to defend themselves. That’s total BS often spat by those who would rather preserve their political identity than use common sense.

I understand those people afraid of having a gun at home because of kids and such, but in that situation any sane person would want to defend themselves and their family. I am also certain that if that gym teacher had a gun he would've tried/shot the gunman rather than being forced to act as a human sheild to protect those kids.

jla-x here in Canuckistan, a farmer in Saskatchewan was recently acquitted of second-degree murder for "accidentally" killing an intruder on his property, while acting "to protect himself" from stupid teenagers. Most people don't know what to do with the verdict, and it's divided popular opinion along racial lines because the farmer was white, and the jury that acquitted him was entirely white, while the slain teenager was of First Nations origin, and most Canadians know that white people and natives don't mix well in Saskatchewan... The kids who were breaking the law had a broken .22 in the cab of their truck, the farmer discharged three rounds from a handgun, and claimed that the last (and deadly) one was an accidental shot. He shot a boy in the back of the head and claimed that he didn't mean to do it, and the law sided with him because this took place on his farm. You're telling me that we should all be like the farmer?

I think if a real maniac with a gun is in your home, it's probably too late to defend yourself - and if you're worried about this scenario, you should take all available preventive measures.

We should not all be like the farmer. He was clearly not actually defending himself.

Yes it does. The problem is gun obsession can't be reasoned with.

How has banning guns worked for the killing fields of south Chicago?

LITS4, I assume you're allergic to NPR and facts, but do encourage you to read this: https://www.npr.org/2017/10/05/555580598/fact-check-is-chicago-proof-that-gun-laws-don-t-work?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social

just fine.

TL:DR = A LOT of guns involved in Chicago shootings are from Wisconsin and Indiana, states where gun laws are way more lax. Also, gun control laws do not have a history of being upheld by legislators in Illinois...

The Court also added dicta regarding the private ownership of machine guns. In doing so, it suggested the elevation of the "in common use at the time" prong of the Miller decision, which by itself protects handguns, over the first prong (protecting arms that "have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"), which may not by itself protect machine guns: "It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service – M16 rifles and the like – may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home.

Most people don’t realize that guns were actually banned in many Wild Western towns. People typically had to check them with the sheriff when entering. The second amendment as well as all others have been reinterpreted over and over to suit the times. No one anticipated twitter and the internet when writing the first amendment, yet we still interpret it to preserve free speech regardless. Another misconception is that the second amendment is about hunting. If you didn’t hunt on the 1700’s you didn’t eat. The 2nd amendment is about creating a last ditch check against tyranny. Again, we are not in the business of constitutional law, we are designers. We can wish away violence all day, but if we ignore the fact that it exists and do nothing to address it with defensive design, we are not doing our job as designers or advocates for the environment. we should collectively be lobbying for building safety reforms and the funding to make it happen. We should also be looking into the effect that ones environment has on a sociopaths behavior and mental deterioration. It seems that suburban environments are more prone to this kind of isolation that drives already crazy people into completely dangerous maniacs. More research in this area would be good. I’m also sure technology can be used to create a more efficient system for identifying and reporting such abnormal behaviors.

...and what? that number would be significantly higher the more folks were armed. Gun rights obsessed wankers lead to higher availability. Treat that religious nonsense around the 2nd amendment and get rid of the supply. More guns is not going to help.

Who said anything about adding more guns? All I said was banning guns doesn't work. Taking guns away from law abiding citizens doesn't help the situation either. This hysteria is just early campaigning for the 2018 election and a bit of $oro$ engineered chaos. If any of these politicians gave a shit about "school safety" Sandyhook would have led to some meaningful change.

banning guns would work better if Indiana also banned guns, or if there was a way to control the transfer of goods across the Indiana-Illinois border

you're right that criminals will find ways to get guns, but right now the NRA and pro-2nd Amendment people are giving them that way

Ban guns in the US and cartels south of the border change their business model. Then only criminals have guns at that point. ​Living in California where you have to jump through endless hoops and be familiar with ever changing laws, owning guns(legally) is quite the hassle. Somehow violent crime doesn't seem to decrease and shootings are not in short supply. Again this isn't going to make suburban schools safer or stop people with mental health issues/terrorists any less likely to plot mass murder.

Guns are highly illegal in Mexico...hows that working out?

guns, hand guns specially, are extra mega illegal here (canada) yet I routinely hear gun shots (not a joke) in my neighbourhood. Still does not make me feel the need to arm myself in the slightest and I'll walk through anywhere in the dead of night without fear. I guess an above average knowledge of statistics and probability helps here.

What was the probability that the US women’s hockey team would beat Canada?

rather high... damn shoot-outs.

Love that site.

But how many drowned themselves after seeing a Nicholas Cage movie?

Ban Nicholas Cage!

Create Nick Cage free zones around all pools.

Miles, how hard to you think getting the rights to, say, pokemon or starwars, would be? I bet you'd make boat loads of money if you could market vest with popular characters prints.

Want to partner up? Great business model. Kids grow so fast they always need a bigger size. If they survive, of course. And the licensing possibilities are endless: NASCAR, pop stars, NBA, soft drinks, McDonalds ... we'll make a fortune while saving lives!

I would, but certainly the NRA will get wind of our business venture and squeeze us out in no time. Just like the tobacco companies backing both cigarettes and alternatives/cessation aids (nicotine gums, and stupid vappers).

Don't you have any true-blooded gun'loving m'erican gun companies?

We're waiting for Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau to come out with the 'Ballerina Derringer' single-shot BB gun.

If so, you won't be able to load it without first making a formal apology to the native population.

Canada should design a non-lethal hockey puck gun...those things hurt.

Jla, they kinda did already way back in 1991 in the classic animated masterpiece called ProStars. In that show, Mr. Gretzky's character did not use a gun to fight crime, no sir, he used a hockey stick which automatically loaded pucks for him through a slot on the face of the blade.

OMG, I have to see that lol!

I also hate it when the US army invades sovereign countries with non US weaponry.

Glad you appriciate the depth I reached for that reference. Although this link does not show the exact version I remember, the intro gives you an idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtA9isgQU58

Although you are trying to be sarcastic, I agree.

I know you're joking, but I think anti-microbial doorknobs for publicly accessible bathrooms and venues, and maybe even busses are actually a good idea

Until we find out, like antibacterial soap, that they cause cancer.

Howard Stern is an asshole "I don't know what the solution is, but let me tell you, all these ideas for solutions are dumb because FREEDOM!" And "I just think we need to have a dialogue" while literally talking over someone else's voice, someone who is calling in to provide input into said dialogue. "I said I want dialogue, so let me ignore you and keep this show in monologue mode because FREEDOM!"
smfh

Freedom is a real concern. Without a constitution we would be living in a very different country right now....do you not agree? Are you not happy to have due process, freedom of speech, right to
assembly?

jla-x you an a jackass very much like Stern. Confusing the issue by playing all sides. Go play with your wanker.

I take that as evidence that you are having a hard time arguing
the above points...

No, your stupid argument implies that America is the only "free" country in the world.

So are you for preserving the first amendment?

My stupid argument implies that America’s freedom is reliant upon our constitution and the checks and balances of government. Not saying that other societies cannot achieve
freedom in other ways.

Your ideology is stunting you ability to advocate for basic hsw in buildings. It’s a problem that exists. Defensive space may help. You are a designer. Period. I am very much in favor of driverless cars. Cars are very very dangerous. I would give up my right to drive up
without hesitation

*right to drive a car without hesitation. To me that freedom is not important. I’m sure however others would go nuts if they were no longer allowed to drive manually. You have to respect the rights of others though. If you feel guns are unnecessary, remember there is a 65 yo female who owns a liquor store in some bad neighborhood that feels some peace of mind by having one for self defense.

The constitution is essentially toilet paper at this point. Money=speech, no protection from search and seizure, monetization of the legal process, loss of privacy, etc. 

Except of course for the 2nd Amendment, courtesy of the military industrial complex. 

Miles, I’m very much against the NRA and any other group that buys political puppets. Money should be out of politics

i asked a question

shit or get off the can

Pharma has media in its pocket.

It’s so American the 2 most simplistic comments are the featured comments. Microcosm of the media.

Senjohn's Feb 22 @ 1:09 pm.

So there is an architectural solution, even one that could be retrofitted. So does it work? I don't know the anatomy of any of the schools where the incidents have occurred. Has a shooting occurred in a school where you had to get past a secure entrance? How do the shooters get in? Seems they just walk in, armed with guns, and do their thing. They can be at least deterred. Yet you hear time and tine again that people want schools to be a place where you can walk freely in and out because it feels good to them. My point, we don't have to devolve into thus argument about guns because regardless if we live in a country where depressed people act out killing fantasies or not, a secure vestibule helps with more security issues than that one.

Well said tint!

I think it's the American school system that encourages severe bullying and provokes these attacks, it's at first a social issue, than a gun issue and maybe third an architectural issue. If kids can't shoot their peers and teachers inside the school, what's keeping them from a shoot out on the parking lot as long as guns are so easily obtained?

I don't disagree. But it doesn't mean a school's design shouldn't try to deter intruders.

There was a shooting in the parking lot of the school 1.5 blocks from my house. It is just a matter of time before every school has a shooting event in their history.

what is cns news? can you link to a cdc.gov page that says the same thing?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/06/handguns_suicides_mass_shootings_deaths_and_self_defense_findings_from_a.html

My bad, meant to post this Slate article...I’ll look for the cdc link...

There is stats in there that support both sides of the debate, but self defense is legitimate.

To be clear as to my stance, I believe that “military style” guns create a bad/irresponsible gun culture...not because of their functionality so much as their attractiveness to wacky and dangerous people. That said, I support ones right to have a gun for defense and sport. It’s a complicated debate. I am 100% anti nra because I dislike their money in politics sneak tactics and overall bad taste.

my stance is that misleading headlines should be avoided, as should manipulated data. fake news really is hurting our collective intelligence. it would be wiser to seek the truth and allow your opinions to be malleable enough to change as you discover new truths, rather than finding manipulated data to support the opinion you want to hold.

not to disparage the opinion you choose to hold. i just don't think posting a link from "right news right now" is constructive.

Follow your own advice. I Meant to post the above slate article. Did you read it?

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

Another cdc study...

that cdc study from 2003 is not the one mentioned by cns news or from the slate article is it? i will try to follow my own advice, but you're still reinforcing my belief that fake news is poisoning our collective intelligence. it seems either your opinion is formed by substandard sources, or you're seeking out
substandard sources to defend the opinion you want to hold.

Hence the word “another”.

My opinion is informed by common sense.

As usual, you're all over the map. Common sense would see that if you are part of the profession, you're also part of the problem, and hence possibly part of the solution. Common sense would also ask; what is the more likely thing to happen, NCARB gonna change, or just getting the license, and stop carping about the process? Common sense would ask, what's more likely; changing behaviors, or limiting weapons of war from public access, like Heller allows? Common sense would ask, what's more likely; hardening schools - make them like prisons, when people are carping about property taxes, or limiting weapons of war from the mentally deranged?

I am 100% for limiting weapons of all kinds from the mentality deranged.

The problem is that everyone is mentally ill. Some are just more so or more often than others. It is not necessarily a full-time or permanent condition.

We've all had our moments. Plus, we live in a society that encourages rather than discourages them. 

Common sense, bullet proof doors and glass can keep people safer than non-bullet proof doors. It’s a no-brainer safety feature, not a solution. Again, I’ll ask...which door would you rather be behind in such an emergency?

You have zero concept. Price that shit out, understand how bonding issues work, and then, call me, but until then - you have zero knowledge. Simplistic - not simplicity - comments, only underscore how little you know, and undermine the professional capacity of those that do, know.

3" Thick, $100 sf. How many windows are in a typical school? Let's assume 25 s.f. per opening, and 100 windows. $250,000 just for glazing. Bulletproof doors; $4000 per door, at 100 doors = $400,000. Nearly $1 million for one school. Multiply that by 140,000 K-12 schools = $140,000,000,000.00 - Just to provide those two items.

Math. Sucks. 

Common Sense, ain't so common.

Take this up a level. "We can't afford it" is the common refrain. That's fine for your household budget, but when you are a sovereign government that issues currency you can never run out. Therefore you can afford anything. 

This is not an endorsement of hardening schools, it is a wake up call that the economic system is a complete sham used to benefit specific wealthy interest groups like the military complex, for which the NRA is a front. 

The problem going forward could largely be addressed with taxation. Simply raise the tax on weapons and ammo until it is unaffordable. It's working with cigarettes. When the price of gas goes up people buy smaller cars or take public transit. It's simple economics (at one level).

Miles, absolutely. What we can't afford is the same old same old. I just hate the kind simplistic response that hardening targets are the solutions, when they haven't done the basics.

I never said that it would be cheap, nor did I say that it would be a solution, but it would likely save lives. You just don’t want to have the conversation because of your ideological opinion about guns. You are entitled to that opinion, but to suggest that defensible space is a waste of time is ridiculous for a number of reasons, not to even mention the possible ineffectiveness of gun laws on such violent crimes. Your argument mirrors that of conservatives who oppose premarital sex, and therefore oppose giving condoms out...despite their acknowledgement of teen pregnancy as a problem. Your view is just as irresponsible.

A good example of deficient reasoning. You're addressing the symptom, not the cause(s).

He's always fighting the last war.

a defensible space could give the shooter cover and protection from the police that are trying to subdue him.

Valid point curt.

Yeah, and you wouldn’t have to think about a Design solution.

Bulletproof vests are just another kind of poorly considered design solution. Specifically, one that monetizes an aspect of the problem for profit.

Design solutions are not limited to products and can be behavioral, economic, etc. In fact any good product design addresses human factors, it is a basic factor.

Fire egress is far more important than school shootings since one is a common ocvurance. Installing delayed devices on exit doors will certainly cause far more problems than simply helping reinforced the stupid false sense of security gun lovers crave. I’ve designed a few systems like these and they are a pain to pass. Too many moving pieces to rely on for basic fire safety.

should we shame everyone with an anxiety disorder to the point where they are afraid to seek help? i could see how that helps.

shaming someone for a bad haircut or for being RBalkins, sure, but shaming someone for anxiety or a serotonin production imbalance doesn't seem right.

No one is talking about 'shaming' the mentally ill. I am saying someone needs to investigate which medicine with which dosage and what side effects and what withdrawal effects were prescribed for this person. If it turns out that the psychiatrist prescribed a very strong drug with dangerous side effects in order to get kickbacks from a pharmaceutical company then that psychiatrist needs to lose his medical license. A common thread in most of the shootings I am aware of is the person is on drugs and NO ONE is calling out either the psychiatrists or the pharma companies.

if there was a specific drug that caused people to kill other people, then i would agree there should be some avenue to prevent the person on that drug from buying a firearm. or they should stop prescribing that drug.

Perhaps the psychiatrist who prescribes the medicine should be required to inform whatever database they check when someone buys a gun that this person shouldn't be buying firearms. the database would not have to include why the person isn't able to purchase a weapon, so whatever caused them to get the prescription remains private. you're still discouraging those people who may need help from getting help though.

on the other hand, if you include a line on the application to buy a gun 'are you taking a very common drug such as an ssri or sari, or adderall, or whatever drug/illness you want to target,' then you are literally shaming people for being mentally ill.

surely volunteer is talking about the american version of mentally ill (i.e., dsm-5) as it pertains to american gun control legislation?

i just saw on the internet that 1 in 6 americans are on some sort of psychiatric drug

somewhere someone is going to go to a psychiatrist with paranoia, and the shrink will tell them the government is not tracking them. then they will prescribe medication to help them, and have to tell them now the government is tracking you.

Only 1 in 6? Seems too low.

I think about 2% of the population is schizophrenic, schizo-affective, or bi-polar, which is the population I was thinking of. A lot of mental illness is treatable and fully curable, of course, but not usually schizophrenia. Using a pharma database to prevent those patients from owning firearms might be somewhat effective but it is easy to see how it could be abused.

A lot of "mental" illness is temporary, stress induced, etc. 

Miles, that's a fine point. Idiots like Balkins who think it's only the main permanent mental health conditions that are a concern when... as you say... people sometimes snap for no other reason than because so. Good thing for them there are an assortment of loaded weapons casual laying around... hurrah freedom.

Many psychotropic drugs have known side effects of violence and suicidal thoughts. Paxil, Prozac, etc have been sued many times and have settled hundreds of millions out of court to keep hush.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/28307-from-prozac-to-parkland-are-psychiatric-drugs-causing-mass-shootings

Maybe we should be doctors.

Or let's just call them out on it.

The mislabelling is mostly not done by the professionals but by laymen and laywomen...in my experience, a true professional wouldnt even be able to diagnose someone without proper consultation, even with the best of intentions...they can easily result in selffulfilling prophecies, a black trenchcoat is all it takes to get stigmatised.

A diagnosis is required to get treated. They have to put a code down in order to satisfy insurance, so that's why they have to diagnose you. The threshold for diagnosis is seeking treatment.

True...good points.

Over diagnosis is a huge problem. Normal wild behavior is now a “disorder” and kids get put on meds and labeled as hyperactive. FOH.

This

Miles, the original cost was $5000... did you adjust for inflation since his early 90s bit?

No. Simplistic reasoning on your part if that’s the conclusion that you came to. I’ll ask again, why do banks, politicians, etc have armed security (including the “liberal” ones) if guns are ineffective for self defense? Also, as stated, what have police used to stop terroists, shooters, etc? A) rocks B) hugs C) guns. I am saying that well trained security can be beefed up. Not a fan of the arming teachers thing, but not really against it either. Haven’t made up mind on that one. Sounds like a recipe for kids to fear teachers especially in minority schools where teachers have been known to call police on kids for behavior that any rational adult should be able to handle. My nephew was handcuffed and nearly arrested for “assault” because he is black and bumped past his teacher who was standing in doorway as she told him to leave . He was like 9 years old at the time I believe. Also, Russian trolls are not necessary...dumb cnn sjw liberals are doing enough to troll people into voting for orange Potus again.

I really can’t argue with you anymore. It’s obvious that your ability to have a constructive conversation is handicapped by political identity if you cannot even acknowledge that guns are used in self defense. I’m not saying it’s a solution to anything, but at least acknowledge that reality, put it out there as a possible option, and then debate whether it’s a good or bad idea. It’s a fact that guns are used for self defense and as a deterrent. Whether the beefed up security does harm than good, that’s a debate that we can have, and I really don’t know. But to pretend that self defense is a fake concept is just beyond reason. Such unbending dedication to a pre-scripted political identity is a mental handicap. Be a political atheist.

My initial post was that WE designers should be in the debate regarding security design. While many have yelled about schools becoming prisons, do you not think they will unless the situation is well thought about in the Design community? Designers can find ways to possibly (hypothesis not guaranteed) design spaces, technology, features, that can save lives in the case of another tradgedy. This thread has become a microcosm or the Country/world. Everyone is so entrenched in their politics that the conversation can’t even happen. This is crazy.

*design spaces, technology, features, that can save lives in the case of an emergency, without feeling and looking like a prison.

I would not want my son in a school with armed teachers.

cnn sjw liberals ... 

I really can’t argue with you anymore. It’s obvious that your ability to have a constructive conversation is handicapped by political identity

Too funny. And perfectly explains the quality of the 'reasoning'.

How about churches, malls, theaters, and parks? You want to see securities with deadly weapons on every corner every time you go to pick up your kids and every Sunday service? That sounds like a dystopia right there. That's like saying since terrorists can fly their planes in to you, beef up and bullet proof every buildings including that CVS building across the street and every mac mansions in the country. And you sound like you are the one struggling with your political identity. I will not argue with you anymore, but I just hope there are not many architects like you because they need to be responsible for people's life and safety.

Since 9-11 we have secured cock pit doors, and started putting Air Marshals on planes. Is that not a good thing?

An Air Marshall would’ve likely saved thousands of lives had he/she been aboard those planes. Do you agree?

Let me teach you shji how a designer thinks. Guns exist, I don’t have a magic wand to make them not exist, therefore let’s help to remedy a problem that dose not seem to be going away anytime soon as unfortunate as that is. People don’t want armed teachers, president may sign a bill that allows teachers to be armed. Concerns,
teachers will have guns

*99.99999% of the time when nothing is happening. Possible design solution, design a gun that is concealed in a wall safe that can be electronically opened and activated to be operational by local police, or by a police officer stationed at that school and deactivated upon arrival of police at that school to close the 5-7 minute gap that a police response typically takes. Not saying it’s a good idea, but something to put out there for debate. That was the point of this thread.

Not architecture necessarily, but a design concept...by your logic, even approaching the subject in anyway that doesn’t rely on govt banning and confiscating all guns (which is not possible) is irresponsible. I think the inverse is true.

Keep thinking inside the box, that's where all the really innovative solutions are. And monetize the shit out of it, because that's the most important thing in conventional thinking.

Let me teach you how a problem solver thinks. You identify a problem, analyze it thoroughly to determine the causes of it, then develop solutions that reduce and/or eliminate those causes.

Which are?

And likelihood of it happening?

Jla, True, there is no point arguing with you, as you will not change, and live in your naive beliefs that this is an architectural issue. I'd love though, to see what your reasoning is behind how the Las Vegas attacks could have been stopped. They had metal detectors and tons of security guards. But the attacker chose to use a tall building next door. The same can happen with schools.

On the other hand, I find it appalling that you have a kid and you can think of armed teachers/student situation.

It’s pie in the sky thinking to suggest that all guns, including the illegal ones, and 250 million existing ones, will be removed from society during trumps administration when the dems had the reigns for 8 years and couldn’t even ban bump stocks. We have a better chance of aliens invading imo.

Are you mental sod? I never said anything remotely suggesting arming students. I said arming teachers is probably not a good idea, but not sure. Learn to read. I’m appalled that you are entrusted to protect the hsw of society and can’t even discuss school security as a legitimate subject matter on an Internet forum. You're right, let’s just create a utopian society where crime and terrorism doesn’t exist.

Dismissing any solution eliminates the possibility of it happening. That's not design or problem solving, that's obstinate stupidity.

And yes, all the schools in my area have a police office stationed at each all day. Makes me feel a lot better. The kids hardly notice. Could be a step towards integrating community policing as well. I’m sure it’s good to get police off the streets and around kids/parents once and a while to expose them to the 99% non-criminal element of the community. Would you sod rather have a police officer at a school or not?

Miles, you assume that it’s good to remove guns from the hands of law abiding citizens. As stated, guns are used in self defense something like a million times a year. Yes, if it where guaranteed the guns can be removed from all, good and bad, legal and illegal, I would agree, but that’s impossible. How’s the war on drugs working out?

That would simply tip the scale in favor of the crooks. I know several women who work in sketchy areas and carry. These are not gun nuts, just ordinary professional women who want to protect themselves. What will you tell them? What will you tell the jewelry store owner? It’s very unfair to disarm a law abiding citizen when they rely on that security...especially those who are in dangerous areas, physically unable to fight an attacker, or in
dangerous lines of work.

Legalizing drugs would remove the criminal element and violent crime based on the drug trade.

I agree 100%. And making guns illegal would just drive the underground market....and if the drug market is surrounded by such violence, imagine how bad the gun market would be.

Australia did it. "the National Firearms Agreement prohibited automatic and semiautomatic assault rifles and pump shotguns in all but unusual cases. It tightened licensing rules, established a 28-day waiting period for gun purchases, created a national gun registry and instituted a temporary buyback program that removed more than 20 percent of firearms from public circulation."

So don't say it can't be done.

Miles, are you suggesting other countries do thing better than americans? How novel.

Exactly. Fix the source of the problem don't put layers of bandages on the result.

“ They would've chosen a different way to cause mayhem, because that's what terrorists do.” Ok, by your own logic, that’s an argument people often use for the ineffectiveness of gun control. I could just as easily say—if guns are banned, they will find another way to cause mayhem—The misconception is that self-defense preparation is equal to violence. It’s not. It’s also a misconception that we can’t prepare for self defense while simultaneously addressing the root of the problem. There is a saying in martial arts...”it’s better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war”

Meaning, yes strive for peace and non-violence, but always be fit for survival.

You shouldn't compare the terrorist that wants to cause mayhem nonetheless with gun control but with the school shooter that sees no other escape than going out with a bang, therefore your logic and argument is faulty. If you don't address the reasons school shootings occur, nothing will change, they will simply drive a truck into a crowd or whatever.

The reasons are debatable. I don’t buy the idea that we are all blank slates and some, because of a unique set of circumstances, can become mass killers. That’s simply untrue. I believe they are probably genetically pre-disposed to being sociopaths and psychopaths. Actually, scientists found a “serial killer gene”. While a small fraction of the population carries this gene, and never become serial killers, a large portion of serial killers (if not all) carry it. This suggests that it’s nature and nurture. As society goes, this desire for fame and infamy is very pervasive these days. Media is giving these killers the fame they desire. Step one stop giving them a name. Step two, stop making kids soft. This over emphasis on bullying, bully free zones, etc is making kids hyper sensitive to any normal playground socialization. Bullying is real, and really bad, but there is a line. By making everyone hyper vigilant/ hyper-sensitive we are elevating the power of words... What ever happened to “sticks and stones...”. We are creating a victim mentality, and when someone identifies as a victim, well then, there is an enemy...an oppressor. We should be teaching kids to be head-strong.

Step 3, Fathers need to stop abandoning their families. The lack of a father figure is a common feature with these types of mass killers. Not sure why, but maybe because they have a warped idea of their masculinity...these are all young males with the exception of the Vegas shooter. Not a psychologist, but there is a correlation it seems. Step 4...this is where the schools can be improved, recognize and foster divergent talents and interests. It’s important that young people have interests in things. Sports are fine, but not everyone likes sports. Allow kids to pursue things that interest them. Without a sense of Purpose, people, especially young males, will often turn to destructive behaviors. Step 5...lead by example. Tribalism is replacing individuality more and more every day, and as it does, personal responsibility for the way we treat others will be ignored more and more, and group think/identity will be more and more pervasive...leading to a peer pressure to exclude or ignore certain people even when conscience says its wrong. This further isolates the outsiders, and allows their warning signs to go unnoticed.

If we keep thinking that our problems are the governments responsibility to fix, rather than ours as a community, this will continue. At its root, this is a sociological and psychological problem, not a legal or political one. I personally find it strange that we so often welcome this surrender of responsibility to the state, especially given the morally bankrupt nature of our politicians.

That all said, if you live in a bad neighborhood, you may have a ton of ideas how to improve that neighborhood..you may even actively be doing something to improve it, but you still lock your doors and do what you have to do to keep yourself safe.

So, I don’t necessarily disagree with some of what you all are saying. I just think that you are talking long term solutions to an immediate problem. We need short and long term solutions.

What about autonomous turrets and drones armed with tasers? I am sure that will make the dumb ones feel safe.

You mean make schools into positive, constructive, nurturing places? 

Nah, never happen.

I have a dream.

You're a lovely person.

It can be done, if the ridiculous competitiveness and overtesting kids would stop, teaching kids it's basically okay to cheat because it will make you a winner or get that good grade to allow you entry into the best schools. In Finland every school is the best school, allowing pupils and teachers to focus on learning, not on comparing and testing kids. The result of an education shouldn't be grades but competences and skills.

Yes, it can be done. And fairly easily and swiftly too. But the schools are in denial that they are part of the problem. And the parents refuse to think that the schools are a problem. But they are. Americans are not #1 but you could get shot for saying that. Even if someone believes you, they say, "well not my school." Yes, your school is woefully underperforming. Denial.

In a competitive society a few due well by stepping on everyone else. The ultimate goal in a competitive society is to eliminate your competition (by any and all means). 

Thus dog eat dog. In a cooperative society everybody helps each other do well.

Not buying the Marxist ba that a cooperative society will result in everyone doing well. A whole other debate, but First define “well” then define the consequences for doing “better”. A lot of Tyranny is required to achieve equality of outcome. The govt required for such a system will always turn authoritarian. Imagine what the umpa-lumpa in office would do with such broad powers... I’d rather live with capitalism. Competition is good.

Define cooperative

And, maybe white collar crime and even street crime can be linked to competition, but these mass killings are not about “eliminating competition”. They are a total rejection of not just society, but existence itself. These crimes are done by sociopaths, not people who got a shit hand of cards.

Pathetic attempt to support your ridiculous position. Competitive society creates mental illness.

In competitive society we're taught to "improve" ourselves as measured against everyone else. More money, better college, better looks, better job, better (more expensive) stuff, and so on.

There is a continuous media stream designed to make you feel inadequate if you don't have the right shit. You're not skinny enough, you don't have enough dough to have the right clothes / phone / car / etc. BUY BUY BUY

In competitive society the "losers" (the poor) are vilified. They are denied the most basic consideration and care because they don't have dough (the measure of all things!) and because it is their fault of course.

It couldn't possibly be the result of an economically competitive society where the ownership class has virtually enslaved the entire population via rent extraction (interest on debt) and monopolistic practices.

Who do architects work for? The rich. Who buys art? The rich. You're not rich? LOSER.

"These crimes are done by sociopaths, not people who got a shit hand of cards." I wonder how do you think sociopaths come to be, just out of thin air?

And Miles, that is one of the best pictures of capitalism I've seen, thanks!

Genetic predispositions + environmental factors...as I said.

Miles, you blame capitalism on almost every ill in society. What exactly is it that is better in your opinion, and how does it work?

uff....

You are conflating culture and capitalism. No one says that you have to be rich to be happy in a capitalist society. I’m not rich, I’m happy. The problem is that our culture is morally and spiritually empty...not because of capitalism, but because of materialism. One is an external economic system, the other is an internal obsession with the material nature of that system.

And culture is morally and spiritually empty because ... ? As if the economic system has no effect on culture.

 It is very difficult to maintain civility in the face of such obstinate stupidity. As such I am done here.

Stupidity is to think that capitalism can be replaced (like that’s within your power), people can be forced into communism or whatever, and everyone can all of a sudden turn nice and stop wanting to hurt one another. That argument is tantamount to...well utopia. I though we were done with mid-century tabula rasa thinking?

You’ve been tainted with this post-modernist idea that our lives are dictated by the external...they are not. Internal enlightenment can be attained even in prison. Until the internal is fixed, the exteral will remain broken. You are arguing the opposite. Society is a reflection of our collective inner selves. Inner spirituality, not necessarily in a religious sense, will trickle out and shape the world.

Why you ask? I don’t know. We really don’t have any spiritual leaders. The last great was MLK. Spirituality has been pretty absent from our culture. Again, not talking about religion per se...religion is more often a guise for a lack of spirituality than a guide for it. Not always, but often.

And let’s see...hmm...we keep pushing this victim mentality upon people and wonder why depression is rampant. This idea that no matter what you do the oppressors will never let you get ahead...there is no way out...no hope...that my friend is the definition of depression.

Pete, I’ll check that out. Yeah, a victim mentality isn’t good for anyone. Well, except the politicians of course.