As we all know by now, locked doors and a security system that required visitors to ring a bell before being admitted to the main office at Sandy Hook School didn’t deter a national travesty last week.
But do any of Newton’s schools have anything close to that?
I recall many years ago, the TAB sent a reporter to test how far he could get into our schools without being questioned. The answer, in most instances, was pretty far.
Does anyone feel our Newton’s schools are adequately secure? Given the design of our (mostly) older facilities is there a way to make them safer? Do we even lock the doors of our elementary schools?
I feel that the current level of security is not adequate. In fact I blogged about this a week before the Sandy Hook massacre.
I wasn’t even thinking armed mass murderer but rather more run of the mill creepy guy, domestic situation, etc. Right now the front doors of our schools are not locked and I think they should be. I do not think it’s that much of an inconvenience to have to be buzzed in before entering the school. In downtown Boston I have to check in with a security desk before heading up an elevator for a meeting, why not offer our children and staff at least that level of security?
There is nothing put in place to prevent or even begin to counter a worst case scenario, so no.
Mike
Nothing would have prevented Friday’s event… the man had a mission. However, at home I lock all my doors when I am home. Locking the doors of the school buildings does not seem like it would take much money. I am not advocating the use of cameras, however my kids school has an unlocked door. . . . and the door opens to a stairwell. Any lunatic or stranger could roam the halls undetected. . . . doesn’t even need to shoot . . . could just take a kid.
Basic safety.
@mike, I trained to be a teacher, and while I am not a teacher right now, I would NOT want a gun at all. I am not great at shooting (yes, I have done it), and would be too nervous that an accident would happen.
But basic safety of locking the building makes sense to me.
Our current schoolwide policy is all doors except one are secured. I hope we stick with that. If we turn our schools into lock up prisons, in the end we all feel less secure.
Nothing could have prevented the Sandy Hill massacre. The young man had access to the weapons of mass destruction. The school door was locked.
Deirdre Fernandes has a nice roundup today, looking at how different districts are thinking about this. Here’s part of the section related to Newton (bold emphasis is mine(..
Which, of course, includes this discussion here on Village 14.
Actually Countryside’s front door was locked yesterday and will be locked all this week. I think this is to make parents feel less uneasy in the wake of the recent atrocity.
Weapons of mass destruction…haha ok. What does it take for you guys to wake up?
Mike
I think it is important to tailor security measures to the actual risks presented, taking into account the severity and likelihood of the risk as well as the effectiveness of the security measures in preventing such risks. Without minimizing last week’s horrific tragedy, locking down all of the schools and turning them into armed fortresses is not necessary nor, would it even be effective if someone with semi-automatic weapons and body armor was really bent on getting into the school, like the shooter in Newtown, CT. S/he could most likely shoot their way inside. At the same time, the last thing we need in our public schools are weapons of any kind, regardless whether it is a staff person, parent or student. The risk of someone getting hurt by a weapon or worse makes that a no-brainer. Fortunately, that is also the law.
A number of my friends, including my wife, are teachers, principals or work in public schools. They regularly have “lock down” drills in which all of the classrooms are closed and locked, and the children are instructed to move to a part of the room and get down on the floor where they cannot be seen through the doors or windows. The reasons for these drills are many, including the possibility of a gunman entering the building. But that kind of incident, as awful as it is, is extremely unlikely. The more common incidents, which actually do happen everyday in schools across the country, involve things like an unarmed stranger in the building who does not belong there, or a non-custodial parent or other person who insists on seeing or taking a child from the building without authorization from the custodial parent, guardian or a court. Many kidnappings or unauthorized access actually involve non-custodial parents, and, with divorce rates being what they are, the likelihood of such incidents is far greater certainly than when I was growing up.
So, while I do not want to see our schools become armed fortresses, given the realistic and relatively common threats to the safety or well-being of students that actually do exist, I see nothing wrong with cameras at the doorways, locking all of the doors, other than, perhaps, the entrance adjacent to the main office, and a requirement that all visitors must either be buzzed in and/or sign in at the office before entering the building. In my view, this would be the most effective way to reduce the likelihood that children or adults in public school buildings would be harmed.
It is not just armed people. It is non custodial parents sneaking into the school and taking a child. . . . . or a person who doesn’t belong IN the school, IN the school taking supplies. If you aren’t supposed to be in the building, don’t let them in! A buzzer and lock is like your front door at your house. Why allow anyone to walk the halls of a school? Especially when many schools don’t have front doors NEAR the office.
“At the same time, the last thing we need in our public schools are weapons of any kind, regardless whether it is a staff person, parent or student. The risk of someone getting hurt by a weapon or worse makes that a no-brainer.”
Is this based off any sort of fact? Other countries would beg to differ, and they have put this policy in practice. It has also been in practice in some school districts in the U.S. with zero issues. It is impossible to say whether or not it would prevent a tragedy, and very well may likely not. However, what you are advocating is a situation where the only possible outcome is what happened in Newtown, based only off how you “feel.” That is irresponsible, in my opinion.
Mike
BTW, Jeff Young gave us an earful when we assigned the TAB reporter to walk into several Newton schools. At the time I don’t believe there were even any signs telling visitors to check in at the office.
But the funny part was the vice principal at one of the middle schools (don’t recall which one) who sent our trespassing reporter to detention. (And he went.)
Mike, it is just common sense.
The risk of an armed gunman coming into a school with or without body armor is slight. It obviously happens but the chances of it happening at any particular school are almost negligible. Even you would not require that every teacher arm themselves, so if an armed gunman does enter a school, there is no guarantee that his victims will be able to return fire (and if he is wearing body armor as the Aurora, CO shooter was, it may not even be effective to defend). Moreover, for safety reasons, school staff would have to store their firearms someplace where children or others could not get at them, making it somewhat impractical to return fire if a gunman bursts into the classroom and begins firing. A concealed weapon is a non-starter for safety reasons, and I don’t think most people would tolerate it. Even if they tolerated it, what is to prevent a student from stealing a concealed weapon from a teacher or staffperson in a struggle and shooting someone including the teacher? (If you have ever taught middle school or high school, you would know such struggles do occur all too often, and if the teacher is packing heat, there is probably a good chance someone will get injured or killed and the use of lethal force on an unarmed student would be grounds for manslaughter, at least.) On the other hand, as a matter of common sense, the risk presented by having weapons in school are far greater than the likelihood that a gun could be stolen or taken from a teacher or staffperson and used against innocent victims. How often do you hear about armed gunmen in schools? Rarely, although once is too many times. By contrast, how often do you hear or read about theft in schools, whether it is a wallet, an iPhone, an iPod, an iPad or laptop, computers, you name it? All the time, I would wager. You may feel the need to arm yourself to protect your home, in your home, where you have control over your home. But that kind of control is impossible in schools, unless, as I said, you turn them into armed fortresses. And there just isn’t the demonstrated need for that.
Use your head, man.
How often are teachers beaten down and have their wallets stolen from their pockets? The small % of teachers who were those who were CARRYING THE GUN ON THEIR PERSON CONCEALED could avoid getting in to tussles with students. Maybe I didn’t teach school, but I’ve spent 13 years in NPS.
You are right that this has a very slight chance of happening, which makes me hopeful that you don’t support any sweeping legislation further against guns in the future. That said, schools do present themselves as a target because they are known as a location where there will be no resistance. You cannot just play the common sense card here. In other countries where they have had problems with bombings and shootings (Israel), it is common sense FOR their to be armed teachers among the students.
And I know you don’t like the VPC’s statistics, Mike, but they pretty clearly show that states with high gun ownership rates and weak gun laws, defined as “those that add little or nothing to federal restrictions and have permissive concealed carry laws allowing civilians to carry concealed handguns” have far higher gun related death rates than those states (like Massachusetts) with low gun ownership rates and strong gun laws, defined as “those that add significant state regulation in addition to federal law, such as restricting access to particularly hazardous types of firearms (for example, assault weapons), setting minimum safety standards for firearms and/or requiring a permit to purchase a firearm, and have restrictive concealed carry laws.”
Them’s the facts.
I am curious what people on this blog think about the fact that Weston, Wellesley, Walpole, Watertown, Waltham, Cambridge, Westwood, Medford, Boston, Lexington to just name a few have locked doors at their schools. Dont you think we are at a Greater risk for something to happen if our School doors remain open? So what is it going to take to get our Superintendent and Mayor to make our schools safe. Because right now I dont feel like my children are safe while in the NPS. And I feel that they are less safe considering all our surrounding city’s have the doors locked.
And I don’t feel like the Superintendent gets it and our Mayor seems to be deferring this to him. At this point we don’t even need our Leaders to Lead anymore – they just need to follow. And considering that the W’s we LOVE to compare ourselves with thought it was important to lock the door yesterday – what is it going to take for Newton to Follow.
Anyway, Mike, we can agree to disagree whether arming teachers is a bad idea, but I hope we can all at least agree that this is the worst response yet to the Newtown school shootings.
The greater risk may be that citizens stop seeing schools as a community resource, and instead as the private domain of teachers, students and the few parents who’ve bothered to clear the criminal background check. The risk of an armed assailant or even a disgruntled parent is much less than the risk that the taxpaying public ceases to see schools as community assets and instead as a burden.
I agree that in most environments where there are young children that is useless and probably more problematic than all the lock-down procedures. However, in a university setting with adults that makes more sense than hiding behind a piece of foam and plastic. Umass even has fight back as part of their advice as to what to do against an “active shooter” which they publish. Fighting back for me anywhere else other than my time at Umass provides me with much higher odds (since the state doesn’t stop me from carrying a gun with one of the few exceptions being Umass).
I don’t agree with how VPC uses statistics because they are an anti-gun organization with an agenda. They include suicides as “gun deaths” as one example. You can’t apply a simple # across the board. For example it’s not valid if I tell you you are X more likely to die while drinking and driving because people who drive a truck have this chance of dying in a DUI. If you never drink and drive, then you never drink and drive. If you own a gun and are responsible, than you own a gun and are responsible. If we took the responsible teachers and provided them with a good training program, they would be a great asset to school security. Another example: Chicago, New York, and Boston have the strictest gun laws in the country… look how thats working out. California has a much more restrictive “assault weapons ban” than Massachusetts, check out oakland.
The worst response to the school shootings is politicians and citizens who have zero idea what they are talking about using this for political gain. It is pretty eye opening to listen to people who are 100% incorrect talk about how they want to legislate X Y and Z which will in effect only make them feel better, and they can’t even describe what these laws will do. If they do this about guns, I can’t imagine what they do when it comes to laws surrounding things I don’t actually understand.
Yea sure I am a gun owner, and I like my guns. I also firmly believe that it makes our society a better place that we let good people own guns. This doesn’t mean arm everyone, but having concentrated areas where nobody at all is armed and having that publicized is bad.
@Andreae, I might have agreed with you totally were it not for the fact I talk to so many teachers and principals who are friends, and therefore willing to be more candid. Parents, in particular non-custodial parents, or parents involved in custody disputes or messy divorces who use the kids as ammunition against each other, are part of the reason public schools are having to employ more security measures. Hysteria about pedophiles and armed assailants, heightened by last week’s horrific stories about the shooting in Connecticut and a serial pedophile in Massachusetts, make everyone that much more anxious. The remedial steps may be out of whack with the true risk, but in the universal media age of TV and Twitter, everyone is a little on edge and wants to be as safe as possible.
@Mike, universities are different. I still don’t think anyone other than a law enforcement officer should bring a firearm, concealed or otherwise, onto a college campus, but it is very different from a public elementary, middle or high school given the corresponding ages of the students. And I still think we are all safer where fewer people own or carry guns and the gun ownership, permitting and registration laws are stricter. Like in Massachusetts, although I would like to see our state gun laws even more restrictive and would support Governor Patrick’s legislation.
I’m glad you think that. I certainly don’t think that, I’d much rather have my gun on my hip in the back of a giant lecture hall like I do everywhere else I go. I wouldn’t oppose a university further vetting all students and faculty who are licensed once further before that is extended to campus, but it is bad policy to forbid it no matter what.
You are entitled to feel safer with more legislation… I am NOT safer with further legislation tying me up, so I will continue to educate others on how to protect themselves, and continue to be responsible for my and my families own safety through fighting restrictive legislation. Note I do not oppose background checks. I’m not unreasonable, there are common sense initiatives that exist. Banning specific hardware based off how you think it looks or of principles you don’t understand is something I will fight.
What would you like to see made MORE restrictive about our states gun laws? How are they not restrictive enough? I can’t wait to here this one. Deval patrick has proposed nothing of any worth, even Martha Coakley (who has not been a friend to gun owners) was on the radio talking about how pointless and “feel good” his gun laws would be, and were an unnecessary burden on gun owners.
Elementary and middle schools with closed campuses should be locked with re-enforced doors (because you can break through a glass door with pretty much anything). This will hopefully allow for another 30 seconds to a minute to initiate a lock down and call the police.
Terrorist attacks, like this was, will happen forever. There will be more bombings and shootings. The only way to reduce the threat of an active shooter is to have something that can match them in the school. It is a fact that school shootings have been stopped by armed staff. I’d like to add that having had family complete their time at NPS within the last year they have done little to curb bullying. Not that that is ever an excuse… but if you are talking about nipping the problem in the butt at the source.
Mike
“but the issue of locked buildings and buzzers and cameras at the doors will have to be discussed as a community, Fleishman said.”
Does anyone know if Weston and Wellesley had town meetings to discuss this or did the Superintendent show some leadership skills and decide that it might be a good thing to do in light of what happened last week?
Joanne… people in Newton.. well lets just say what did you expect.
I regularly am a visitor in elementary schools all around the Commonwealth. At every one of them I must be buzzed in and wear a visitor ID at all times. None of these are unfriendly, locked down places. They are all just ordinary schools – both urban and rural.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics 92% of public schools in the United States lock and monitor doors during school hours – http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2011/ind_20.asp
The director of the National School Safety Center is quoted in EdWeek Online today as saying: . “The standard of care that schools have at the end of the day… is whether or not the schools took reasonable steps.” In my view locked doors during the school day is reasonable.
What boggles my mind is that the NPS Administration and the Mayors office are not in the short term locking the front entrances of the Schools to keep our children safe – when the surrounding communities have either already done that YEARS AGO or did it this week.
I decided yesterday that I will be VOTING NO on the override if this is way our Leadership deals with our children’s safety. Maybe if it hits their pockets they will realize that this was the time they needed to show us their Leadership.
@Joanne – At my daughter’s school (Countryside) the doors are being kept locked. I don’t know about other schools. Are you sure you have your information right?
Jerry – a few of principals – I have heard Pierce and Lincoln Eliot have locked the doors. It is the principals bypassing our so called leadership and locking them themselves. Horace Mann door is open, Day, NNHS, Burr to name a few that I know have open front doors.
The stand of our so called fearless leaders is to keep the front door open. I wonder why our Mayor who a few weeks ago started to have had his own police detail to protect him cannot realize that our childrens safety is just as important as his.
According to today’s TAB, Lincoln-Eliot is the only school where administrators lock the front door (and all others).
Mike (not Striar), you posted on a related thread that you are a “gun enthusiast”. Some may consider guns a necessary evil, but can you explain your enthusiasm? It indicates something more than a rational consideration of the role of guns in society. You also indicate that you don’t restrict your enthusiasm to hunting rifles or hand guns that arguably serve as protection. Are you enthusiastic about semi-automatic weapons as well as other guns? The enthusiasm you express for guns undermines your credibility in making a rational argument about a widespread need for guns in civil society.
It appears that Adam Lanza was also enthusiastic about guns, as was his mother. They went to target practice together, and she bragged about her guns. Perhaps understanding the psychological roots of enthusiasm for guns is a step toward understanding the causes of irrational acts of gun violence.
I tend to agree with Joanne on this. In the short term, while our Citywide policies are being evaluated, we should take precautionary measures to protect our children. Locking the doors is a small step in the process. Doing so does not create a militarized zone or any kind of fortress, but simply requires the use of a buzzer for entrance. It’s certainly true that the buzzer did nothing to stop what occurred in Newtown, but did it slow his entrance? Maybe. Community discussion on topics such as these is important, gaining input and perspective essential, but for now, let’s take this first step. In the longer term, let’s see what the review of our policies concludes, and take appropriate action. By the way, when is this review expected to be complete?
Does anyone know which elementary and middle schools have main offices where administrators can see the front door (and therefore see who they are buzzing in)? If I remember correctly, Countryside does but Brown does not.
First and foremost I truly believe in the Second Amendment, and it’s purpose. I believe that having private gun ownership is an incredible defense for the state from enemies both foreign and domestic.
I do not understand where you think rationality loses out for me enjoying shooting guns and collecting guns (I guess is how I would describe my “enthusiasm’) in addition to believing in their neccessary use.
First of all, “semi-automatics” includes handguns and rifles. The handguns I own (I personally carry a Sig Sauer P229) are both semi-automatic and “high capacity” as you all define that as greater than 10 rounds, despite the gun being designed to hold a 12 round magazine which I would consider standard capacity. The vast majority of all guns carried and used for protection are semi-automatic. I defend my home with an AR15 rifle, as it is better equipped for that job. This is the best selling gun in the country, 10s of millions of people have owned them starting in the 1960s, and you could count on one hand how many have done terrible things with them, and fewer lawfully owned them in the first place.
If you want to attack my credibility because I enjoy shooting guns in addition to recognizing their importance in a free society go right ahead. If you want a little more background before you jump to conclusions I grew up in Newton, I served as an infantryman in the Marine Corps in Afghanistan, I am an NRA and Massachusetts State Police certified firearms instructor, and I founded the UMass Amherst gun club which we are working to get involved in actual events. I firmly believe in the 2nd Amendment in addition to enjoying shooting sports.I and most of my friends own these “semi-automatic” guns and rifles and enjoying shooting them, and I can tell you that all of us are equally disgusted as you in crimes that took place in CT. The difference is the majority here don’t care that schools still aren’t locking their doors, they’d rather ban things from good people they don’t even understand to no actual end because they for whatever reason are uncomfortable with people having guns, despite the fact that that is NOT the solution.
I can’t begin to speculate as to why a psychopath would murder a bunch of children. When ever I am shooting my guns I am doing so to better myself and my skills for my own protection, or to teach others for their protection and the protection of a free state. If I come across any psychopaths though, I’ll be sure to ask them so I can give you an answer before I call the cops. There are 100 Million gun owners in the U.S. that don’t kill people everyday. Remember that.
Mike
@Mike – “There are 100 Million gun owners in the U.S. that don’t kill people everyday”. Yes there are, and there also 100’s of millions of automobiles that don’t get in accidents every day.
Every year though many, many people are hurt, maimed and killed by both automobiles and guns. When we look at the countless tragedies involving car accidents we continuously work at finding ways to make them safer – everything from licensing drivers, standards for the design of cars, design of roads, training and public education, etc.
In the aftermath of last week’s horrific tragedy, when people quite reasonably ask what can we do lessen the chance of this happening again, its striking that the only suggestions you can come up with are limited to those that will have zero impact on gun use, ownership or manufacture. You seem to refuse to consider that guns are even related to what happened in Newtown.
It’s as if after a spate of horrific car accidents we constrained our responses to only those things that won’t affect car owners or manufacturers in any way whatsoever and pretend that cars themselves had nothing to do with car accidents – “if they didn’t have a car, they would have run into him with a bicycle”
The question was asked “What steps can we take to prevent children from being shot in an elementary classroom” and your main answer was, in effect, “arm the kindergarden teachers”. Its hard to take you seriously and think that you really are dealing in a good faith effort to lessen the chances of future tragedies.
VOTING NO on the override won’t get your message to the administration. The teachers and the students need better spaces for learning. Voting no will mean that the CITY doesn’t support the schools. Your home won’t be worth as much when you try to tell. Vote YES for the over-ride. I am not agreeing with keeping the doors unlocked. IN fact, I disagree with MANY things with the schools, however I do agree that CABOT AND ANGIER need to be replaced. I AGREE WITH REPLACING THESE SCHOOLS. The over ride is for THESE ISSUES, and they are NOT asking for your opinion on the greater NPS. The city is asking for your support for ANGIER, CABOT, ZERVAS and SIDEWALKS. By voting no, you are sending the signal that you don’t support those issues.
The over ride is for these issues. . . . not every NPS issue.
Jerry I have proposed things. I have proposed that the NICS checks be extended to all private sales as well (that is what is the so-called gun show loophole) and I suggested mental health systems are revamped to incorporate that into the NICS system. We still have fast cars, SUVS, etc. What we do is put restrictions on operation. OUI, speed limits where you can and can’t go fast. That doesn’t act as a physical barrier for people driving drunk and killing 10s of thousands annually, nor speeding. You can never stop crazy or irresponsible people.
Limiting the magazine capacity or external visual attributes of a gun is pointless, and will have no mechanical effect. First of all, the guy used a “ban compliant” rifle, it was not an assault rifle as covered by the previous ban. Next, even the more stringent proposed ban can be reversed by a screwdriver, and only changes the external ergonomics of the gun, not the actual function. As far as magazine capacity goes, I’ve explained that multiple times. It takes less than a second to change between “low capacity 10 round magazines,” which a person committing a terrorist act could just carry dozens of (as the Virginia tech shooter did with his low capacity magazines). However those of us who want to protect ourselves and only have the one magazine in our gun would like those extra 2-3 rounds because they may make the difference, rather than carrying hole other separate magazines.
Go ahead and don’t take me seriously. Plenty of other countries use armed security, teachers, chaperones and it works just fine. It is even used in parts of the U.S. Meanwhile, you guys can’t even agree to lock the front doors to the school, you just want to go after guns despite the proven lack of effect on anyone but the law abiding.
Mike
A society is not free when its members carry guns around, because they all are afraid of each other. FEAR KILLS FREEDOM. One never knows if another guy shoots him/her for whatever reason one may have. Here’s an every-day example:
I argued with a next-car driver about a traffic issue, but my wife said “Stop it! What if he has a gun?” This happens every day a million times per day on the US roads, let alone in other locations.
You lock school doors, an angry guy will kill children outside schools, on buses, playgrounds, etc. The problem is: millions of angry guys have an easy access to guns. Also, how do we tell a psychopath from a “normal” guy?
Adam Lanza didn’t look like a nut – he was just WITHDRAWN. His mother was not even withdrawn, but she taught him to shoot and enjoy shooting guns. Thousands of youths get suicidal for whatever reasons they may have. They don’t have to be mentally ill, just angry at teachers, peers, or at unrequited love. You give them guns – see what happens.
Should schools be locked? Yes.
Gail – Pierce and evidently Countryside are locking the doors. Franklin is posting a volunteer at the door. Obviously the Principals are deciding this since we have a lack Leadership from our Superintendent.
If 93% of the schools have locked doors – more like 99% this week – what is NEWTONS issue.
Our Mayor should be ashamed of his lack of Leadership on this. Locking the doors is not the culture the people make the culure.
I thought we had resolved this after 9-11. Yes, the doors should be locked and visitors should have to sign in.
Either way, I would ask that people not cite specific school security vulnerabilities on this blog. Pls. address that with NPS and the SC.
Not my fault you are afraid of yelling at other drivers because you might get shot. People being armed discouraging you from becoming involved in a road rage incident isnt really selling your point. I walk outside everyday comfortable that I am protected to the best of my abilities. No fear from this guy. It has nothing to do with others maybe having guns, and everything to do with the fact that their will always be bad people with many tools at their disposal. I do what I can to protect my own with little effort on my part. I dont need somone who thinks we will have a magic happy world if they make guns illegal to deny me that. So I will fight that through trying to educate people even on this board.
Bad people will get guns, knives, explosives, cars, bats, etc forever. Not everything will be avoidable. Life has inherint risk to it and the solution is not to mitigate individuals ability to lower that risk for themselves.
Gail thanks for pointing out the Tab article, I haven’t read mine yet. Now I feel like I’m in the Twilight Zone. Not only are we proudly NOT locking our doors, unlike 93% of other schools in America, but we have a social worker as our main spokesperson on school safety?!
Umm, actually I think the most important thing is making sure we have done all we can to ensure the safety of our students and staff in the wake of this horrific incident in Newtown CT.
Would it be too much to ask that this once Newton not be trying to out-PC everyone else?
There’s a discussion like this going on one of the school listservs in which parents are volunteering to sit in the hallway and watch the front door until a buzzer is put in.
One parent raised a small caution flag, saying that we need to be careful what we do out of fear. He wasn’t trying to quash the idea of a buzzer (it certainly has its merits) but wanted parents to look for the greater risk.
As another parents said: where’s the petition to put speed bumps on the street?
Also, do we stop kids from going outside during recess? What about field trips? How much risk is real? How much are we willing to tolerate? Where are the lines between keeping safe and keeping cloistered?
“Where’s the petition to put speed bumps on the street?”
After 2 kids were hit at an intersection on Crafts Street, the city responded by putting a traffic light at the intersection.
A risk was identified due to real life events, and the city responded. That’s all I’m asking for. And that the response come from the mayor or the chief of police, not a social worker.
Locking the doors, as 93% of other schools in America do, does not seem to me to be such a heavy lift.
Also worth pointing out the creation of this Facebook page. It’s from parents who want to see some action:
https://www.facebook.com/NewtonMaParentsForSchoolSafety
When my kids first started going to Countryside the office wasn’t located by the front door, but that changed at some point, and all doors but the front were locked. I clearly remember a discussion with another mom after her daughter and another child were out on the playground during recess. For some reason they had to go back into the school (bathroom?). There weren’t enough teachers/aides on the playgrounds to accompany the two girls so whomever was in charge allowed them to walk back to the school together. They walked around to the front door (on Dedham Street) together. They were fourth or fifth graders and I imagine the thinking was that the teachers could see them until they got to the front of the school and the girls could handle it from there. But the mother wasn’t sure about it.
So, imagine the same scenario with a locked front door. There are probably fewer aides than there were then. Kids are on the playground and they need to go back into the school, they’re old enough to go with a buddy, they get to the front door and it’s locked. Let’s say it’s a school where the office isn’t right by the front door so they aren’t buzzed right in. It takes maybe 30 seconds. If that’s your 9-year-old, do you want her standing out on Grove Street or Beacon Street or Dedham Street or Cabot Street waiting to get into the school?
I’m not arguing in favor of keeping doors unlocked. In fact, I probably am inclined in the other direction. But there are considerations that are not driven by political correctness, I think. And it doesn’t hurt to take a few days to think about them. Not a year to set up a task force, but a little bit of time.
That said, locking the doors in the meantime simply to help put people at ease seems completely logical to me.
@ Bill Brandel – If our SO CALLED Leaders would Lead we would not have this problem. The SC has been SILENT and the Superintendent should be reprimanded for publically stating that our schools doors are unlocked. Maybe as a former Alderman the Mayor might listen to you – Because he is not listening to US.
And to add – another parent is working on a petition to get our doors locked. I am sure we will be hearing about that soon too. We have facebook and a petition not to mention the many parents calling the Schools. And the Superintendent is still not listening to US.
We have Principals working on their own locking doors because the Superintendent is NOT doing his job. I guess they must think that the 93% are RIGHT.
And Emily is right – we are living in a twilight zone. And can we get Jim Marini Out of Retirement???
Gail – dont you think that the other 93% of schools have figured out how to run a school with a locked front door? Did Wellesley and Weston need to have community meeting to decide this- NO. It was decided by the leadership of the Superintendent.
Unfortunately we dont have a strong leader and therefore parents are scrambling to setup facebook pages, petition websites, setting up volunteer schedules to keep the front door safe and making calls and sending emails to the Mayor and Superintendent and neither one of them get it. Maybe they are busy working on their speeches for tonight.
This is so sad that in a community like Newton we have to waste all this energy to keep our children safe – when all they needed to do was lock the doors on Monday AM.
I say Vote NO for the Override – obviously neither our Mayor nor our Superintendent have any idea about community engagement or safety nor do they deserve any More money for our schools.
@Joanne – clearly this locked door issue is a passionate one this week for many people but why would you urge No on the override? The override isn’t about “the mayor deserving money for the schools”, its about our children deserving decent schools. The financial needs of our schools hasn’t changed since last week.
@Joanne,
I appreciate you’re outraged, but saying you’re going to vote no on the override because schools don’t lock their doors is misguided and, I think, misleading.
As someone else pointed out above, you voting no on the override really won’t have any bearing on whether or not the schools lock their doors — in fact, a defeated override will effectively kill the effort to reconstruct two schools into places where students can learn in an efficient, comfortable environment. More importantly, override reconstructed schools can be built to incorporate new safety designs (auto-lock doors with buzzers, cameras at the front doors, etc.) that can help protect our students.
I do not see why you would bring up voting no on the override unless you had already decided on your vote, and are now trying to hijack this thread to convince others to vote no, as well. I don’t think that is an appropriate place to take this thread, and perhaps you should be posting your thoughts on the override elsewhere.
The reality is, parents are scared, and have a right to be. School security is lacking in our city, but there is a conversation that should take place in our community about the ways our students should be protected. How far is too far, how far is not enough? Take the idea of front-door cameras, for example: some people will be in favor, because of the benefits of being able to identify strangers entering the school, and some people will be opposed, citing privacy concerns. Both sides should be listened to, and long-term solutions should be put into place that will best serve the safety needs of our schools and our students.
In the short term, there is no argument from me: the doors should be locked, and if candid conversations between students, parents, and teachers aren’t happening about safety and emergency procedures, they should. I was a freshman at Newton North when 9/11 happened, and the weeks immediately after my teachers talked to our classes about what had happened and what precautions were being taken to make sure we were all safe. We were also told about what to do in lockdown and shelter-in-place situations, and even had drills practicing going into lockdown and SIP.
To sum: in the short-term, go above-and-beyond to assure parents, students, and staff that safety is of chief importance, but the community should want to have a conversation with the best way to move proactively forward.
Jerry our children deserve to be SAFE. If the Mayor can’t figure that out it really wont matter what type of school they are schooled in.
He doesn’t deserve ANY more money if he doesn’t understand that our children are not safe in schools with open doors. He is not acting like a leader. This was the time he was supposed to show leadership and IMHO he let us down. And I voted for him and have supported him wholeheartedly – UNTIL Monday. When neither he nor the Superintendent could figure out that they need to LOCK THE School DOORS.
A different take on arming teachers:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/opinion/granderson-guns-in-schools/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Everything that PMJ said so well.
This is a difficult week and we just have to get through it. Our kids need us to remain calm, make reasoned decisions about school safety, and to keep daily routines in place.
I don’t understand why political beliefs about gun control or the override are part of the local conversation when another community is in deep mourning.
OK, Mike, you want to balance the “bad” guys with guns with “good” guys with guns, I understand that idea. But then everybody has guns, right? So, the road rage will definitely involve guns.
In Russia in the 90-s I saw exactly this scenario: mafia soldiers got out of cars with guns and shoot-outs happened. There was this joke at that time:
Yeltsin persuaded his driver to let him drive his limo and hit a mafia’s Mercedes. A mafia soldier got out, pointed his gun at Yeltsin, turned around, ran back to his Mercedes and said: Let’s get out of here, I don’t know who those guys are, but their driver is Yeltsin!”
I want to reinforce Bill Brandel’s comment about discussing security vulnerabilities at specific schools. This is the world wide web. What you write right now may be being read anywhere in the word. Personally, I was outraged that our Superintendent pretty much advertised security vulnerabilities in today’s TAB article. I think this was a reckless lack of judgement with the potential of putting children at risk. At worst, it was an invitation to those with bad intentions Unprofessional, indiscrete or imprudent is an understatement for this media fiasco. This is a big deal. IMHO, Fleishman should lose his job over it because the safety of our children is the most important thing and we should not continue to employ anyone who does not understand that. Seeing a photo of the elementary school that my children attended in the article struck an even deeper chord of outrage, vulnerability and a betrayal of confidence for me. In a time when leadership should be making people feel protected and assured, Fleishman’s colossal lack of judgement about revealing security weaknesses is making my family feel vulnerable and exposed.
I simply don’t understand the current discrepancy between policy and practice. School systems have policies. How can a couple of schools go rogue and not practice the policy/philosophy of their superintendent? If Fleishman feels so passionately about his point of view regarding open communities, why isn’t he forcing Lincoln-Eliot and Peirce to remain unlocked.?
As for locked doors not making a difference… They did not make a difference in preventing the casualties that occurred, but they definitely prevented more casualties. A locked entrance meant that the shooter had to shoot his way into the building, instead of just walking in. The noise involved in this meant that the school secretary in the front office followed security protocol and turned on the school p.a. system, allowing all of the other classrooms to hear gunfire and begin lockdown procedures. These were split-second occurrences. When split seconds can make a difference, I want my children, and all of Newton’s children to have the split seconds that a locked front entrance provides.
@jane, you may have missed tonight’s vigil at the War Memorial. It was a solemn and beautiful tribute and service to the 20 children and 7 adults who were struck down by a senseless act of gun violence in a public elementary school. The Mayor and Superintendent both spoke eloquently about the pain and sorrow being felt in Newtown and in sympathy in virtually every other community around the nation. They also both came out strongly in favor of sensible legislation to reduce gun violence. I thought it was entirely appropriate, and made me proud to live in Newton.
That said, I am with you on the override thing. I don’t get the connection there at all.
It was my understanding that over the past few years the elementary school doors that lead to recess areas were retro-fitted with those swipey key card things (I believe that’s the technical term) so doors could remain locked and teachers and students could easily get back inside. Is that not true at all the schools? On another note – the idea of volunteers at the main door of a school is ludicrous. They have no training, and can’t have (or shouldn’t have) important information about things like restraining orders and custody issues. And they shouldn’t bear the responsibility.
@Tricia I cannot speak to whether all the doors were retrofitted but at least at this time it is not the case that all schools are locked when school is in session.
Ted-I’m totally with you on the gun control issue, feel that it needs to be addressed, have signed more petitions this week than I can count, made calls, etc. I was referring to repeated and lengthy public comments on the local blogs that seem to have an uncomfortable disconnect to the tragedy in Newtown.
My experience has been the same as Margaret’s visiting schools. I’ve been to schools all around the Greater Lowell/Merrimack Valley on photo assignments, and during the school day at least, the normal thing is to ring a buzzer and be let in, and usually a sign-in sheet as well. That’s during the normal school day. If it’s after school or on weekends with an event going on, like a basketball game, performance, holiday fair, school committee meeting, etc., anyone can just walk in. So do we need metal detectors at concerts? Basketball games? I suppose there may be inner-city schools that do that. And if school are open to the public for events, how does one be sure the child molester/gunman/terrorist doesn’t hide out in a closet until the next school day? If schools are fortresses, do movie theatres, ice rinks, restaurants need to be as well?
Why did I not have to worry about this going to Newton High in the 1970s, walking freely in and out of Buildings I, II and III? What happened in 40 years that we are such a different place?
I wasn’t able to make the vigil as I am currently living in a different part of the state, but I’m glad the powers that be in Newton used it as a soap box to sell a political agenda, definitely politics in spirit.
As awful as I’m sure some of you find it that I think having armed teachers is a better answer than locking the doors (which the city won’t even do, and great point about them advertising they won’t do that as well), I think it equally awful that you think it appropriate to tell me how to protect my family, and refuse to look at any option that makes you feel “uncomfortable” despite evidence that it does in actuality increase safety. MOST people in any sort of security industry understand where I am coming from…
Mike