Bob Francis says:

Anything for a buck!

pwils says:

Security cameras might be good, armed people and body searches. This is the US isn’t it? Last time I looked anyway…..

Sounds to me like the Univ should have posted an alarm on the first shooting no matter what they thought it might be. At least then the students would have been aware that something was going on……….

pwils says:

So that you understand my comment a little better above………..I just want to say, that I meant security cameras would be good but I think body searches and armed guards are beyond what this country stands for and represents.

Karen says:

What an ass.

pwils says:

Who are you calling an ass? The company trying to make the bucks I hope.

Andrew says:

Of course! (Karen = the wife)

Emily says:

@pwils

I believe the administration used email, early on, to alert the students not to leave their rooms.

pwils says:

Actually they did not send out an email until about 9:20 am

lionemom says:

Yeah, because all of these measures - besides being the type of thing I would expect on the premises of, say, a contractor’s office in Iraq - wouldn’t cause 6 and 7 year old kids to have nightmares that someone is hunting them down to shoot them, or to grow up with anxiety and panic disorders.

AG says:

Doors closed and locked FROM THE OUTSIDE during the day… right, ’cause fires never break out in schools… dude, so glad you got this and not me. (And that’s aside from the timing, which is simply beneath contempt.) Nice of the spokesmushroom (not my term, damn it all, but the guy I stole it from knew I would) to be an idiot right at the beginning of the release so’s you could skip reading the rest.

Christy says:

While I certainly understand the intense outrage over this whole mess, I have to wonder why everyone is so upset with this e-mail. To say that the timing is “beneath contempt” is missing the whole point, as far as I’m concerned. It seems to me that securing the campus would be priority number one and the faster that can be achieved, the better. What good is going to come of sitting around and waiting to discuss these issues? Why not implement upgraded security measures now so that future incidents can be avoided? Although there are loathsome people out there whose only concern is profitting on the pain of others, I seriously doubt that was the case here. This was a tragic event that affected everyone, in one way or another. Pointing fingers and placing blame on people who are only trying to help is both useless and counterproductive.

Maggie says:

its certainly easy to point fingers as a self-important blogger sitting behind a computer assuming people give a crap about what you have to say. maybe perhaps you’re directing your anger towards the wrong target.

Tommy J says:

I am going to have to agree with Christy and Maggie on this issue here. What happened was horrible event and blaming someone who is trying to help out in the end is horrible in itself. I see why Kantor had a little hissy fit but why point and blame at someone who is trying to implement a safety plan. Thumbs up to you.

Emily says:

You thought that was a plan?

Randy says:

I don’t care if people agree or disagree with Andrew here. I can see why he thinks it crass, and I can see why others disagree. Personally, I expect such tragedy opportunistic self-selling - that’s what we humans do. I just have to wonder what exactly most of these steps would have done to prevent this incident?

Locked doors from the outside? Suuuuuure. Sounds like another Triangle Shirtwaist factory catastrophe waiting to happen. Worse, this actually encourages those wanting to go on a slaying rampage to simply set buildings on fire.

What good would closed circuit have done? OK, so they would have known a minute faster where Cho was when he started shooting.

Metal detectors/turnstiles? Are we talking for all entry on to campus, or for each entryway into each building? If the former, talk about your inefficiencies and bottlenecks - it will never fly in the US, and unless it also includes vehicle searches it won’t even protect against those intending to do something bad. And I have my doubts about vehicle searches ever getting approved for all campus entrance points at any university. If the latter, well, the shooter would only have needed to shoot the guard and the metal detector, then chain and lock that one door from the inside. Now he’s blocked everyone from getting in, so why even care if he is seen on closed-circuit TV?

Neither guest registration nor resident ID badges would have done anything. Being able to identify someone does nothing for knowing the threat level of that someone - hasn’t Bruce Schneier covered this enough to get people to realize this?) And the shooter was a student, so he would have had a resident ID anyway.

Open communication with local police wasn’t an issue here - law enforcement officials were already on campus.

The only good thing I see in there is #4 - teaching how to react in a crisis situation.

Overall, I think the thing about this letter that matters is the poor recommendations, strategies that wouldn’t have had any impact on the success or failure of the VT shooter, and improbable suggestions for changes at schools and universities. If this was the best that a security company could come up with, I don’t think I’d care to have a business relationship with that security company.

Dana says:

Looks like some company folks have found this post — probably while googling for articles after their pr blitz. As if sending obvious boilerplate in an attempt to drum up business after a TRAGEDY would result in a positive article anywhere. They are probably lucky no one wrote about their lame attempt to look relevant and knowledgeable.