Security - It Really is a T or F Question
I know many of you when you read the title thought, “Yep,
security is a true or false question.
You’ve either got it or you don’t.
Well, purposefully I didn’t spell out what the T and F stood for. It isn’t
true or false.
As many of you know, for some time now I’ve been advocating
for a softer approach to security, especially when it comes to the design and
layout of high-occupancy spaces.
And
during my years of advocacy I’m come across some, who will agree, and others
that play lip service and say, “Oh yea, that’s what we should do.”
And when they have their next opportunity to
make the change they go back to their olds ways with the bigger, better,
faster, stronger, in your face approach.
Recently, while collaborating with a local school district
we took a softer approach.
After an
active shooter threat (fortunately stopped prior to being carried out due to
social media monitoring), parents wanted the District to heighten security by
adding guards and cameras, and constructing fences on the perimeter.
They wanted this because that’s what they’ve
been seeing on TV.
After every school
shooting, there’s a rush to install more cameras, higher fences, and to hire more
guards.
I don’t blame the parents; I
blame the security companies who are selling their products with the idea that
if one is good, two must be better – the more products sold the better for the
bottom-line.
Some may argue that adding
visible, in your face, deterrence works.
I’ll admit, there is some benefit; however, a dedicated threat will not
be deterred – they will bring the tools necessary to circumvent whatever is in
place. That said, we can argue until the cows come home about the
benefits.
From my point of view, it’s
not about effectiveness.
It’s about the
psychological impact it has on our youth.
Recently, a local school board approved a bond for security
upgrades.
The newspaper ran a picture of
a ten foot metal fence gate to allow campus entry and mentioned that everyone
would go through a metal detector.
I showed
the article to a Latino friend of mine and he said, “They’re always looking
at us like we’re all criminals.
The guys
are in gangs and the girls are ‘ho’s.”
Is this the intended message?
Additionally, research shows us that “hardening” causes
anxiety and even affects performance.
https://network.aia.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=110227d5-dde4-9c0d-fa52-a23257148cca
Our approach is to add security features that are “hidden in
plain sight”.
For example, instead of a
fence to keep out trespasser we suggest a buried co-axial cable sensor
system.
It provides a warning that
someone has breached the perimeter, yet is unseen.
Another example, to keep unauthorized folks
off of the roof we suggest placing large flower pots with bougainvillea near
drainage pipes or next to other features that a person could climb to get to
the roof.
Again, a solution that is unseen.
My article published in
American
Security Today magazine January 2020
https://view.joomag.com/2019-champions-edition-2019-champions-edition/0683429001578075665/p148?short
So
which message do we want to send?
The
message that we don’t trust you and we think there will be an incident or the
message that we trust you, we expect you to act trustworthy and you can expect
the same of others?
My book,
The Solutions
Matrix: a Practical Guide to Soft
Security Engineering for Architects, Engineers, Facility Managers, Planner and
Security Professionals has a Quick Glance Checklist that will allow you to
list your current security solutions and then list your ideas on how to take a
softer approach.
Order your copy today
via the CONTACT US link at
https://hainessecuritysolutions.com
No comments:
Post a Comment