Wait: Did you just spend a paragraph trying to argue against my position, then agree with what I said by saying that the schools you reference allow teachers to use multiple entry points and students to use "one, two at most"?
Yeah, those aren't cases of a single entry point, and that's exactly my point. Twenty years ago, my high school only allowed students to enter in one of two entrances: the main front entrance or the main back entrance. It had nothing to do with students bringing in guns. It had to do with there being two main parking lots students could park in, as well as where the buses dropped students off at the school.
And it's simply not feasible, which is what your own source just admitted for many buildings. Tell me, how do you "regular access at the campus level" if all entrances can't be regulated like your article claims? Exit doors cannot be locked from the inside. It's illegal and a huge safety issue. Even with a single entry system, there has to be numerous exit areas that can easily be used as entrances. You simply cannot have an officer at every single exit. Cameras and an alarm at each exit door won't be sufficient; it takes less than ten seconds for somebody to open the exit door (the alarm sounds), grab a bag that or gun that had been dropped there three minutes earlier, and be back inside.
Are you going to make every single exit a double exit system at every single school. Those would be like the ones at airports - as you exit, the first door opens. The second door to leave the building won't open until the first one closes. At that point, you're basically in purgatory in between both doors. As you proceed to leave, the second door opens after the first one closes. You couldn't bring an outdoor weapon in that way. But the cost to do that to every single door in every single school? Good luck with that.
Yes, exactly like I just said. Care to consider the cost of doing that at more than a dozen exits in a school?
Then, that isn't a single entry system. My god, you don't even know what you're arguing.
That isn't the case at all. You're too stupid to be able to read what your own source is saying. E.T. quoted it for you. Your own source says that if there are other secondary points of entry that are easily defeated, which I have shown the feasibility of happening being quite high, it renders the single entry point useless.
That's exactly my point. Unless you want an armed guard at every exit (extremely expensive) or unless you want a double door entry system (which I went over is also extremely expensive), your single entry point does very little help. Hell, your own source admits that!
Yes, that is to protect students from outsiders. It isn't to protect students from students. If you're already inside, as students have access to be, they can easily work around a single entry point system by the way I stated.
You aren't very bright. I wonder if you have ever used logic in your life. Ever been to places like Langley, the Pentagon, or the White House? I have. Those places aren't nearly as concerned about their own attacking their own. Their systems are in place to defend their own from outsiders.
You don't have to go to a metal detector to get into Langley. You can drive your own car in, park in the parking lot, and enter the Bush Center (the headquarters) without any metal detector (unless it has changed in the last seven years). Now, getting to that point is a bit more difficult if you aren't a regular employee there - you drive through a checkpoint with bomb sniffing dogs and heavily armed guards, have to show your ID, and have to match their guest list at the gate. But if you're on the list, it is very easy to bring a gun(s) inside the headquarters.
Why do they make it like this? Because they aren't worried about their own attacking their own. Their goal is to defend their own from outsiders. If you're on the list, you are considered one of their own. At that point, you have far less security to get through than getting on a plane.
That's different than the mass shootings at schools where it has been "inside jobs."
The White House, Pentagon, and Langley aren't as concerned about one of their own giving access to an outsider to come in and attack. They all have decent security measures surrounding their complexes to make it tough, but it isn't impossible because that isn't their main focus.
At schools, it would be one of their own they are worried about - somebody who is granted access and then can use another entry to bring in the security issue.
