Metal Detectors in Schools – Rumors, Claims and Myths
School metal detector options and capabilities are rapidly expanding as the economics of the market becomes more competitive and scalable. Yet metal detectors remain an uncommon staple in schools overall.
Each manufacturer offers systems that can vary widely in cost, supported by sometimes lofty but well-intended sales messages designed to set themselves apart that further confuse and even deter buyers, while decreasing the confidence and diluting the practicality of the solutions.
Each offering has advantages and disadvantages, so we’d like to provide “practical advice from the practitioners” based on our experience in recent years selecting, procuring, installing, and operating these capabilities that may help facilitate the decisions to implement metal detectors (or not)...
There are several factors to think through when considering implementing metal detectors:
Metal Detectors are not 100% effective.
Several factors can affect their performance, reliability, and practicality as a security countermeasure:
Staffing and Training:
A small percentage of schools across the US routinely use metal detectors.
Earlier this year, referring to a survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, the Washington Post reported only approximately 3% of elementary schools and 12% of high schools across the United States have deployed metal detectors to screen all students daily or conduct random checks on entering students. Additionally, in many cases, there has been pushback in communities centering on the use of metal detectors offering little to no threat mitigation, while, according to the U.S. Department of Education, being more likely deployed in where more than 75% of the population are minorities and creating a prison-like feel, further adding to the controversy.
They should not be used as a stand-alone solution.
Considering their current limitations, metal detectors should not be regarded as a stand-alone solution but can be a critical part of a more comprehensive security program and supporting infrastructure.
When made part of a comprehensive security program built upon sound security fundamentals, including Protection-In-Depth and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles, with supporting policies, procedures, and controls, they can be an effective tool in helping to mitigate the threat of weapons in our schools. Additionally, when included as part of a school’s modern security infrastructure that provides for digital access control, high-resolution video, supporting video analytics, visual weapons recognition, and in-classroom emergency communications, their effectiveness as part of a more comprehensive solution can increase exponentially.
Legal, Compliance, Ethics and Culture
Metal detectors in schools can be a contentious topic, and the effectiveness of their use as a security measure depends on several factors, including:
Summary
Adequate security is about identifying risks and minimizing enabling variables, including introducing metal weapons and objects that can be used as weapons. Metal detectors are becoming increasingly sophisticated and more accurate. When made part of a comprehensive security program and supporting technology infrastructure, they can be part of a practical set of countermeasures that can significantly increase a school’s security.
However, they have drawbacks and limitations, including technical, operational, staffing, regulatory, and cultural, that must be carefully considered in any school's selection, deployment, and use.