Disaster Management In Schools
Over the years, security agencies have been encouraged to adopt preventive measures as an efficient way to curb insecurity extensively terrorism. This will help the agencies to thwart or pre-empt planned attacks consequently saving the loss of human life and property damage. To ensure that preventive measures provide a long-lasting solution, security agencies in partnership with various institutions adopted measures that enhanced surveillance of arguably all activities from one command centre. This has also encouraged installing and using metal detectors to prevent particularly harmful tools from being sneaked into the institutions. However, this has rubbed some individuals the wrong way especially those who are continuously frisked to ensure they comply with the requirements put in place. The argument has been, the war to curb disaster and related issues should be ideological rather than employing physical approach (Lemire 2015). Those for this idea argue that individuals should be consistently encouraged to at all times hold human life with dignity. This means that the moral perspective or upbringing should emphasise more on teaching individuals how to co-exist with their colleagues. Adoption of ideological approach is furthermore advocated as opposed to other approaches which critics argue that they more or less make individuals feel victimised.
Another easier and effective approach said to help in reducing disaster incidences like killings in schools is to establish the root cause or factors that may be contributing to such incidences (Teasley 2013). Mostly, racial and religious intolerance has been said to be the leading factors here. Mental disorder and anger management issues are also said to cause a substantial proportion of these disasters. With this in mind, experts, therefore, suggest dealing with these issues from the bottom would certainly reduce the immoralities and insecurity witnessed. They suggest that there should be lessons integrated into the education curriculum which is mostly aimed to enlighten the students that religious or racial diversion should not be used as a discrimination factor whatsoever. These lessons should not only apply to the students or younger population, but also to the general public. To enhance discipline and safety in learning institutions, there should be clear set rules which students should adhere to at all times. The rules should among other things stipulate that any student caught having breached the rules by sneaking any material perceived to be a weapon without the consent of the authority would be permanently discontinued and furthermore be punished by law. To avoid frisking exercises and use of metal detectors, parents should be given the responsibility to ensure that their children comply with the set rules. This policy is more or less meant to advocate for parental responsibility in ensuring the children confine themselves to the set rules and guidelines.
However, the use of metal detectors should not be seen as a policy meant to torment the students or other stakeholders. Contrary to this, it should be seen as an approach whose intention was to ensure that the security and safety of the students are guaranteed. This means that before fully doing away with the metal detectors, an attainable and realistic policy should be put in place which will ensure that the safety of the students is not compromised (Greene 2005). To ensure that children or students are exonerated from frequent checks, including the use of metal detectors, there should be a clear law passed to ensure that the students are barred from accessing and holding weapons. To achieve this, good co-operation among all stakeholders is eminent.
Greene, M. (2005). Reducing Violence and Aggression in Schools. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6(3), 236-253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524838005277406
Lemire.J (2015) Calls mount to remove NYPD metal detectors in schools, associated press.
Teasley, M. (2013). School Violence Reduction and Related Services Personnel. Children &Schools, 35(4), 195-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdt020