Public Watchdog.org

School Shooting Statistics An April Fool’s Joke…On The Taxpayers

04.04.16

We just saw the April 1, 2016 statistic-based comment on the Park Ridge Concerned Homeowners Group FB page by resident Josh Kiem, made in response to the March 22 post by Kathy Panattoni Meade about Park Ridge-Niles School District 64’s plan to spend $8-$10 million on not-really-secured vestibules.

Kiem cited a Wikipedia compendium of school shootings since 1764. Not shooting deaths, mind you, just shooting incidents. And he decided to focus on shooting data from 1990 to the present. Basically 25 years.

The statistics he found will likely surprise nobody but the usual flock of Chicken Littles who think kids – or at least their kids – deserve to be bubble-wrapped and garage kept, at the taxpayers’ expense; and most members of the D-64 Board and Administration, who apparently were born without the common sense gene.

According to the Wikipedia post, from 1990 to 2015, there were 7 shooting incidents in elementary schools and only 35 such incidents in middle schools. That’s 42 incidents over 25 years in schools like D-64’s. Or an average of 1.7 incidents per year throughout a system of 66,689 elementary and middle schools.

Frankly, that minimal level of risk doesn’t even justify the $840,000 the D-64 Board voted, at its March 21 meeting, to spend this summer on a not-really-secured vestibule just for Washington School.

That doesn’t matter to Supt. Laurie Heinz and the District’s new business czarina Luann Kolstad, neither of whom pay Park Ridge property taxes while reaping fat salaries and benefits funded by people who DO pay those property taxes. But expect Heinz and Kolstad to cite these “security achievements” as performance achievements when it comes time for another one-year, one quarter-million dollar-plus contract extension and raise (Heinz) and raise to her solidly six-figure salary (Kolstad) – even though neither Heinz nor Kolstad seem able to improve either student performance on benchmark standardized tests, or the related rankings of the District’s schools against schools in comparable communities.

That’s because improving academic performance is a lot tougher and uncertain than blowing $8-10 million on brick and mortar.

Meanwhile, these not-really-secured vestibules won’t make the D-64 schools measurably more secure against a student, parent, teacher, repairman or deliveryman who gains access to the schools with a MAC-10, a ball bearing-filled suicide vest, or even a knife or two.

We’re not saying that reconfiguring entranceways so that they funnel visitors into the school’s office is not what currently passes for a “best practice.” But unless that office is operated like a sally port that can effectively lock in armed visitors – assuming they can be identified as “armed” – funneling them into it doesn’t prevent those visitors from opening fire in there before extending the carnage to the rest of the building.

And it does nothing to detect weaponry being carried in by off-kilter students or teachers.

Throwing big money at not-really-secured vestibules, however, does meet the purely political needs of school administrators like Heinz and Kolstad, and Board members like Tony Borrelli, Scott Zimmerman, Vickie Lee and Bob Johnson – who voted 4-2 (Mark Eggemann and Tom Sotos “no,” Dathan Paterno MIA), to appear to be doing something about school safety, no matter how half-baked and cost-ineffective that something might be. And new brick-and-mortar becomes a convenient and tangible prop with which those administrators and Board members can dazzle gullible residents.

Ask yourself: Is this the best way D-64 can spend $8-10 million of the taxpayers’ money? Or even the $860,000 for Washington’s not-really-secured vestibules?

If your answer is “no,” then it’s time you contacted Borrelli, Zimmerman, Lee and Johnson to demand they make a motion to reconsider (only somebody who voted for the Washington School boondoggle can move to reconsider) at the Board’s next meeting and then vote to kill this stupid and wasteful expenditure.

But if your answer is “yes,” you’re probably already spending a fortune on bubble-wrap.

To read or post comments, click on title.

41 comments so far

Mr. Kiem deserves some credit for bringing this data to your and, in return, our attention.

“Chicken Littles” is right. Even without knowing this data, the security vestibules idea sounded like a waste of money. In light of the data spending $8-10 million that the district could be spending on actual education sounds almost criminal.

Which 1.7 children are not worthy of protection?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Why aren’t you asking Tony Borrelli and his Board, or Laurie Heinz and her administrators, why the 4,500+ kids in their care “are not worthy of protection” by meaningful measures like armed security guards and/or metal detectors?

They’re the ones who have repeatedly said the district’s schools are inadequately secured, yet they don’t care enough to hire security guards to deal with whatever current threats there might be. And they’re the ones who want to waste $8-10 million on not-really-secured vestibules but who don’t care enough to include the metal detectors that would detect the guns and knives most likely to harm the kids.

Oh, yeah, and they’re the one who don’t care enough to enclose the playgrounds to protect all those kids from drive-by shootinngs or other threats during gym or recess.

8:35am: How much protection do those 1.7 children deserve? $1.7 million? $7.7 million? $70.7 million?

How about the next 1.7 children who will die of cancer at LGH, how many millions of dollars should we spend to try to save them?

This is another “there goes Elvis” moment from District 64. Nobody there has been talking nuts and bolts education, they are focused on security.

EDITOR’S NOTE: That IS typical “there goes Elvis” strategy practiced by highly-paid “professionals” – Heinz and Kolstad -who are far better at their jobs of wasting taxpayer money and avoiding accountability than their overseers (the D-64 Board) are at theirs.

Good stats but pearls before swine.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Swine may be smarter.

8:35am: How much protection do those 1.7 children deserve? $1.7 million? $7.7 million? $70.7 million?

How about the next 1.7 children who will die of cancer at LGH, how many millions of dollars should we spend to try to save them?

According to you, pubdog, eggman and sotos…apparently zero, zilch, nada.
Why worry about such things when your self interest in keeping your pocket book fat rather than supporting the school district that keeps your property values high bc of the quality of those schools (perceived or actual quality it still benefits your property values friends so careful what you defund -you might outsmart yourselves by following the beat of pubdog’s self interested drum )

EDITOR’S NOTE: The stupidity – or ignorance – of your comments is revealed by your reference to “keeping your pocket book fat” – because the $8-10 million that’s going to be wasted by D-64 on these not-really-secured vestibules won’t be more than a Starbucks latte or three for most taxpayers. Nothing but a red herring.

But that level of stupidity/ignorance suggests you’re a member of the D-64 Board majority or administration that is using “security” as your “There goes Elvis!” misdirection. No surprise there.

they don’t care enough to hire security guards to deal with whatever current threats there might be.

If pubdog you are truly advocating security guard bc that would be safer and cheaper than a vestibule …wouldn’t we need at least two security guards per school? One at the door that could stop someone from walking directly through classrooms rather than being stuck in glass enclosure or stuck trying to get out of office giving police more time to respond and likely 2 out in the field on either end to protect the 60 or so kids out at gym class? that isconservatively (according to salary.com) 27k -35k per year per guard (unless we make them district employees then add pension liability) per school so the 800k for vestibule will run out in 8 years if salaries don’t increase.
Your condo has a vestibule. They don’t allow people to roam your condo halls without getting buzzed in. Not a perfect security measure but more safe than not having Any.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Ah, you’re back, this time anonymously instead of as “Wake Up Caller.”

Our point is simple: THERE IS NO REALISTIC SECURITY THREAT AT THESE SCHOOLS. And if there IS one, then leaving these schools without security guards while they remain without those not-really-secured vesibules is irresponsible and reckless at best.

Hardening the campus entry is a best practice advocated by top security professionals across the country. It’s a concept that can work on virtually any school and provides a high degree of security for a relatively limited investment.

https://webspm.com/Articles/2014/12/01/Secure-Environment.aspx?m=1&Page=2

Why do you and the sheep that blindly follow your greedy and moronic logic keep wanting our schools not to keep up with what best practices are around the country. Having well maintained facilities is an important factor and often fosters better academic progress and more important encourages the perception that the schools are well cared for attracting residents with children increasing demand for our housing and ultimately increasing property values.

EDITOR’S NOTE: “Hardening the campus entry”? Seriously? “Hardening”? We’re in sleepy Park Ridge, IL, not Fallujah or Tikrit!

But if you really want to “harden” things, why not add metal detectors? And how about “hardening” the playgrounds where anybody from anywhere can just drive or walk up and spray the area with a MAC 10 or Bushmaster? Or yank a kid or two into a van and take off?

As for your link to “School Planning & Management” magazine, you’re kidding, right? That rag is basically an Amway catalog for the school vendor community. So either you’re one of D-64’s boneheaded board members or administrators trying to defend a dumber-than-normal decision, or you’re from FGM/Nicholas and worried about losing your piece of that $8-10 million not-really-secured vestibules pie. Either way, come out of the closet and let the public know who’s behind all your silly comments.

But if you’re so hung up on “best practices,” why not focus on the best educational practices that actually improve not only the “perceived” educational quality (from your 04.06.16 8:15 pm comment) but the real, objectively-measurable kind that competing districts keep producing while D-64 stagnates or declines?

I never thought I would stoop to this particular banality, but here it goes: OMG!

That article listed in the 8:17 AM comment is panic peddling at its absolute worst. “It’s no longer reasonable to postpone taking action to protect students citing budgetary concerns,” writes Patrick V. Fiel, Sr., a “security consultant” to a manufacturer of video entry systems for schools, businesses and residences.

I cannot imagine how stupid and naive our school board and admin have to be to buy into this kind of blatant marketing crap for “multiple layers of security between potentially dangerous visitors and children on campus.”

This causes me to wonder if somebody really is on the take, because nobody can or should be stupid enough not to see through it.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Exactly. And how many “layers of security” are D-64 interposing between “potentially dangerous visitors and children” on the playgrounds, or in front of the school entry-ways?

Ok since you and your sheep didn’t like that particular “publication” I did a quick Google search that revealed too many to count school districts across the country considering building or already built secure vestibules ….see small sample below…Google yourself…some of your bobble head followers might not know how to google search so help them out the way you spoon Feed them your moronic greedy anti child propaganda.

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20140829/news/140828207/

http://www.nj.com/south-jersey-towns/index.ssf/2015/09/school_year_opens_with_new_ves.html

http://www.canyonsdistrict.org/district-news/item/3454-coming-in-2015-2016-security-vestibules-for-elementaries

https://www.reynolds.k12.or.us/district/rfp-cmgc-secure-vestibules-districtwide-3-28-16

http://www.schoolnewsnetwork.org/index.php/2014-15/schools-spend-big-tighten-security-we-live-different-world/

EDITOR’S NOTE: When Mark Twain said “God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board,” his observation wasn’t limited to D-64’s. Or D-207’s, for that matter.

Just to drive the point home that district 64 is not the only district in the nation “so stupid” to install secure vestibule..if you are to believe pubdog our school district is trying to do something so out in left field that they should be scorned for it, below are a few only article of othe districts implementing vestibules and one talking about putting fences around playgrounds like all schools have in the U.K. But I guess these thousands of other school board members are incompetent too? Right dog?

http://www.fortbendisd.com/Page/1111

http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south-jersey/2015/09/04/washington-twp-vestibules/71712324/

http://woodtv.com/2015/08/27/security-improvements-at-rockford-schools/

http://www.allenisd.org/Page/1487

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/mtg01/malone-school-district-expands-vestibule-at-davis-elementary-20160113&template=mwdt

EDITOR’S NOTE: See the EDITOR’S NOTE to your previous comment.

The dumb-as-a-stump, herd-like mentality of American elementary and secondary school administrators and board members is one of the main reasons those two systems dropped out of the world’s Top Ten (and are unlikely to return) even though we remain in the Top Five in spending.

– because the $8-10 million that’s going to be wasted by D-64 on these not-really-secured vestibules won’t be more than a Starbucks latte or three for most taxpayers.

So stop belly-aching, skip your latte and support the improvement to the facilities of the institution that keeps your property value from sinking -real estate reports say prices in park ridge up 15% despite other nearby areas flat or going down.

Geez-you people fancy yourselves fiscally-wise?! Like the dumb leading the dumber when it comes to pubdog trying to defund our local education and his brainless board member and online supportive commentators following along by the nose. Baaaaa baaaaa come little sheep follow uncle bob to the slaughter. Wake up.

EDITOR’S NOTE: …says the perpetual sleep-walker whose last few comments demonstrate why he/she hides behind the anonymity we permit.

The people who are “defund[ing] our local education” are the boneheaded board members and administrators who are wasting $8-10 million on brick and mortar (presumably because there’s not quite enough between their ears to do all eight schools) on not-really-secured vestibules instead of on actual education.

We’re in sleepy Park Ridge, IL, not Fallujah or Tikrit!

So to follow your logic dog…our sleepy little town is safe so let’s not waste dollars on making this somewhat more secure…light bulb…more ways to save money:
Why does our sleepy little town need so many police with their pesky salaries and pensions and expenses on such unnecessary things for our sleepy lil town as bullets and guns. We can save so much money if we hired Andy and Barney and give them each one bullet to keep in their respective shirt pockets.
Oh and by the way the statistics for deaths in fires in park ridge is lower than 1.7 children that get shot (property damage is covered by insurance) so let’s scale back it elimnate our fire department too? Brilliant pubdog and bob-ble head sheep …
Education, like our military, police, fire, public works are unfortunately costly but important and useful parts of our society. Here a novel idea…let’s support them rather than try to tear them down?

EDITOR’S NOTE: This isn’t about “education,” this is about a threat so minimal that this school board and administration don’t even see the need to address it TODAY (e.g., by security guards at each school) while their $8-10 million boondoggle – the not-really-secured vestibules program – is so patently b.s. that even they, as silly and shameless spendthrifts as they may be, don’t have the political nerve to build more than one right now, and that one not until this summer.

You say your point is there is no realistic threat to security at our schools. I’m sure the folks in Columbine and Newtown thought the exact same thing. I don’t know if these vestibules are the answer. I’m just glad no one has suggested arming the teachers is another one.

EDITOR’S NOTE: And we’re sure the folks in the WTC towers never thought terrorists would fly planes into those buildings, either, but tens of thousands of people here in Chicago still work in the Willis Tower and AON bulding, and live in the Hancock Building and Trump Tower.

But if you really “don’t know if these vestibules are the answer,” then why would you just sit back and scratch your head (or other body parts) while our school board and administration waste $8-10 MILLION on them?

but tens of thousands of people here in Chicago still work in the Willis Tower and AON bulding, and live in the Hancock Building and Trump Tower.

Yes pubdog NOTHING has changed since 911 about security?! Have you walked into the Willis -metal detectors went up, TSA was formed etc etc. you really do try to misdirect don’t you

EDITOR’S NOTE: Thie issue is RISK, which is a function of probabilies and extent of harm.

It the “threat to security at our schools” WAS “realistic,” then there currently would be security guards at every school protecting those kids until the not-really-secured vestibules are built. But it’s not “realistic,” and the board members and administrators know it.

Which is why there are no guards, and why they are outfitting only one school but hoping that singularity can spur enough dull-witted, Chicken Little parents to demand “my kids, too!” to speed the rest of the wasteful project thoughtlessly along – and without the metal detectors that are S.O.P. for places that actually have “realistic” risk.

So this is just another “Look, there goes Elvis!” artifice – albeit an $8-10 million one – for distracting attention away from the fact that the school board’s and administration’s ongoing mismanagement of our schools continues to produce students whose objectively-measurable educational performance is nowhere close to where it should be. And which feeds under-educated kids into Maine South, thereby helping to keep that school’s performance on its own slide-path.

your either dumb or dishonest that so many school boards across the nation are spending money on vestibules “just to spend” without any honest belief that it will make children somewhat safer. Just like metal detectors at Willis (despite risk being the same) are not perfect but add more safety to some degree in actuality and in perception to keep people from panicking and to continue to work in the building. Same with taking shoes off at airport is it THE solution? No. Does it help to a degree? Yes.
Come on. Stop misleading the sheep that follow you blindly.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Spending “just to spend” is what school boards do best. Educating…not so much. That explains the U.S.’s high-priced-but-not-high-achieving world elementary and secondary education rankings despite an endless procession of faux-silver bullet remedies like No Child Left Behind, Common Core, Every Student Succeeds, yada yada yada.

And, no, the risk at Willis is not “the same” as it used to be, especially because Willis (then Sears) was identified back around the time of 9/11 as being a potential terrorist target.

$8-10 million on not-really-secured vestibules that may help “to a degree” is the height of boneheadedess. But assuming you buy that half-witted premise, why stop at “to a degree” when metal detectors would help a whole lot more, if the threat were truly legitimate? Which it isn’t, which is why nobody at D-64 is talking about metal detectors or about security guards to protect the kids and staff until the not-really-secured vestibules are installed at all of the D-64 schools.

So if it’s “sheep” you’re looking for, look no further than the next D-64 board meeting and see if you can detect the faint traces of mint jelly on Borrelli, Zimmerman, Lee and Johnson as they baaaaaa meekly at whatever “Little Bo” Heinz tells them to do.

So Willis being identified as a terror target justifies increased spending on security measures?
so since school would never be a terror target we shouldn’t spend money for n security?
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2015/12/police-investigate-terror-threat-against-pinkston-high-martinez-elementary.html/

EDITOR’S NOTE: No, Wills (then Sears) was identified as the target of an actual bombing plot in 2006, leading to the arrest and conviction (in 2009) of 5 terrorists, who received between 6 and 13 years in prison. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2009/11/20/sears-tower-terror-plot-leader-gets-year-sentence.html

Got evidence of any such plots for Emerson, Field or Washington?

No such specific evidence just like no such specific evidence for Aon center trump etc or for columbine etc
Again you are either dumb or dishonest and just banking on park ridge tax payers being dumber than you. School districts across the nation are evaluating safety the same way just as high rise towers (specifically identified or generally identified like us schools) have evaluated their security same way.

If you logic held true about our specific schools not being specifically targeted so no need to spend on security-then park ridge should stop spending on a police force -I guess by your logic our city council is not serious about securing park ridge otherwise they would spend on tanks,a secure gate at the boarders with armed guards and maybe some Blackhawk helicopters to patrol airspace.
You are being dumb or dishonest with this -drop it you and your sheep are just looking foolish

EDITOR’S NOTE: The reason “our city council is not serious about securing park ridge” and isn’t wasting tens of millions of dollars “on tanks, a secure gate at the boarders with armed guards and maybe some Blackhawk helicopters to patrol airspace” is because – unlike their spendthrift Chicken Little counterparts at D-64 – our city council understands that there are no realistic terror threats to the City, its buildings, etc.

But please, please, please identify yourself so that we and the rest of this community can mock you and your stupidity by name. And please, please, please be a D-64 Board member.

reason “our city council is not serious about securing park ridge” and isn’t wasting tens of millions of dollars “on tanks, a secure gate at the boarders with armed guards and maybe some Blackhawk helicopters to patrol airspace” is because – unlike their spendthrift Chicken Little counterparts at D-64 – our city council understands that there are no realistic terror threats to the City, its buildings, etc

Yes Bob Bob black sheep that is why city is not spending on tanks -BUT you didn’t answer why city is still spending on a police force with high powered rifles in each cruiser and 9mm as side arms. Wasteful! Wasteful of our tax payer dollars! There is no credible threat to our sleepy little town. For shame you foolish city council …I’m leaning towards you being dishonest cause based on your moronic last response that missed the sarcasm and irony ..no one could be that dumb (wait except for school board members that agree with your logic)

EDITOR’S NOTE: “Sarcasm and irony” require far more intelligence than you can muster.

And identifying yourself so that readers can know who the clown is behind these comments apparently requires far more courage than you can muster.

Kumbaya.

Just in case your not being dishonest …let me explain it to you.

City council spending on a well equipped police force (or Fire dpt) in a town that is deemed safe based on history of lack of serious crime is similar to a school board in a safe community spending on vestibule

City council spending on tanks gates and Blackhawk copters is similar to your moronic argument that if the school board were serious about security it should take measures to hire armed guards immediately or put a bullet proof dome over the playground.

Get it?
Geez. Maybe you weren’t being dishonest…if you didn’t understand that?!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Just in case you really are as stupid as you sound, let us explain it to you.

Every day the City police force deals with situations of varying risks and dangers, and it is equipped based on those risks. Hence, no tanks or choppers. For the City to waste money on those, the City Council would have to be as stupid, spendthrift and wasteful as the D-64 Board. Fortunately, it’s not.

Get it?

No, of course not.

Bob- why not answer the question?
Why should the city continue to pay for a well equipped police and fire department when our town is safe and not a target of major crime or terror threats?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Cowardly lion/lioness:

Why not answer our question and tell us and our readers who you are. Show some pride in your authorship and sound thinking.

Oh, wait….

Every day the City police force deals with situations of varying risks and dangers, and it is equipped based on those risks. Hence, no tanks or choppers.

Every day the schools deal with situations of varying risk including (real examples) an escaped man potentially with a gun from Lutheran) a man flashing girls a van attempting to lure child a belligerent parent contesting custody (etc) and it should be equipped based on those. Vestibule would help.

And yes- I see your point of our 50 police officers and the high powered automatic rifle in each cruiser being “equipped based” on the type of crime and risks that have occurred in park ridge. Wow you are dense

EDITOR’S NOTE: And wow, you must really be embarrassed by all this silly drivel you produce if you won’t even reveal who you really are.

Since you seem so interested in only the identity of those who disagree with you (aka those who are correct on the issue you are discussing) I will reveal myself:

I will be the one asking the city council at the next meeting why they are so stupid to buy and maintain high powered rifles for our police force, why they spend on two fire stations, why they spend on a secure vestibule bullet proof glass at our police station? Why why so much waste when the everyday risks of which you so generically speak so not warrant such matters. Why oh why are they as foolish as the school boards across the country seeking to spend dollars on better doors. Why oh why. The insanity of it all.

Wait a minute…Bob. You are the chicken little. Lol

EDITOR’S NOTE: No you won’t…you’ve got a special D-64 Board meeting Monday night, right after your 2-hour closed session.

You caught me- avoid answering why our sleepy town having high powered rifles in each police car isn’t similar to having a secure vestibule-instead focus on me obviously being a school board member.

You really are full of yourself that school board members (even the brain dead sheep ones that agree with you) would waste there time posting on your blog. Instead this spot is reserved for board members like me trying to persuade the masses to support my wasteful spending on the institution that tends to the young while keeping our property values up.

You are too smart you caught me. Congratulations.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The suggestion that PRPD officers having high powered rifles is “similar to having a secure vestibule” is demented. By around $8 million.

And it’s hard to be humble when arguing with the demented – especially anonymous D-64 Board members.

“Silly drivel”
I like that name…for your blog.
🙂

EDITOR’S NOTE: You’ve hit on something. Since you don’t want to identify yourself, we will: “Silly Drivel.” And that’s the way we’re re-naming all of your comments to this post.

5:40 pm High powered automatic rifles in 50 police cruisers cost less than $50,000. How does that compare to the cost of vestibules?

EDITOR’S NOTE: We don’t know, and Silly Drivel won’t explain it.

Each police vehicle has a rifle, don’t forget about the bullet proof “vestibule” at the police station, or the vests and guns for each officer, or why we need as many officers as we have (add up salaries and pensions) or the fact that we have two fire stations and multiple fire trucks – the way this equates to school vestibules is that a community must invest in security despite the town being low in crime or risk being low. Columbine and other towns had no increased risks or prior notice. To put your bobble heads on the sand and say park ridge is so safe we don’t need secure doors at our schools is the same as saying park ridge is so safe we don’t need 50 officers or two fire stations or police rifles or police vests or a bullet proof entryway to the police station. It’s ridiculous is the point.

geez. I truly hope dog you and your supportive posters are just acting dumb…

Before the Columbine High School tragedy, police were trained to set up staging areas outside the school. That changed post-Columbine, Jogmen said, with police squads now equipped with helmets, shields and rifles in order to enter a scene.

Coming from someone as misinformed or intentionally misleading as you dog, I wear your “silly drivel” label S a badge of honor. It only goes to show that the flaws in your logic which I shed light upon truly bother you to the extent you resort to playground name calling.

You like that? Was able to include a school reference in making fun of you. 🙂
Your name calling is the equivalent of ignoring factual based substantive refutation of counter-arguments instead relying upon the incredibly effective “liar liar pants on fire” method.

EDITOR’S NOTE: That’s likely the only “badge of honor” you’ll ever get.

I tend to share PW’s belief that “Silly Drivel” is a D-64 board member because only a Borrelli, Zimmerman, Lee or Johnson (or a top administrator like Heinz or Kolstad) would have both the need to vindicate a foolish and wasteful decision and also the motivation to submit so many comments spouting the same inanities.

And by posting those comments it shows just how fearful this commentator is that reality and sanity will overcome fear and delusions.

EDITOR’S NOTE: And let’s not forget the easy money for FGM, Nicholas and D-64’s “security” consultant, RETA Security, Inc.

Silly Drivel,

Are you for real?

Park Ridge has crime, and the threat of additional crime, thus we have a police force.

Park Ridge has calls for the fire department and EMTs, thus we have a fire department.

Park Ridge has no threat of ISIS invading one of the schools, and even if there was a threat, secured vestibules won’t protect the students. Providing false protection against random violence is just foolish.

There are several calamities that are more likely than shootings at our schools. Tornados and earthquakes come to mind. If the New Madrid fault moves, the schools might fall down. So do we intend to make our schools earthquake proof for this unlikely occurrence (although it’s more likely than a school shooting)? Do we intend to make our schools tornado proof? What about a car sliding on ice and running into kids walking to school? All of these are more likely than a school shooting, but the board is not addressing these safety issues.

The D-64 board should concentrate on making the schools better for educating our children. Then they will have accomplished something.

And by posting those comments it shows just how fearful this commentator is that reality and sanity will overcome fear and delusions.

To one of Bob’s sheep that posted the about …yes you are so right all the thousands of school board members nationwide not to mention in Europe are as you describe or maybe just maybe bob is so greedy he has convinced people like you (fearful of increased taxes but readily accepting increase property values resulting from schools which attract residents that keep your property value high)

Silly doesn’t begin to describe your post or how you blindly follow little bob peep

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013

Putting your head in the sand doesn’t help. Ignoring the risk doesn’t make it go away.

EDITOR’S NOTE: And the not-really-secured vestibules – at $8-10 million – won’t stop any student, teacher, parent, repairman, etc. from walking in with the undetected MAC 10 in the backpack, the Glock in the coat pocket, or the ball-bearing suicide vest. Brilliant!

The threat to schools is not ISIS. How about the guy that escaped Lutheran thought to have a gun or the guy exposing himself to school kids that our police have yet to catch. Safer doors will help.

Ridge has crime, and the threat of additional crime, thus we have a police force.

Park Ridge has calls for the fire department and EMTs, thus we have a fire department.

Of course, but according to bob you need to spend commensurately with the need so if park ridge has low violent crime or low overall crime according to Bob’s twisted logic we should save taxpayer dollars on such extravagant items as the secure vestibule at the police station (no Isis threat there either! )

EDITOR’S NOTE: “Safe doors will help” do what with “the guy that escaped Lutheran thought to have a gun” who never came near any school?

“Safe doors will help” shield school kids from the guy walking down the street and exposing himself?

Find some not-really-secured vestibules that can teach the kids better than they’re currently being taught and you might finally contribute something of value to this discussion.

EDITOR’S NOTE: And the not-really-secured vestibules – at $8-10 million – won’t stop any student, teacher, parent, repairman, etc. from walking in with the undetected MAC 10 in the backpack, the Glock in the coat pocket, or the ball-bearing suicide vest.

BUT will delay the guy that escaped from Lutheran general, the pervert the newspaper reported was exposing himself and the crazed parent trying to grab his kid without telling his divorced spouse -you know the kind of stuff that actually happens in our town.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Outstanding! Let’s hear you and your co-clowns on the D-64 Board admit that the $8-10 million not-really-secured vestibules will let automatic weapons into the schools but will “delay” a flasher and a divorced spouse.

Parents at Franklin complained about the police response regarding guy from Lutheran he reportedly came close to that school.
The point (again to explain the obvious) is to delay those types of threats so police have time to respond.

You know just like taking everyone’s shoes off to get on an airplane doesn’t prevent all the terror threats but certainly will get the guy hiding the threat in his shoe

Geez. Just because we can’t make everything full proof does that mean we shouldn’t try at all?! If your logic held true we would disband all police departments simply bc the police can’t prevent all crime. You guys are really that dense? The vestibules nationwide are not bring put up just to spend money -be honest-they are being put up based on an honest belief that both actual and perceived security will deter some crime and keep people feeling safe.

EDITOR’S NOTE: $8-10 million for “perceived security” will “deter” nobody and keep only the idiots “feeling safe.” No wonder you and the rest of your Board majority are so sold on them.

So what have a secure vestibule at the police station if the threats in town can be handled by lesser security measures dog?

EDITOR’S NOTE: Ask Chief K, but we’re guessing it’s for when they apprehend the next El Chapo and have to fend of his cartel buddies. We’re alos betting it didn’t cost $800,000 like Washington’s will.

So $8 million to ensure safety for children has now devolved to “perceived security” and “delay.”

Thank you for addressing this issue, which is the only place it has been discussed this thoroughly and intelligently. And even the silly comments from Silly Drivel helped get us to the point of understanding that we will be paying $8 million for some modest amount of “delay” but only after the guns are inside the schools.

I don’t understand how anyone can believe that this solves a real problem.

If the goal is to prevent guns from entering the schools, this proposal fails because there is no provision to prevent weapons from entering the buildings.

If the goal is to prevent kids from being targets of violence, this proposal fails because they can be targeted during recess and when school lets out and they are released from the building. Someone who intends to harm to others will certainly find this gap in security.

If the goal is to waste taxpayer money, this proposal succeeds very well.

What’s the goal? And how close does this proposal come to achieving it? If the goal is to keep our children safe, then this proposal is an utter failure and a waste of money.

Another instance of a governmental body being taken advantage of by people who stand to make a lot of money from their recommendation.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Without metal detectors to prevent the entry of guns, the not-really-secured vestibules “can be targeted” inside the building.

If the goal is to prevent guns from entering the schools, this proposal fails because there is no provision to prevent weapons from entering the buildings.

If the goal is to prevent kids from being targets of violence, this proposal fails because they can be targeted during recess and when school lets out and they are released from the building. Someone who intends to harm to others will certainly find this gap in security.

If the goal is to waste taxpayer money, this proposal succeeds very well.

So what is the point of having a police or fire department? Is it to keep guns away form people? Is it to keep people from killing each other? Is it to keep from fires being started?
If so according to the silly poster above -it has been a failure bc such things still happen. come on sheep – you must have better arguments than “it costs money and won’t be full proof” -bc that argument can be applied to everything?!

EDITOR’S NOTE: There is: “It costs $8-10 MILLION and it won’t prevent anything.”

Only you and your D-64 Board cronies could come up with such a waste of so much money.

And now, after publishing 29 of your stupid comments to this post, Silly Drivel, you have received far more of a forum than your modest intellect deserves, exhausted all reasonable rights of allocution, and bored us in the process. So we are cutting off any further comment from you on this post unless you identify yourself by your full legal name. You can thank us later.

Editor, thanks for prohibiting Silly Drivel from posting again.

It’s interesting to me that the questions “What is the goal?” and “And how close does this proposal come to achieving it?” were never answered. These are simple and straightforward questions that should be answered about every project.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Whatever teaching moments he/she may have initially provided became redundant and boring.

As best as we can track the propaganda that comes out of D-64, initially the $8-10 million not-really-secured vestibules were talked up as being for “security” purposes, with emphasis on preventing the Columbine/Sandy Hook kinds of threats. But as holes began being poked in those unlikely scenarios the Board and Admin pivoted from prevention to “delaying” intruders bent on violence.

As holes continued to be poked in the concept of $8-10 million for “delay,” however, they pivoted yet again – this time to “controlling” access and movement of visitors throughout the building after they get inside.

Frankly, we almost wish someone was being paid off on this boondoggle – because sometimes corruption is actually easier to understand than such profound stupidity.



Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>