2 ms·
Poorly implemented solutions are security theatre at its best. Well, almost. They're second best to "The wrong solution for the problem" approaches. Take the sc
by chao- 15y ago
Poorly implemented solutions are security theatre at its best. Well, almost. They're second best to "The wrong solution for the problem" approaches. Take the school in Texas this week where one kid shot another [1]. The school's solution is to make everyone use completely transparent backpacks, nevermind that:
1. You could fit a gun inside a zippered/covered binder or expanding file folder and the backpack does nothing.
2. The school already has metal detectors, so the backpacks aren't actually adding any detection.
3. They don't even know if the edge case where their current security failed even involved backpacks.
[1] http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Teen-shot-at-North-Forest-High-School-2457718.php http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Teen-shot-at...
- rdtsc 15y agoThe point of security theater is often to placate the public. Public demands (or is perceived to demand) action. Doesn't matter what. In this case "something" was done. The school gets to : 1) boast about how they were proactive and did something quick (so it looks good on their resumes). 2) protect themselves against the expected criticisms that they didn't do anything. 3) it was an easy policy to implement (they just wrote down a new rule). no need for new equipment, training or anything so it doesn't affect the budget. Not saying that it isn't stupid. It is very stupid. But in their position they seem to act rationally. Now if another incident occurs they will get a backlash about how transparent backpacks didn't work, to which the response would be we need to outlaw binders. _But_ if they hadn't done anything and another incident occurred the backlash would have been a lot worse -- they would have been blamed and possibly sued because they took no action to prevent it after a history of past incidents.