To think we need to re-think security for children's schools and clubs following Southport

Similarly, I'm concerned about the security at DCs' school and nursery, where doors are often left open.

That sounds unusual.

At my DD's nursery, the main door is locked and accessed by a doorbell or a parent with fingerprint access. There is no access to the back garden from the front.

And my other DD's school, the main gate is locked and can only be opened by buzzing in. The gate to the playground is locked (only opened at pick up/drop off) so once through the main gate you cannot access anything other than the reception (as in the office, not reception class) which again you need to be buzzed in to.

It's a definite contrast to the Rainbows my DD attends, which is in a church hall and I think anyone could walk in during the sessions. Physically locking the church hall doors would probably be a risk in a fire, which needs to be balanced against the risk of someone coming in through unlocked doors I guess.

Yes we can it's that simple keep kids locked up for the duration of a club then when parents come doors get unlocked. Or would you rather do nothing ?

Thankfully these tragedies are incredibly rare
so no I wouldn’t support that. Not at all.

It's escaped your notice that the Southport murderer was British, hasn't it? You also haven't noticed that Wayne Couzens is British, as is Kyle Clifford. We grow plenty of our own murderers here.

As others have said, it all changed post Dunblane. Your child’s nursery should not have doors that are left open. They’d be shut down by Ofsted if that were the case.

However, although there are things we can do better, random murders by people with mental health issues (thankfully rare) will never be able to be 100% prevented.

We can't really lock up loads of people who have committed no crime, even if they have worrying obsessions or search histories. I agree we could do more to intervene in these cases though.

Thing is, anyone could claim to be a prospective parent of a nursery or school and get access.

This is horrific but I don’t think anything could have been done differently.

Yes to better mental health interventions and also to addressing what teens can access on the internet.

The 15 year old girl who killed Brianna Ghey had also been obsessed with murder and had accessed the dark web. Brianna's mum is campaigning for better control of what young people are accessing online.

I think we would be much wiser to think about the internet and how these people, sometimes with their own issues, use it to feed an intense obsession with violence. Im thinking also of the terrible gun attack in Plymouth - the killer had a history of obsessive use of dark online material.

20 years ago it was more difficult to become intense and obsessed and isolated like this.

I pulled my child out of a summer holiday club last year after I was shocked at the security. It was a pain to arrange other childcare at the last minute but anyone could have walked in (this was before the Southport horrors) and caused a similar massacre. Also anyone could have gone in and taken a child and the staff really wouldn't have noticed.

When I signed her out I noticed on the register they hadn't completed the break snd lunch time registers either so they could have had no idea who was or wasn't in the room. I did complain to the leisure centre that evening and I have still had no response so I was right to pull her out.

I think schools are mostly secure, but holiday clubs etc.... really need to up the security.

Agree with this, highly unusual for a school to be 'open'. The only building the public could potentially at DS' enter is main reception which is segregated from the rest of the school and has measures in place to control entry; the rest is securely fenced and locked at all times. Same with clubs here, exterior doors only left open in summer where premises are secured externally too.

Honestly, this is ridiculous. We don’t want children to grow up riddled with fear over the outside world because their paranoid parents insisted they be locked in all the time.

Sure, you’ll feel safer. But if someone is determined, that isn’t going to stop them. And all you’ll do is contribute to the rising mental health issues.

But that’s okay though, isn’t it, because you’ll feel safer.

Both my kids' schools are securely locked. The nursery we used doesn't allow any parents inside during the regular day either. Obviously you can visit when choosing it.

Instead of putting borders and security checkpoints around ever smaller areas of geographical space we need to put them back around our country.

The price we're currently paying for open borders and the liberal feel good factor of allowing any Tom, Dick or Harry in, is too high. I fear this is going to drag on and on for years still but the correction will come. And it will come hard.

Indeed - there's another thread where a parent is threatening to keep her 18 year old son from going out if he refuses to constantly update her about where he is at any given time.

I'd rather there was investment in MH services and policing, rather than people having to lock themselves in all the time.

I take issue with the idea that killers mainly target children and would like to see some evidence to support that contention.

Because if, as I suspect, it is not that simple, are we all going to armour and lock everything? Buses with armed drivers and sluices, armed guards in all shops and on the streets? All to prevent an event which while horrific, is also extremely rare? The reason the Southport murders have caused such shock is in part due to how rarely such crimes happen.

I think it would be far more worthwhile to invest in prevention - in the case of the Southport murders, many signs were missed. This was also the case with Wayne Couzens. It's very rare that someone just snaps out of the blue with no warning signs. Rather than lock up ourselves and our children, let's look at getting in earlier with those who are potentially very dangerous.

Not that this is going to be easy.

Unfortunately, if someone is determined to hurt children then they will find a way. We can safeguard and lock doors etc but nothing can be prevented 100% of the time.

Like you've already said, things like this happening are incredibly rare.

I think we’re facing a new kind of threat- individuals armed with knives and cars, rather than guns and explosives. A lot harder to surveil.

While we can do much better than we are with surveillance, it won’t be enough. I anticipate much greater security in schools, clubs etc- more like the US, and security features built in to public areas (as we already see with bollards etc around football stadiums).

It’s horrible and I agree harmful to society and individuals in all sorts of ways but the security services simply cannot prevent these lone attacks, and we shouldn’t let the fact that they might have prevented Southport blind us to that. It’s too easy to think that all this can be fixed with a few more security officers and better Prevent training- it can’t. Likewise stricter rules on knife sales- fine if that’s what we want but we’d be kidding ourselves to think this is going to prevent knife attacks.

[Long post snipped] I don't think there's any need for primary age children to walk to school alone even in a small group. If they do, we can teach them to be aware of safety rules eg. stay together, don't mess around or take detours, come straight home rather than loiter in park, if a suspicious looking person approaches teach them what to do.

No wonder there's an epidemic of anxiety among children and young people.

And they are still more likely to be at risk from adults known to them than random strangers.

No it isn’t stop trying to cause trouble, after incidents like this action is often taken to prevent repeats - for instance how the Dunblane massacre and how that led to changes in school security, it also led to the banning of handguns if I remember correctly. Hopefully something will be learned after this tragedy, especially around mental health and ignoring repeated warnings on potential offenders (although again if I remember correctly the perpetrator at Dunblane had also been flagged to authorities although I can’t recall why).

What about public transport? Or children walking from/to school and clubs in big groups? What about playgrounds, kids playing football or basketball in their local field? Street fairs, libraries, eating out in McDonald’s ? there are so many places where children congregate You can’t protect them in every situation, as I said if a sick individual wants to harm someone they will find a way.

True, but we can reduce risks as much as possible. Children accompanied by watchful parents on public transport, street fayres, playgrounds, libraries are less likely to be targeted. If a situation does arise, parents who are alert have more chance to spot it and keep their children safe, than a big group of children with low ratio of adults, in a building with easy access. I avoid high-crime areas as much as possible, to me the risk isn't worth it. If I do have to travel through such an area I drive or take taxis rather than trains/buses.

We all need to be vigilant in playgrounds and open areas, ideally going in a group so more adults to keep watch. I avoid certain playgrounds, or those backing onto woods, busy roads.. and I'm very wary of lone males who approach playgrounds or take a 'short cut' through.

I don't think there's any need for primary age children to walk to school alone even in a small group. If they do, we can teach them to be aware of safety rules eg. stay together, don't mess around or take detours, come straight home rather than loiter in park, if a suspicious looking person approaches teach them what to do.

It's all very well being nostalgic for the freedom we had as kids, but life has changed drastically since then, especially knife and gun crime.

Modern churches often have tight security. Ours has a locked gate to car park, front double doors open (and staffed by a welcome team) only to admit people at set times eg sermons, clubs, classes, choir practice).

Too bad if you just want to go in and pray, I suppose.

But church halls and gyms used by scouts and guides often open their firedoors for fresh air in summer. I appreciate this is a security risk but I also think that stifling kids in over hot buildings without fresh air flow because 'it's too dangerous to open the door' is not the way we want to live

Isn't it illegal to prop open fire doors? They're supposed to prevent fire spreading, eg if entrance hall with coat area caught fire.

Modern churches often have tight security. Ours has a locked gate to car park, front double doors open (and staffed by a welcome team) only to admit people at set times eg sermons, clubs, classes, choir practice). Back door is pin code protected and there's CCTV around entire building. It's purpose built with high windows for airflow, aircon for rooms without high windows (like offices and crèche room) security office so blind spots can be monitored, high secure fences and padlock on yard used at toddler group. All members who volunteer with children and all key/pin holders are crb checked.

In today's world, with terrorism and horrific acts like this on rise, I think parents have to be discerning where they send their young children. They're only at such a vulnerable age for a few years. Extra activities like cubs, dance, gymnastics aren't essential and if you do want to send them it's wise to check the security provision first. Much as I want to trust society and think the best, I've seen too much of the darkness, crime and corruption out there (used to work in forensic psychiatry).

I actually think it would be easier to break into prison than our local primary. You have to walk a maze of fences to a buzzer door. To then enter basically an air lock. To be photoed and id checked before you enter the actual school during school hours.