Nashville school district defends no metal detectors before school shooting: 'Unintended consequences'
Antioch High School in Nashville, Tennessee, where a deadly shooting took place last Wednesday, did not have metal detectors due to some administrators' concerns about racism, the New York Post reported.
"I knew this day was gonna happen," Fran Bush, a former Metro Nashville Public Schools (MNPS) board member, told the New York Post. "I knew it was gonna happen just because it's like a free open door, everybody coming in."
The shooting, which left 16-year-old student Josselin Corea Escalante and the suspect dead, has parents calling for the school to bring in metal detectors after the AI security system failed to detect the 17-year-old gunman's weapon.
Bush claims she pushed for metal detectors while serving on the MNPS board, but district Director Adrienne Battle wasn't receptive.
Battle told reporters that the school district did not have metal detectors because of potential "unintended consequences," but did not elaborate on the possible repercussions.
MNPS allegedly sent the Post a study showing that metal detectors can disproportionately impact students of color and instill more of a sense of fear than one of safety for some. However, Bush dismissed this reasoning as a "bunch of bull."
"There's no study [that] shows metal detectors don't work," Bush told the Post. "If that was the case, then we won't have them in our airports, sports games, we wouldn't have them in all these places that require security."
Parents are demanding that MNPS at least consider installing metal detectors. MNPS mom Mary Uhles told local outlet WSMV 4 that it's time for administrators to take action and not "sit around and wring hands."
"At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself the question, which are you more afraid of? Walking through a metal detector or some terrible piece of violence happening?"
Another MNPS parent, Melissa Alvarez-Zabriskie told WSMV 4 that she has been demanding metal detectors for years and she believes that they could have "prevented" the fatal shooting that occurred last week.
Following the deadly shooting, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee expressed gratitude for "law enforcement & first responders who responded quickly and continue to investigate." He also said he was praying for the victims and their families.
"Every day I told her how much I loved her," German Corea, the father of Escalante, told WTVF. "It's not fair."
Escalante's aunt also told WTVF that the 16-year-old was a "very calm girl and well-behaved."
In February 2023, the MNPS board greenlit a $1 million contract with AI gun detection system Omnilert, which is set to end on Nov. 30, 2025, local outlet WKRN reported. On its website, the AI company claims that the system can identify gun threats and send "human-verified intelligence" to first responders. However, last Wednesday, the system failed to pick up on the 17-year-old suspect's weapon.
"AI visual gun detection is a new and promising way to get advance warning before an incident occurs, allowing preventative action to take place. This is particularly so since most gun violence begins outdoors and often in full view of previously unmonitored security cameras. In the Metro Nashville case, unfortunately, the gun was only brandished in the bathroom, where there are no cameras, and then for 30 seconds in the cafeteria where the gun was not visible to the camera, neither to human eyes nor to AI," Omnilert CEO Dave Fraser told Fox News Digital.
"We're saddened that this tragic incident occurred despite the various security methods in place, and it serves to remind us of the value of our mission and to redouble our efforts to have monitoring on every available camera. Remarks that the AI system 'failed' are misleading to say the least and may serve only to decrease the safety of children and staff in our schools."
MNPS has yet to respond to a Fox News request for comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Entrepreneur
an hour ago
- Entrepreneur
How London Built the World's Best Legal AI Ecosystem
Self-flagellation feels part of the British psyche these days. It has become fashionable to beat down on the UK, be that tech bros calling the country a 'museum' bereft of growth and innovation, Brits en masse recently voting against the status quo, or pro-Europe Londoners watching this all play out while mouthing 'I told you so'. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur United Kingdom, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. Business optimism is also plummeting. When the Financial Times reported that Shein had plans to ditch London for its IPO, they wrote that the real surprise was "that Shein had even entertained London in the first place." To compound matters, British fintech - the jewel in London's crown - was dealt a huge blow this month when UK payments darling Wise also chose to avoid listing on London's beleaguered stock market. Amidst this malaise, though, there remains one stalwart of the British economy: legal services. And not only is London's legal sector flourishing, it's leading the way in legaltech and AI. It's no secret that AI is uprooting every industry, and professional services sit squarely in its non-sentient crosshairs. Within white collar jobs, lawyers - with their repeated document creation and need for reviewing extensive reams of information - are likely to see some of the most radical change. This isn't just about efficiencies, this is a near-trillion-dollar industry in which AI could generate $100,000 in additional billable time annually per lawyer (Thomson Reuters Future of Professionals Report, 2024). So what put London in the driving seat here? Why do law firms in NYC and even investors in the Bay Area concede that London is still streaks ahead in this vertical? The answer reveals the blueprint for winning any AI transformation race. The starting point is fierce competition. In the early years of the 2010s software explosion, law firms in the City of London were large but rarely bloated. With so many great competing practices all within a mile of each other, competition was relentless. Senior Partners were already used to having to prioritise efficiency, productivity and flexibility over headcount. Then, when more serious technology solutions came onto the scene around the early 2010s (think document creation software and legal workflow tools), these same law firms were nimble enough to capitalise. Dedicated legal innovation departments were set up to try to work out how SaaS and Cloud technologies could be woven into legal work. London-headquartered, international law firm, Addleshaw Goddard, as just one example, quickly built a team of 40 legal engineers and operations staff to keep the firm cutting edge. And all this was happening while US counterparts continued with their paper and office stamps. This might seem surprising, given America's reputation as innovator-in-chief. Why did Britain get the jump here ahead of its Transatlantic cousins, who were 'moving fast and breaking things'? Crucially, the institutional players and incumbents were keen to come along for the ride. Allen & Overy (now A&O Shearman) and Mishcon de Reya, two of Britain's most established firms, both built incubator programs for startups. I vividly remember entrepreneurs from places like Singapore and Latin America moving to London to be part of FUSE, Allen & Overy's program. The Law Society of England and Wales created events and roundtables on legaltech and even partnered with startups looking to disrupt the industry. Not only did this start fostering entrepreneurial and digital talent in the London legal sector, but it also signalled to the rest of the industry that innovation was the direction of travel, whether people liked it or not. It's also worth mentioning that the regulators helped too. The UK's laws on alternative legal services providers (ALSPs) allowed for firms to be owned by non-lawyers, a practice banned in most jurisdictions, such as the US and Germany. By allowing firms to list publicly or be bought by private equity, more business minds were brought into UK law firms. This, in turn, drove innovation acceptance. The final factor for London leading the legaltech race is the company you can keep in this brilliant city. When we at BRYTER were deciding on our first international market to expand to, our core axiom was that we needed to follow our customers. London, with its parade of skyscrapers packed with lawyers, was the obvious choice. But importantly, and unlike in other European professional services hubs, we knew that just down the road in Mayfair was Europe's most mature venture capital ecosystem. London was already home to brilliant British-born funds like Balderton and Atomico, but also flourishing outposts from the American behemoths like Accel and Index Ventures, who had noticed that European startups were attractive (and cheaper) to invest in. This meshing of established law firms and venture capital led to a legal tech boom and significant exits such as HighQ (acquired by Thomson Reuters), Tessian (Proofpoint), Della (WoltersKluwer), Onfido (Entrust) and more. And, each of these liquidity moments forged a next generation of entrepreneurs and angel investors within the London ecosystem. This confluence of factors and attitudes is what London's legaltech dominance is built on. The combination of deep specialist knowledge going back centuries, open-minded institutional players, and the mixing of lawyers and VCs has set the city up to lead our industry for decades. But there's also a cautionary tale baked into this story. A warning for all the tech bros out there who see the AI-ification of professional services as the next gold rush. London's legaltech flourished because tools were built hand-in-glove with the traditional legal industry. It was always the law first, and then workflows, software and automation. For those of us looking to design the next era of the legal industry, we need to be spending as much time in the pubs of Lincoln's Inn as the boardrooms of Silicon Valley.
CBS News
6 hours ago
- CBS News
Leaders applaud Amazon's "historic investment" in Pennsylvania data centers
State leaders and Amazon came together on Monday to announce a historic investment. Amazon is pumping $20 billion into Pennsylvania to create high-tech cloud computing and artificial intelligence innovation campuses. Governor Josh Shapiro says it's the largest private sector investment in the commonwealth's history. "An initial announcement of about $20 billion in multiple state-of-the-art data centers across our commonwealth that will power our global economy and the future of artificial intelligence," said Governor Shapiro. "These facilities are really going to serve as the backbone of America's AI infrastructure, helping make sure that the United States continues to remain at the forefront of global technology innovation," said Kevin Miller, vice president of global data centers for Amazon Web Services. The data centers will be built in Luzerne County and a former U.S. Steel mill in Bucks County. But Amazon says other parts of Pennsylvania are under consideration. "It is just the beginning, because our administration is actively engaged with Amazon on additional sites in our commonwealth," Shapiro said. The governor said the investment is expected to create at least 1,250 jobs and thousands of local construction jobs. Pennsylvania U.S. Senator Dave McCormick applauded the announcement and said it builds momentum ahead of his upcoming Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit in Pittsburgh next month. "Pennsylvania is blessed; we have amazing assets. We have the second-largest energy capability in the country, the fourth-largest natural gas reserves in the world. We have the absolute best skilled workforce, hardest-working workforce," said McCormick. Carnegie Mellon University President Farnam Jahanian released a statement about the Amazon investment announcement, saying, "This historic investment by AWS – and the research and innovation network it envisions – will deliver unprecedented computing power and strengthen Pennsylvania's position as the nation's premier AI and energy hub. It will also create jobs in skilled trades, hasten the speed of innovation and supercharge startup growth. Carnegie Mellon University, working with research universities across Pennsylvania, is ready to help lead planning efforts for this research network, and we congratulate Governor Josh Shapiro, AWS and stakeholders across the Commonwealth on this extraordinary partnership."
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP lawmakers uneasy about package to codify DOGE cuts ahead of House vote this week
Multiple Republican lawmakers are voicing concerns about backing a high-profile measure later this week to codify Elon Musk's DOGE cuts – raising questions about whether it can pass the House at all. Two Republicans – Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada and Nicole Malliotakis of New York – separately told CNN they have concerns with the White House's push to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 'Still mulling,' Amodei said when asked if he would support the package of cuts. 'The impact on local PBS stations appears to be significant.' Other Republicans have heartburn about how it could cut the Bush-era program, PEPFAR, devoted to fighting HIV and AIDS globally. 'If it cuts PEPFAR like they're saying it is, that's not good,' GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska told CNN last week. House GOP leaders plan to put the package of cuts, totaling $9.4 billion, on the floor as soon as Thursday, according to two people familiar with the plans. But Speaker Mike Johnson will need near unanimity in his conference for the package to pass the House, where he can only lose three votes. Johnson said on Monday that he's 'working on' getting enough votes for the Department of Government Efficiency spending cuts package he hopes to bring to the floor this week. 'The only concern I heard initially was some wanted a little more specificity and detail on what was in the package,' Johnson continued. Asked how he would persuade members that wanted more specificity in the package, Johnson replied, 'I'm gathering up all their questions and we'll try to get them all answered. I mean, that's what we do in every piece of legislation.' If it can survive the House, it will face major obstacles in the Senate. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told CNN on Monday that she has major misgivings about the global health cuts, including PEPFAR. 'I think we can change it. We're still figuring out what the set rules are,' Collins said. The White House sent its long-awaited spending cuts request to Congress as it seeks to formalize a slew of DOGE slashes to federal funding. The $9.4 billion package – known as 'rescissions' on Capitol Hill – would claw back previously appropriated government funding. The move to cancel the funding through Congress would insulate the administration from legal challenges related to its cuts to federal funding. Johnson said on Monday, 'We'd like to do multiple rescissions packages, and this first one I'm sure will be successful.' This initial request, however, is far more limited in scope than the more than $1 trillion in spending cuts that DOGE has promised. The lengthy time it took the White House to send over a first round of cuts underscores the uphill battle for even a Republican-led Congress to codify DOGE's work. CNN's Molly English contributed to this report.
