Printed from the blog of Lori Greene, AHC/CDC, CCPR, FDAI
Email:, Blog: or

Feb 24 2015

State board rules against classroom door blocking devices

Category: Egress,School SecurityLori @ 10:14 am Comments (6)

I’ve been following this situation since last fall, when I saw the Facebook page of a community group raising money to buy barricade devices for their school district.  The group ultimately raised over $30,000 and purchased the devices, but were then told that the devices did not comply with egress code requirements and a variance would be needed before the devices could be used.  The variance hearing for the barricade devices to be used on the district’s high school was held yesterday, and the variance request was denied.

In order for the district to use the purchased devices, a change to the state’s fire code would be required.  It’s possible that the state could eventually adopt a change similar to what was approved in Kansas or Louisiana, but my hope is that as the 2018 IBC code development cycle progresses, the proposals submitted by the BHMA Codes and Government Affairs Committee will be embraced as a better alternative so each state is not trying to address the matter individually.

For any schools considering the purchase of barricade devices, I would recommend having a conversation with the local fire marshal and building inspector, and looking at the code-compliant options available for locking classroom doors.


6 Responses to “State board rules against classroom door blocking devices”

  1. Cda says:


    1010.1.4.4 Occupancy Group E classrooms. In Occupancy Group E, classroom doors shall be lockable from within the classroom without opening the classroom door. All the following conditions shall apply:

    The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from within the classroom and shall comply with Section 1010.1.9.
    The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from outside the classroom by the use of a key or other credential.
    1010. Remote operation of locks. Remote operation of locks complying with 1010.1.4.4 shall be permitted.

    I am not sure how I would feel, if I still had a child in school?

    There just seems to be so many variables involved in all this.

    At least the 2018 proposal gives legal means to provide security.

    • Lori says:

      Yes, and this proposal meets all of the current requirements for egress, fire, and accessibility, while adding the requirements for the ability to lock the door without opening it, as well as requiring authorized access from the outside.

  2. Bill says:

    I have 3 kids in school. I do not like these products. The last thing we need is a device that would allow a shooter to barricade himself INSIDE the class with the children. The classroom security locks are already approved, I say stick with what works.

  3. Safecrackin Sammy says:

    Why didnt they just take the 30K and buy some decent code compliant locks???

    May not have done all the doors but I’ll bet it would have been a good start…

    Classic case of well intended people going down the wrong road.

  4. Brendan says:

    I hope the manufacturer is working with them to credit money spent or this horrible idea.

    This would be a great opportunity for say a large lock manufacturer to take the devices publicly burn them and give the school 30K in classroom intruder locks.

    Think of the PR

Leave a Reply