Will it become more difficult?
If you have responded to more than one fire alarm, you have likely encountered a percentage of the public that does not believe in evacuating during a fire alarm. They do not see smoke or danger; it must be a false alarm.
Excessive fire alarms
We all have buildings within our jurisdictions about which we can bet on will have a fire alarm within a week. We know this, and, likely, the residents or inhabitants of the building know this, as well.
Because they have gone out in the cold more than once–possibly in the night–but the building was not on fire, they are now programmed to look around for smoke first. If there’s no smoke, they stay put.
The National Fire Protection Association and other fire service organizations have produced data and opinions on the need to reduce false alarms because of this prescribed reaction that I just described. The local fire department must work together with building owners and alarm companies to ensure that the fire alarm is not a false alarm.
If the alarm sounds, the occupants must take appropriate action.
Add the complication of a terrorist opportunity
Just this week, we heard news of the terrorist attack at Ohio State University. The event was described as the fire alarm sounding, followed by a person running down students with a car and attacking them with a knife.
The fire alarm scenario is perfect, especially on a college campus, where evacuation is more enforced than other facilities. Now occupants must wonder if they will leave the building only to be a subject of a violent event, too.
Upgraded alarms
Is it time that we upgrade the code and fire alarms to have a panic button at the exit that would change the sound of the alarm to alert evacuees that they are being ambushed?
We must adapt to the new hazards and begin to think about how the systems that are used to save occupants are being used against them.
Comments are closed.