How Locked Classroom Doors Stopped the Evergreen Massacre (And Why That's Still Not Enough)
- CrisisWire
- 5 days ago
- 13 min read
By Warren Pulley, BTAM Certified | CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions
September 10, 2025, 12:24 PM: Sixteen-year-old Desmond Holly walks through Evergreen High School's hallways with a loaded revolver. He fires. Reloads. Fires again. Students scatter. Staff activates lockdown protocols.
Holly roams the building searching for victims. He approaches classroom after classroom. Each time, he encounters the same obstacle: locked doors he cannot breach.
Inside those locked classrooms, students and staff huddle quietly, following procedures they've practiced in drills. Doors remain secured. Lights stay off. Everyone stays silent and hidden.
Holly fires at door locks, trying to force entry. The doors hold. He moves to the next classroom. Same result. And the next. Same result.
Unable to access additional victims, his rampage limited by physical barriers, Holly's attack concludes with two students critically wounded rather than the massacre he likely intended.
Jefferson County Sheriff's spokesperson Jacki Kelley stated it clearly: "Students and staff were amazing. They did their job and they did it well. Lives were saved yesterday because of the actions they took."
The locked doors at Evergreen High School worked. Lockdown training worked. Physical security measures prevented mass casualties.
But here's the critical question that every school administrator, security director, and board member must confront: Why did we need locked doors to stop Desmond Holly on September 10th instead of threat assessment to stop him in July when the FBI first identified his concerning online behavior?
After 40 years protecting lives—from securing nuclear weapons facilities in the U.S. Air Force to protecting diplomats in Baghdad's combat zone to directing campus safety operations—I can state unequivocally: Physical security measures are essential. They save lives. But they only activate after violence begins. True prevention happens months earlier.
This article examines what physical security measures actually worked at Evergreen, why they're not sufficient on their own, and how organizations must balance physical barriers with behavioral threat assessment to prevent attacks from being attempted in the first place.
What Actually Saved Lives at Evergreen
Before discussing limitations, we must honestly acknowledge what worked. Physical security and emergency response protocols prevented catastrophe.
Security Measure 1: Locked Classroom Doors
What Happened:
When Holly began firing, teachers immediately secured their classroom doors from inside. Evergreen High School had installed classroom door locks that could be engaged without opening the door—a critical feature that allows rapid lockdown without exposing teachers to hallway threats.
As detailed in my book Locked Down: The Access Control Playbook, access control represents the most fundamental layer of physical security across all environments. The principle is simple: if an attacker cannot access victims, casualties remain limited.
Why This Worked:
Time Delay: Even attempting to breach a locked door takes time. Each failed attempt delays the attacker, reducing time available for violence and increasing time for law enforcement response.
Psychological Barrier: Locked doors signal "this space is protected." Some attackers move to easier targets rather than spending time on breach attempts.
Physical Barrier: Standard classroom doors with proper locks can withstand significant force. Holly fired at locks trying to breach doors—the doors held.
Protection for Occupants: Locked doors allow students and staff to focus on hiding and remaining quiet rather than physically holding doors closed or barricading.
The Evidence:
Holly attempted to access multiple locked classrooms. Each attempt failed. He fired dozens of rounds throughout the building but could only harm victims he encountered before lockdown activated or in areas where barriers didn't exist.
Sheriff's investigators credit locked doors with preventing additional casualties despite Holly's extensive ammunition supply and clear intent to cause mass harm.
Security Measure 2: Lockdown Training That Actually Worked
What Happened:
When gunfire erupted, students and staff didn't freeze in confusion. They executed trained responses immediately and effectively.
Trained Behaviors Observed:
Immediate Door Locking: Teachers secured doors within seconds of recognizing threat—not after deliberation or waiting for announcements.
Lights Off, Quiet, Hidden: Students moved away from doors and windows, turned off lights, remained silent. These actions make rooms appear empty and unoccupied.
Helping Others: Students assisted classmates who needed help reaching cover, demonstrated calm leadership, followed adult instructions.
Sustained Discipline: Students remained in lockdown for extended periods waiting for all-clear, despite fear and confusion.
Why This Worked:
Muscle Memory: Regular drills create automatic responses that activate under stress without requiring conscious decision-making.
Clear Procedures: Everyone knew exactly what to do. No ambiguity about whether to lock door, where to hide, how to behave.
Confidence: Training builds confidence that following procedures protects them—reducing panic and increasing compliance.
Adult Leadership: Teachers who had practiced these procedures could lead students calmly and effectively.
As I discuss extensively in Campus Under Siege: School Safety Strategies, effective emergency training must be age-appropriate, trauma-informed, and regularly practiced. Evergreen's training met these standards—and it saved lives.
Security Measure 3: Rapid Law Enforcement Response
What Happened:
Law enforcement arrived at Evergreen High School within two minutes of the first 911 call. Officers entered the building within five minutes and moved toward the threat immediately.
Why This Worked:
Proximity: School resource officers and local police were nearby, enabling rapid arrival.
Training: Officers are trained in active shooter response—moving toward threat rather than establishing perimeter and waiting.
Courage: The first officer entering the building did so "not wearing a helmet, not with any rifle or SWAT gear"—extraordinary bravery that likely saved additional lives.
Coordination: Multiple agencies responded and coordinated effectively despite complex, multi-location crime scene.
The Reality:
Even with exceptional two-minute response time, Holly had already fired dozens of rounds before law enforcement arrived. Response, no matter how fast, happens after violence begins.
Security Measure 4: Multiple Crime Scene Containment
What Happened:
Holly's rampage covered extensive territory—inside the school, outside buildings, across multiple locations. Each area became a crime scene requiring containment, investigation, and evidence collection.
Hundreds of law enforcement officers responded to process these scenes, interview witnesses, and ensure no additional threats existed.
Why This Mattered:
Thorough Investigation: Comprehensive evidence collection enables understanding of what happened, supporting both prosecution and prevention of future incidents.
Witness Interviews: Speaking with hundreds of students and staff while memories are fresh provides detailed timeline and behavioral indicators.
Addressing Uncertainty: Until every location is cleared and all students accounted for, possibility of additional threats exists. Thorough response addresses this systematically.
The Critical Limitation: Response Is Not Prevention
Everything that saved lives at Evergreen activated after Desmond Holly brought a loaded weapon to school and began firing. Let's examine the timeline:
Months Before September 10:
Holly exhibits concerning online behavior
ADL identifies threat indicators
FBI opens investigation
Holly acquires tactical gear
Holly brings ammunition to school on bus
12:24 PM, September 10:
Holly begins firing
Students scatter
[LOCKDOWN ACTIVATES]
Teachers lock doors
Students hide
911 calls placed
12:26 PM (approximately):
Law enforcement arrives
Officers enter building
Active response begins
12:33 PM (approximately):
Holly takes his own life
Shooting concludes
Two students critically wounded
Everything that worked—locked doors, lockdown training, law enforcement response—happened in the nine minutes between 12:24 PM and 12:33 PM.
Everything that could have prevented the attack entirely needed to happen in the months before September 10.
As I detail in The Prepared Leader: Threat Assessment, Emergency Planning, and Safety, effective violence prevention operates across multiple timeframes:
Months Before (Primary Prevention): Identify concerning behaviors, assess threats, intervene before violence planned
Weeks Before (Secondary Prevention): Detect final preparations, weapons acquisition, target selection
Days Before (Tertiary Prevention): Anonymous reporting, increased security, law enforcement monitoring
During Attack (Response): Physical security, lockdown procedures, law enforcement response
Evergreen had excellent response capability. But prevention capability was entirely absent.
Why Physical Security Alone Creates False Confidence
After the Evergreen shooting, many schools will draw the wrong lesson. They'll invest in better locks, more cameras, additional security guards, enhanced lockdown training.
These investments aren't wrong. They're necessary. But they're insufficient.
Problem 1: Perpetrators Adapt to Physical Security
Attackers study previous incidents. They analyze what worked and what didn't. They identify vulnerabilities in security measures.
Locked Classroom Doors:
Attackers target students in hallways, cafeterias, outdoor spaces where doors don't protect
Some attackers gain access to master keys
Sophisticated attackers breach doors through windows, walls, or forced entry
Insiders (students, staff) know door locations, locking mechanisms, vulnerabilities
The Reality: Every physical security measure has limitations attackers can exploit. As security improves, attack methodologies evolve.
Problem 2: Security Measures Create Operational Friction
The Balancing Act Schools Face:
Enhanced physical security often conflicts with educational mission and daily operations:
Locked Exterior Doors: Improve security but complicate parent visits, deliveries, maintenance, emergency egress
Single Point of Entry: Concentrates security but creates bottlenecks, delays, and potential life safety issues in emergencies
Visitor Screening: Protects against external threats but requires staffing, technology, and time
Locked Classroom Doors: Save lives in active shooter situations but raise fire safety concerns, complicate normal ingress/egress, create accessibility challenges
Surveillance Systems: Detect threats but raise privacy concerns, require monitoring, and generate false alarms
Schools must balance security with education, accessibility, privacy, and life safety. Maximum security isn't optimal security—optimal security balances protection with mission effectiveness.
Problem 3: Physical Security Addresses Symptoms, Not Causes
Why did Desmond Holly decide to attack his school?
Locked doors don't answer this question. They don't address:
His radicalization in online extremist communities
His social isolation and grievance development
His fascination with previous school shooters
His acquisition of weapons and tactical gear
His progression from ideation to planning to preparation
Physical security stops the attack. It doesn't prevent the attacker from forming violent intent, conducting research, acquiring weapons, and arriving at school ready to kill.
The Difference:
Physical Security Says: "When someone tries to hurt people here, we'll minimize casualties."
Threat Assessment Says: "We'll identify people moving toward violence and intervene before they try."
Both matter. But only one is actual prevention.
Problem 4: Resource Allocation Creates Opportunity Costs
School Security Budget Reality:
Most schools have limited security budgets. Money spent on physical security is money not spent on threat assessment, counseling, intervention programs, or staff training.
Common Post-Incident Reactions:
After school shootings, districts often invest heavily in:
Upgraded door locks ($50,000-$150,000 for large schools)
Enhanced surveillance ($100,000-$300,000 for comprehensive systems)
Visitor management systems ($20,000-$50,000)
Security staffing ($50,000-$80,000 per full-time guard)
Physical barriers and access control ($200,000-$500,000 for comprehensive upgrades)
What Gets Neglected:
While physical security receives major investment, behavioral prevention receives minimal resources:
Threat assessment team training: Often skipped or done cheaply
Anonymous reporting systems: Basic or non-existent
Student behavioral support: Underfunded
Mental health services: Inadequate staffing
Staff training in warning signs: Once yearly at best
Law enforcement partnerships: Informal at best
The Result: Schools become harder targets but no better at identifying threats before attackers arrive.
The Balanced Approach: Physical Security + Behavioral Prevention
Effective school safety requires both physical security and behavioral threat assessment working together as integrated layers.
Layer 1: Behavioral Threat Assessment (Months Before)
Primary Prevention Through Early Identification:
As detailed in my Threat Assessment Handbook, comprehensive threat assessment identifies concerning behaviors during ideation and planning stages—before weapons acquisition, before final preparations, before violence becomes imminent.
What This Looks Like:
Trained Teams: Multidisciplinary threat assessment teams with members from administration, counseling, security, law enforcement, and student services
Clear Reporting: Multiple pathways for students, staff, parents, community members to report concerning behaviors without fear of retaliation
Systematic Assessment: Evidence-based frameworks for evaluating whether reported behaviors represent genuine threats requiring intervention
Coordinated Intervention: Mental health support, family engagement, law enforcement involvement, and ongoing monitoring tailored to specific risk levels
Case Management: Documentation, regular review, and adjustment of interventions based on changing circumstances
If Evergreen Had This:
July 2025: FBI identifies Holly's concerning online behavior and notifies school through established information-sharing partnership
Early August: School threat assessment team investigates Holly, interviews teachers and peers, reviews accessible information, determines elevated risk
Mid-August: Team implements intervention—counseling, parent engagement, monitoring, connection to positive supports
September 10: Violence never occurs because Holly received intervention during planning stages
Layer 2: Physical Security & Access Control (Immediate Protection)
Essential Barriers That Buy Time:
While threat assessment prevents most violence, physical security provides critical protection when prevention fails or threats come from external sources.
Baseline Physical Security Every School Needs:
Perimeter Security:
Defined boundaries with clear distinction between public and school property
Fencing where appropriate (balancing security with welcoming environment)
Adequate lighting of parking lots, walkways, and building perimeters
Natural surveillance through strategic landscaping and visibility
Access Control:
Limited entry points during school hours (not necessarily single entry, but controlled entries)
Visitor management requiring check-in, identification, and purpose
Locked exterior doors with capability for emergency egress
Classroom doors with interior locking mechanisms
Surveillance:
Camera coverage of entries, parking areas, hallways, and common spaces
Recording capability with appropriate retention periods
Monitored in real-time when resources permit, or reviewable after incidents
Communication Systems:
PA systems for emergency announcements reaching all locations
Two-way radios for staff coordination
Direct communication with law enforcement (panic buttons, duress alarms)
Mass notification systems (text, email, app-based alerts to parents)
Critical Note: Physical security must comply with fire codes, ADA accessibility requirements, and life safety standards. Security cannot compromise emergency egress or create traps.
Layer 3: Emergency Response Protocols (During Incidents)
Trained Responses That Save Lives:
Even with threat assessment and physical security, schools must prepare for worst-case scenarios including attacks from external threats, rapidly escalating situations, or failures in prevention.
Lockdown Procedures:
Clear, practiced protocols everyone understands
Age-appropriate training (elementary through high school)
Options-based approaches when lockdown impossible (Run-Hide-Fight or similar)
Regular drills without traumatizing students
Law Enforcement Coordination:
Pre-established relationships with local police and sheriff
Building maps and access information provided to responders
Joint training exercises with law enforcement
Unified command protocols for multi-agency response
Medical Response:
Staff training in bleeding control and emergency first aid
Trauma kits in accessible locations
Protocols for treating injured during lockdown
Coordination with EMS for mass casualty scenarios
Crisis Communication:
Procedures for notifying parents during incidents
Media management protocols
Rumor control and accurate information dissemination
Mental health support resources ready for deployment
Layer 4: Post-Incident Support & Recovery (After Events)
Addressing Trauma and Preventing Recurrence:
After any incident of violence or threat of violence, comprehensive response includes:
Immediate Support:
Crisis counseling for affected students and staff
Reunification procedures for parents and students
Ongoing mental health services for traumatized individuals
Investigation and Analysis:
Thorough review of what happened and why
Identification of missed warning signs or system failures
Honest assessment of what worked and what didn't
Implementation of improvements based on lessons learned
Community Recovery:
Long-term mental health support (trauma doesn't end when school reopens)
Rebuilding sense of safety and trust
Memorial and recognition of victims appropriately
Addressing PTSD and ongoing fears
The Investment Framework: How to Allocate Limited Resources
Most schools face budget constraints. How should limited security resources be allocated?
Based on 40 years across diverse security environments and analyzing what actually prevents violence, here's my recommended investment framework:
Priority 1: Behavioral Threat Assessment (50% of Security Budget)
Why This Gets Top Priority:
Prevention provides better ROI than response. Threat assessment prevents 90%+ of violence when implemented properly—far better than any physical security measure.
Minimum Investment for Mid-Sized School:
Year 1 Setup ($25,000-$40,000):
Professional threat assessment team training and certification
Policy and procedure development
Anonymous reporting system implementation
Staff training on warning signs
Law enforcement partnership establishment
Annual Ongoing ($15,000-$25,000):
Training refreshers and updates
Case consultation for complex situations
Anonymous reporting system maintenance
Program review and improvement
Priority 2: Essential Physical Security (30% of Security Budget)
Focus on High-ROI Physical Measures:
Classroom Door Locks: If you can only afford one physical security upgrade, this is it. Evergreen proves locked doors save lives. Cost: $50,000-$150,000 for comprehensive school upgrade.
Communication Systems: Staff must be able to alert others and reach law enforcement instantly. Cost: $20,000-$50,000 for comprehensive system.
Perimeter Lighting: Adequate lighting deters threats and enables surveillance. Cost: $10,000-$30,000.
Basic Surveillance: Cameras at entries and key locations provide situational awareness. Cost: $30,000-$80,000 for basic system.
Total: $110,000-$310,000 initial, $5,000-$15,000 annual maintenance
Priority 3: Emergency Response Training (20% of Security Budget)
Practical Preparedness That Builds Confidence:
Lockdown Drills: Regular, age-appropriate practice. Cost: Staff time, minimal external cost.
Staff Training: Emergency response, bleeding control, crisis management. Cost: $5,000-$10,000 annually.
Law Enforcement Exercises: Joint training and tabletops. Cost: Primarily staff time, some consulting fees $3,000-$5,000 annually.
Total: $8,000-$15,000 annually
De-Prioritize: Low-Value Security Theater
What NOT to Spend Limited Resources On:
Armed Guards at Entries: Expensive ($50,000-$80,000 per officer annually), often ineffective, and may create false confidence. Research shows mixed effectiveness.
Metal Detectors: Expensive ($50,000-$150,000), require staffing ($30,000-$50,000 annually), create bottlenecks, and can be circumvented. Appropriate for very high-threat environments, overkill for most schools.
Fortress Architecture: Extensive physical barriers and fortification creates prison-like environment, enormous cost ($500,000-$2,000,000+), and marginal security improvement over well-implemented baseline measures.
Security Theater: Measures that look impressive but provide minimal actual protection. Examples: Visible cameras that don't record, badge systems without consistent enforcement, visitor sign-in sheets no one monitors.
What Your Organization Must Do Now
Whether you're a school administrator, corporate security director, or responsible for any organization's safety, you must honestly assess your current approach.
The Critical Questions
Question 1: "If someone at our organization is planning violence right now, would we know?"
If your answer is "probably not" or "I'm not sure," your threat assessment capability is inadequate.
Question 2: "If violence occurred here today, would our physical security and emergency procedures limit casualties?"
If your answer is "I hope so" or "maybe," your response capability needs improvement.
Question 3: "Are we investing primarily in prevention or primarily in response?"
If most security budget goes to physical measures and minimal resources support threat assessment, priorities are backward.
Question 4: "Do we measure security effectiveness by absence of incidents or by threats we identified and prevented?"
If you can't name threats you've identified and intercepted, you're measuring response success, not prevention success.
Immediate Actions
Within 30 Days:
Audit Current Capabilities: Honestly assess threat assessment, physical security, and emergency response capabilities against framework outlined in this article
Identify Gaps: Document specific deficiencies requiring attention
Establish Priorities: Rank investments by impact on actual violence prevention
Budget Accordingly: Reallocate resources to emphasize prevention over response
Within 90 Days:
Implement Threat Assessment: Form teams, provide training, establish reporting mechanisms, document procedures
Upgrade Critical Physical Security: Focus on high-impact measures (classroom locks, communication, lighting)
Enhance Emergency Training: Ensure staff and students know procedures and practice regularly
Build Partnerships: Establish relationships with law enforcement, mental health providers, community resources
Within 6 Months:
Full Program Operation: Threat assessment teams actively managing cases, physical security implemented, emergency procedures practiced
Measure Effectiveness: Track reports received, threats assessed, interventions implemented, violence prevented
Continuous Improvement: Regular program reviews, lessons learned integration, capability enhancement
Get Expert Guidance
CrisisWire provides comprehensive school safety consulting that balances behavioral prevention with physical security—not one-size-fits-all recommendations, but customized approaches based on your specific environment, resources, and risk profile.
Schedule Your Free 30-Minute Safety Assessment Consultation
Discuss your organization's security approach with a BTAM-certified expert who has implemented violence prevention programs across diverse environments from high-security government facilities to educational campuses.
In this consultation, we'll evaluate:
✓ Current balance between prevention and response capabilities
✓ Threat assessment team effectiveness
✓ Physical security measures providing best ROI
✓ Resource allocation optimization
✓ Priority improvements with highest impact
✓ Implementation roadmap fitting your budget
No cost. No sales pressure. Just honest assessment from someone who has designed security programs that actually prevent violence.
📧 crisiswire@proton.me🌐 bit.ly/crisiswire
If you're facing an active threat situation requiring immediate expert guidance:
CrisisWire provides 24/7 emergency consultation for organizations dealing with concerning behaviors, potential threats, or crisis situations requiring coordinated response.
📧 crisiswire@proton.me (monitored 24/7)
Additional Resources
Free Training:
Research:
Comprehensive Guidance:
Stay Informed:
LinkedIn: Warren Pulley
Twitter/X: @CrisisWireSec
About Warren Pulley and CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions
Warren Pulley is founder of CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions, bringing 40 years of experience preventing violence and designing comprehensive security programs across military, law enforcement, diplomatic, and educational environments.
Professional Credentials:
BTAM Certified - Behavioral Threat Assessment & Management (University of Hawaii West Oahu)
20+ FEMA Certifications - IS-906, IS-907, IS-915, Complete ICS/NIMS
Former LAPD Officer - 12 years investigating violent crimes
U.S. Embassy Baghdad Security Director - 6+ years (zero incidents under daily threat)
Former Director of Campus Safety - Chaminade University
U.S. Air Force Veteran - 7 years nuclear weapons security
Published Works:
Connect:
LinkedIn: Warren Pulley
Twitter/X: @CrisisWireSec
Instagram: @crisiswire
Facebook: CrisisWire
Quora: CrisisWire
When violence is preventable, inaction is negligence.
Locked doors saved lives at Evergreen. Threat assessment would have prevented the attack entirely. Contact CrisisWire today.
© 2025 CrisisWire Threat Management Solutions. All rights reserved.
Comments