Syndicated Maps has recently launched a value-packed bundled subscription that gives users access to all 22 of its niche maps for just $9.95 per month—a savings of over 50% compared to subscribing individually. This all-access plan was created in response to user demand for a more affordable way to explore multiple data layers across traffic enforcement, environmental hazards, wireless coverage, energy infrastructure, and public safety. Whether you're a researcher, commuter, traveler, or concerned homeowner, this bundle lets you seamlessly tap into detailed, location-based intelligence from across the entire network.
Each map serves a specific purpose—from helping drivers avoid speed traps to alerting families about nearby environmental hazards. The Syndicated Maps network has earned the trust of millions of users annually, including commuters, journalists, health professionals, and urban planners.
Why Choose DangerousSchools.com?
Comprehensive Risk Data
Access a detailed and up-to-date database highlighting schools with ongoing safety concerns. Stay informed about locations where violence and other issues pose risks to students and the community.
Real-Time Updates
Our platform provides frequent updates on high-risk school locations, ensuring the most accurate and current safety information.
User-Friendly Navigation
Easily search and explore problem school zones with our interactive map, designed to help parents, students, and concerned citizens stay aware and make informed decisions.
Trusted by Communities
DangerousSchools.com is a valuable tool for parents, students, educators, and local organizations looking to advocate for safer schools and communities.
Artificial intelligence is no longer confined to consumer apps or corporate security. Schools are adopting AI in growing numbers to prevent violence, detect weapons, and reduce false alarms. Districts across the country are adding computer vision software to cameras, walk-through scanners powered by machine learning, and panic-alert systems that tie everything together.
The goal is simple: shorten the time from detection to response. When a weapon is visible in front of a camera or a student walks through an AI-assisted screening system, the technology can flag the threat, verify it, and alert staff in seconds. That speed could save lives, but the technology is not without trade-offs. False alarms, missed detections, privacy debates, and inconsistent funding make adoption uneven across the country.
What AI for School Safety Looks Like
1. Gun detection on cameras. The most common use case is computer vision layered on top of existing security cameras. The software is trained to identify when a gun is visible. If detected, frames are routed to an operations center for human review before any alerts go out. Utah, for example, made this software available statewide for every K-12 school.
2. AI walk-through scanners. Districts are experimenting with AI-driven entry systems that look like metal detectors but promise faster throughput. These scanners use sensors and algorithms to distinguish benign items like laptops from possible weapons, helping reduce long lines. Florida’s Volusia County Schools piloted such a system in 2025.
3. Automated panic alerts. When paired with state laws like Alyssa’s Law, which requires silent panic alarms in schools, AI detections can trigger faster communication to first responders. Oregon recently expanded its panic-alert infrastructure so schools can connect AI notifications directly to law enforcement.
4. Grant funding. Federal and state grants are the lifeblood of adoption. States like Michigan and Pennsylvania have earmarked millions specifically for AI gun detection and other safety upgrades. Schools can also search programs through SchoolSafety.gov to find relevant grants.
What Works Well—and What Doesn’t
Speed plus human review. When systems are properly placed and staffed, verified alerts can reach administrators in under 10 seconds. Human review is critical to avoid false alarms and panic lockdowns.
Challenges at entry points. AI scanners are controversial. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accused Evolv, one of the biggest vendors, of overstating its capabilities, a reminder that districts must test before relying on marketing claims (FTC).
Placement is everything. After a 2025 incident in Nashville, schools learned the hard way that a camera must have clear sightlines. The system missed a gun because the angle and placement were poor. Technology only works where it can actually “see.”
Community debates. Even in towns touched by tragedy, school boards wrestle with privacy, optics, and whether funds should go to mental-health programs instead. In Newtown, Connecticut, parents and educators openly debated whether to accept donated AI scanning equipment.
How to Interpret Adoption Levels
When comparing states, three broad categories help describe adoption trends:
Ahead. These states have either statewide programs, dedicated budget lines, or broad district deployments that make AI school safety widely accessible. Examples: Utah, Michigan, Pennsylvania.
Emerging. These states have pilot programs, grants, or select districts experimenting with AI, but adoption isn’t uniform or statewide. Examples: California, Washington, Texas.
Lagging. These states have little visible AI activity in schools, often relying solely on traditional security or federal grants. Examples: Alaska, South Dakota, Vermont.
A few states are “Mixed” or “Debated” where adoption exists but strong political or legal pushback is slowing momentum. Florida and Connecticut fit this category.
State-by-State Snapshot of AI Adoption in School Safety
State
Signal of adoption (examples)
Status
Alabama
Limited mention of AI tools; some federal grant use.
A few district pilots, mostly traditional surveillance.
Emerging
Arkansas
Some state safety grant allocations; no AI-specific path.
Lagging
California
Select districts piloting AI detection; statewide funding unclear.
Emerging
Colorado
District-level upgrades; early AI interest.
Emerging
Connecticut
Newtown debated AI scanning but concerns dominate.
Debated
Delaware
Minimal activity; relies on federal grants.
Lagging
Florida
Volusia County pilot; bills proposed banning AI detection.
Mixed
Georgia
Metro districts adding AI-assisted surveillance.
Emerging
Hawaii
Limited adoption; focus on physical barriers.
Lagging
Idaho
No clear AI initiatives; rural schools lag.
Lagging
Illinois
Chicago-area schools testing scanners and alert tech.
Emerging
Indiana
Safety grant recipients upgrading systems.
Emerging
Iowa
Few adoptions; traditional safety dominates.
Lagging
Kansas
District-level adoption slow; no state funding.
Lagging
Kentucky
State safety grants; AI not mainstream yet.
Lagging
Louisiana
Some New Orleans districts piloting detection.
Emerging
Maine
Sparse adoption, mostly rural.
Lagging
Maryland
Baltimore County exploring AI pilots.
Emerging
Massachusetts
FTC case vs. Evolv centered here; some Boston pilots.
Mixed
Michigan
Dedicated line item for firearm detection software.
Ahead
Minnesota
Select suburban schools trialing AI detectors.
Emerging
Mississippi
Low adoption; security funding limited.
Lagging
Missouri
District-led initiatives; some AI proposals.
Emerging
Montana
Rural focus; AI adoption not visible.
Lagging
Nebraska
Basic security; AI not prioritized.
Lagging
Nevada
Clark County piloting AI surveillance.
Emerging
New Hampshire
Minimal adoption; protocol-based safety.
Lagging
New Jersey
Glassboro adopted AI + mass notifications.
Emerging
New Mexico
Some interest in Albuquerque; slow progress.
Lagging
New York
NYC rolling out scanners; scrutiny ongoing.
Mixed
North Carolina
State safety grants; metro pilots.
Emerging
North Dakota
Very little AI adoption.
Lagging
Ohio
Cleveland piloting enhanced detection.
Emerging
Oklahoma
State task forces considering AI.
Emerging
Oregon
Alyssa’s Law expanded panic alerts.
Emerging
Pennsylvania
Over $120M in school safety funds; AI adoptions.
Ahead
Rhode Island
Small state, minimal AI adoption.
Lagging
South Carolina
Select district pilots.
Emerging
South Dakota
Minimal adoption; rural lagging.
Lagging
Tennessee
AI contracts in place; coverage gaps revealed.
Mixed
Texas
Multiple districts adopting AI gun detection.
Emerging
Utah
Statewide funding enabled AI in all K-12.
Ahead
Vermont
Very little adoption.
Lagging
Virginia
Fairfax & Loudoun exploring AI tools.
Emerging
Washington
State issued guidance and funding for security.
Emerging
West Virginia
Minimal adoption, traditional safety only.
Lagging
Wisconsin
Milwaukee exploring AI school safety pilots.
Emerging
Wyoming
Sparse activity; rural reliance on basics.
Lagging
Building a Sensible AI Safety Program
1. Assess risks. Schools should begin with a clear threat assessment. Where are the blind spots? Where do students gather? Where are bottlenecks at entrances?
2. Layer technology. Combine AI gun detection on cameras, AI-assisted entry scanners, and panic-alert systems. Integration matters more than any single tool.
3. Test and train. Run drills with local law enforcement. Measure time to notify and time to lockdown—not just how many detections the software produces.
4. Manage false alarms and privacy. Define acceptable error rates, set policies for data retention, and ensure staff can quickly clear or mute false alerts.
5. Fund responsibly. Use federal programs from SchoolSafety.gov along with state appropriations. Structure contracts with pilot phases and clear performance milestones.
What to Expect
Faster alerts. AI plus human review can send verified alerts in seconds.
Better entry flow. When tuned properly, AI scanners reduce delays at doors.
Not foolproof. Blind spots, camera placement, and concealed weapons remain weaknesses.
Community trust is key. Parents and teachers must feel that technology complements mental-health programs, not replaces them. Transparency reports and drills help build confidence.
What Comes Next
Legislative divides. Some states, like Utah and Michigan, are doubling down, while others, like Florida, debate bans on AI detection.
Stronger testing standards. Independent validations will force vendors to prove performance. The FTC case against Evolv is a sign of things to come.
Integration over point solutions. States will increasingly look at statewide models—like Utah’s—that combine funding, procurement, and training in one system.
Bottom Line
AI in school safety is about time saved and lives protected, not gadgets installed. States ahead of the curve provide funding and clear pathways for districts. Emerging states are experimenting but not yet uniform. Lagging states are waiting, often due to cost, skepticism, or rural challenges.
The best results will come where AI is layered with human judgment, tested regularly, and backed by transparent community engagement. In the race to make schools safer, technology alone is not the answer—but when paired with people and process, it can be the difference between tragedy and prevention.
School safety has never been a bigger concern, and administrators are under pressure to address blind spots where misconduct thrives. It’s widely recognized that school bathrooms often become hotspots for trouble, from bullying to vaping, and stronger enforcement is needed. Some argue that cameras could provide an answer, while others warn that the idea tramples on fundamental privacy rights. The issue has created one of the sharpest divides in education policy today. This article explores both sides of the debate, what the law says, how states handle the question, and what safer alternatives exist for protecting students.
Why Schools Consider Cameras in Bathrooms
Bathrooms are difficult to supervise, and misconduct often goes unchecked. Schools considering cameras point to several recurring problems:
Bullying Prevention: Restrooms are one of the most common areas for harassment when no staff are present.
Vandalism & Property Damage: Graffiti, broken fixtures, and intentional damage cost schools thousands each year.
Substance Abuse: Vaping, smoking, and drug use frequently take place in restrooms.
Violence Prevention: Bathrooms sometimes become the stage for fights where staff cannot intervene quickly. Supporters argue that cameras—if installed outside stalls and sinks—could serve as a deterrent and help administrators intervene sooner.
The Privacy Argument Against Cameras
The counterargument is blunt: cameras in bathrooms are a violation of privacy and dignity. Opponents stress that:
Constitutional Protections: Courts recognize that students have a reasonable expectation of privacy in restrooms.
Psychological Harm: The idea of being watched in a bathroom, even indirectly, creates fear and mistrust.
Legal Risk: Schools could face lawsuits, federal penalties, and even criminal liability if cameras were misused.
Trust Breakdown: Parents and students may see surveillance as crossing an unacceptable line. Critics argue that no safety measure justifies invading the most private spaces of a school.
What the Law Says
Across the United States, bathroom surveillance is nearly always illegal. Federal and state laws consistently back student privacy.
Title IX & Student Rights: Schools cannot create environments that discourage safe, equal access to facilities.
Fourth Amendment: Students retain a right to privacy in restrooms and locker rooms.
State Statutes: States like California, Texas, Illinois, and Oregon have explicit prohibitions against restroom cameras. Some schools have tested cameras at bathroom entrances to track who enters and exits. While technically legal in certain states, even this approach has stirred controversy.
Real-World Cases
South Carolina (2019): Parents sued a middle school after hidden cameras were discovered in restrooms.
Pennsylvania (2017): A district floated the idea to curb vandalism, but lawyers immediately shot it down.
United Kingdom (2012): Reports revealed over 200 schools had installed cameras in bathrooms and changing rooms, sparking international outrage. Each example underscores how quickly the public pushes back once cameras cross the restroom threshold.
State-by-State Breakdown of Bathroom Camera Laws
State
Bathroom Camera Legality
Notes / Statutes
Alabama
Illegal
State privacy laws protect against restroom surveillance
Alaska
Illegal
Explicit bans in spaces of expected privacy
Arizona
Illegal
Surreptitious recording laws apply
Arkansas
Illegal
Voyeurism statutes prohibit restroom recording
California
Illegal
Penal Code §647(j) forbids restroom surveillance
Colorado
Illegal
Invasion of privacy law covers bathrooms
Connecticut
Illegal
Electronic surveillance banned in private areas
Delaware
Illegal
Hidden camera statutes apply
District of Columbia
Illegal
Privacy protections extend to restrooms
Florida
Illegal
Video voyeurism laws ban bathroom cameras
Georgia
Illegal
Surveillance in private places criminalized
Hawaii
Illegal
Explicit prohibition under privacy laws
Idaho
Illegal
Recording in restrooms unlawful
Illinois
Illegal
Criminal code bans cameras in restrooms
Indiana
Illegal
“Peeping Tom” statutes apply
Iowa
Illegal
Covert bathroom cameras outlawed
Kansas
Illegal
Video voyeurism bans apply
Kentucky
Illegal
Cameras in bathrooms violate state law
Louisiana
Illegal
Voyeurism statutes prohibit restroom surveillance
Maine
Illegal
Restroom privacy protected
Maryland
Illegal
Cameras banned in private spaces
Massachusetts
Illegal
Recording in bathrooms is criminal
Michigan
Illegal
Penal Code §750.539j prohibits restroom cameras
Minnesota
Illegal
Restroom recordings forbidden
Mississippi
Illegal
Bathroom surveillance criminalized
Missouri
Illegal
Explicit prohibition under privacy law
Montana
Illegal
Recording in restrooms unlawful
Nebraska
Illegal
Video voyeurism statutes prohibit
Nevada
Illegal
NRS §200.604 bans bathroom cameras
New Hampshire
Illegal
Privacy protections extend to restrooms
New Jersey
Illegal
Statutes criminalize bathroom recording
New Mexico
Illegal
Voyeurism laws prohibit restroom cameras
New York
Illegal
Penal law bans surveillance in restrooms
North Carolina
Illegal
Bathroom surveillance outlawed
North Dakota
Illegal
Covert restroom cameras banned
Ohio
Illegal
Cameras in bathrooms unlawful
Oklahoma
Illegal
Privacy statutes cover bathrooms
Oregon
Illegal
ORS §163.700 prohibits restroom recording
Pennsylvania
Illegal
Title 18 statutes ban bathroom surveillance
Rhode Island
Illegal
Bathroom cameras are criminal
South Carolina
Illegal
Restroom surveillance forbidden
South Dakota
Illegal
Voyeurism statutes apply
Tennessee
Illegal
Video surveillance in restrooms prohibited
Texas
Illegal
Penal Code §21.15 prohibits bathroom recording
Utah
Illegal
Restroom cameras prohibited
Vermont
Illegal
Privacy protections cover restrooms
Virginia
Illegal
Cameras in bathrooms unlawful
Washington
Illegal
Video voyeurism laws apply
West Virginia
Illegal
Restroom recordings banned
Wisconsin
Illegal
Invasion of privacy statutes apply
Wyoming
Illegal
Surveillance in restrooms prohibited
Alternatives to Bathroom Cameras
Given the universal bans, schools are pivoting toward creative solutions:
Cameras Outside Entrances: Records who goes in and out without violating privacy.
Hall Monitors & Patrols: Increases visibility during passing periods.
Anonymous Reporting Apps: Gives students a safe channel to report bullying or misconduct.
Open Sink Designs: Keeps sinks in visible areas while stalls remain private.
Anti-Vaping Sensors: Detects smoke or vapor without using video. These strategies preserve privacy while still tackling the problems administrators worry about most.
Community Reactions
Parents overwhelmingly oppose restroom cameras, fearing both abuse and data breaches. Privacy advocates warn that allowing cameras in bathrooms sets a dangerous precedent for constant surveillance. On the other hand, some parents frustrated by unchecked bullying or drug use push for stronger enforcement. This divide often plays out in contentious school board meetings where emotions run high.
Technology & Ethical Dilemmas
Even if cameras were legally allowed, they would introduce new risks:
Data Security: Recordings could be hacked or leaked.
Artificial Intelligence: While AI could blur private areas, mistakes are inevitable.
Normalization of Surveillance: Once cameras are allowed in bathrooms, where does it stop? The ethical bottom line is clear: preventing some misbehavior does not justify watching students in their most private space.
The Bottom Line
At present, cameras inside bathrooms remain illegal in every U.S. jurisdiction and deeply controversial. While enforcement is necessary, the focus should stay on solutions that protect students without crossing privacy boundaries. Smarter design, better staffing, sensors, and strong community policies can keep bathrooms safe without turning them into surveillance zones.
Conclusion
The reality is that bathrooms are trouble spots, but cameras are not the answer. Safety in schools must be achieved through balanced measures that protect both security and dignity. As administrators seek stronger enforcement, they must remember that students deserve privacy as much as they deserve protection.
School delays and cancellations are part of life in many parts of the United States. Whether it’s snow in the Northeast, heat in the South, wildfires in the West, or hurricanes in the Southeast, extreme weather and climate-related disruptions can upend the school day. But not all areas are created equal when it comes to delays and cancellations.
In this article, we’ll explore:
The regions that experience the most school closures and delays
Key weather drivers behind those closures
How climate change and evolving weather patterns are reshaping school disruption patterns
What factors influence whether a school district delays, cancels, or stays open
SEO keywords to track, such as “school closures by state,” “most snow days,” and “weather-related school delays”
1. Overview: Why Some Regions See More Closures
School closings and delays typically happen when unsafe weather conditions threaten student and staff safety. These include:
Snow, ice, extreme cold — notably in the North and Midwest
Hurricanes, tropical storms, flooding — in the Southeast and coastal areas
Extreme heat — especially in parts of the South and Southwest
Wildfires and smoke — in the West
Rainstorms and mudslides — in mountainous or flood-prone regions
According to the Undaunted K-12 map of extreme-weather school closures, school closures in the U.S. from 2021 to 2024 have stemmed from a wide variety of events, including extreme heat, cold, flooding, wildfire, severe storms, and hurricanes. UndauntedK12
Add to that media reports—like outages in Nevada due to heat, flooding-related closures in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and wildfire-related closures in the West. Climate Action Campaign The data shows that certain areas see repeated disruptions.
2. Regions Most Impacted by Delays and Closures
A. Northeast and Upper Midwest — Snow & Ice
These areas see frequent snow and cold weather closures. Even when they’re well-equipped with plows and snow infrastructure, major storms can overwhelm local systems.
The Northeast, including New York, New England, and the Great Lakes states, experiences heavy snowfall and nor’easters that repeatedly shut down schools in winter.
In the Upper Midwest—think Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan—the combination of heavy snow, freezing rain, and subzero temperatures often forces cancellations. Some districts exhaust their allocated snow days each year. Benzie Record Patriot
An example: Louisville, Kentucky, averaged five weather-related closures per year; in a 10-year period, that added up to about 50 cancellations, even though Louisville sees milder winters than Chicago. The Atlantic
B. Southeast and Gulf Coast — Hurricanes and Flooding
Hurricanes, tropical storms, and related flooding frequently trigger delays and closures.
When storms make landfall, widespread flooding and power outages make transport and infrastructure unsafe, forcing widespread school shutdowns from Florida to the Carolinas and east into Virginia and Louisiana.
During the historic Gulf Coast blizzard of early 2025, even states like Mississippi, Alabama, and coastal North Carolina shut down schools for the week. Wikipedia
C. Southwest and South — Extreme Heat
In parts of the Southwest—Arizona, New Mexico—and the Deep South—Louisiana, Mississippi, parts of Georgia—extreme heat has become a growing school disruption cause, especially when schools lack air conditioning or face unsafe indoor temperatures. Climate Action Campaign
D. West Coast and Mountain West — Wildfires and Smoke
Elsewhere, wildfires can lead to closures due to hazardous air quality. Northern California, Oregon, Washington, and parts of the Mountain West face this threat regularly. Smoke can reach dangerous levels, making classrooms unsafe for students to breathe and forcing schools to close or switch to remote learning. Climate Action Campaign
E. Mixed Regions — Severe Storms, Flooding, and Tornadoes
Some places—like the plains states (Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska)—face tornado threats and severe thunderstorms that bring hail, flash flooding, and damaging winds, leading to sporadic closures or delays.
Similarly, densely populated metro areas in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic can see significant disruption from winter nor’easters or multiple storm systems.
3. Weather Trends & the Rising Costs of Disruption
Climate Change Intensifies Extremes
More frequent extreme heat waves in the South and West lead to more closures.
Heavier precipitation events can produce flooding more often in the Northeast and Midwest.
Worsening wildfire seasons in the West increasingly disrupt schools—not just due to fires themselves, but also smoke days.
Economic & Learning Impacts
Unplanned closures disrupt learning, force districts to squeeze in make-up days, and can strain budgets. They also hurt working parents and communities.
An article by Undaunted K-12 tracks closures by weather type across the U.S., helping districts understand where and why closures are growing. UndauntedK12
4. What Influences School Closure Decisions?
Administrative Safety Processes
Districts weigh factors like:
Road and sidewalk conditions (ice, snow, windblown debris)
Temperature extremes (too hot or too cold to be safe)
Power or heating failures
Air quality (wildfire smoke or chemical events)
Anticipated storm timing and coverage
Superintendents, local officials, and often school boards make final decisions. They must balance student safety with preventing academic loss. AccuWeather
Regional Expectations & Preparedness
Ironically, places used to snow—like northern states—may delay or close less often because they are prepared. In contrast, southern or more temperate regions may cancel when extreme weather is rare but severe.
As The Atlantic’s 2016 report noted: in a decade, Louisville averaged fifty weather-related closures—even though Chicago, more accustomed to snow, had far fewer despite similar or worse weather. The Atlantic
5. State-by-State Patterns (Examples)
Region
Common Disruption Cause(s)
Example School Closure Patterns
Northeast / Great Lakes
Snow, ice, nor’easters
Frequent winter cancellations; some districts max out bad-weather days
Sporadic closures due to short-notice severe weather
Mid-Atlantic
Mixed: snow, coastal storms, flooding
Varied closures depending on storm track and infrastructure capacity
6. Additional Drivers Beyond Weather
Weather isn’t the only reason for delays and closures—it just ranks near the top. Other causes include:
Teacher strikes or labor disruptions
Power outages unrelated to weather
Health emergencies (e.g., pandemic-related shutdowns)
Infrastructure failures (e.g., building issues)
Security or safety threats
Still, weather remains the most frequent disruptor, especially in places facing multiple types of extreme conditions.
7. SEO & Tracking Keywords (for local or national focus)
To boost SEO visibility or gather data by region, focus on targetable keywords such as:
“Which state has the most school closures?”
“Most snow days by state”
“Weather-related school delays in [State Name]”
“Wildfire school closures California”
“Heat-related school cancellations Arizona”
“Hurricane school closures Florida”
“School closure statistics U.S.”
You can also target region-specific queries: e.g., “Why does Michigan cancel school more than Texas?”, or “School delays in New England vs Midwest”.
8. Trends & Insights
Northeast & Upper Midwest: High frequency of winter weather delays; Yet more resilient infrastructure may limit frequency despite high snow.
Southeast & Gulf Coast: Concentrated closures tied to hurricane season; flooding and wind damage widely disruptive.
Southwest & Deep South: Rising heat-related cancellations in districts without air conditioning.
Western U.S.: Smoke and wildfire seasons increasingly force “do-not-send-children-to-school” advisories.
Tornado-prone Plains: Quick-onset storms cause timely, tactical closures—often reactive rather than preemptive.
Effect of Climate Change: More extreme heat, more severe storms, longer wildfire seasons—all portend higher rates of school closure.
Preparedness & Culture: Regions accustomed to weather events may delay/class cancel less (assuming preparedness), whereas rare but intense events in less-prepared areas can cause higher per-event disruption.
Conclusion
In the U.S., school delays and cancellations stem largely from regional weather vulnerabilities and local infrastructure readiness:
Most frequent closures: Northeast, Upper Midwest (winter storms); Southeast / Gulf Coast (hurricanes); West (wildfires & smoke).
Rising trends: Extreme heat in the South & Southwest; worsening wildfire seasons.
Regional resilience matters: Familiarity with snow, storms, or heat can reduce disruption frequency despite extreme conditions.
Climate change ensures that “weather day” disruption remains a significant operational challenge for school districts nationwide.
Which Parts of the U.S. Get the Most School Delays or Cancellations?
School delays and cancellations are a fact of life across the United States. From snow in the North to hurricanes in the South, extreme weather often forces districts to shut down. But some states face disruptions far more often than others. Below is a ranking of U.S. states based on the frequency and type of school closures, along with the main reasons why they happen.
State-by-State Ranking of School Delays and Cancellations
1. New York Heavy snowfall, icy roads, and nor’easters cause frequent cancellations. Rural districts often close multiple times each winter.
2. Michigan Lake-effect snow and extreme cold regularly push districts past their built-in snow days. Schools in northern Michigan see some of the highest closure rates.
3. Ohio Snow, ice storms, and subzero cold snaps make Ohio one of the top states for winter weather school closures.
4. Pennsylvania Snow, ice, and flooding are common culprits. Mountainous terrain and rural bus routes make closures more likely.
5. Minnesota Extreme cold (sometimes below -30°F) and blizzards frequently cancel classes. The state is used to winter, but safety standards still force closures.
6. Wisconsin Snowstorms and polar vortex events lead to multiple cancellations each year. Milwaukee and Madison often close schools due to road safety.
7. Illinois Chicago schools close less often due to infrastructure, but downstate Illinois sees frequent snow and ice day cancellations.
8. Iowa Snow, ice, and blizzards cause regular closures. Districts in rural areas may close sooner because of dangerous bus routes.
9. Massachusetts Nor’easters can shut down entire metro areas, including Boston. Snow and coastal flooding are main factors.
10. New Jersey Snow, ice, and flooding lead to frequent closures, especially in South Jersey where infrastructure is more limited.
11. Vermont Heavy snow and freezing rain cause regular winter closures. Rural communities often get hit hardest.
12. Maine Snow and icy roads regularly force schools to cancel, even though residents are well adapted to winter conditions.
13. New Hampshire Frequent snowstorms and icy roadways lead to multiple closures each year.
14. Connecticut Snow and ice storms cause winter closures, especially in suburban and rural areas.
15. Colorado Snowstorms and blizzards frequently shut schools in Denver and the mountains. High winds and avalanches also add risks.
16. Kentucky Snow and ice cause more disruptions here than in snowier northern states, mainly because Kentucky lacks snow-removal infrastructure.
17. West Virginia Mountainous terrain plus snow and flooding often close schools. Some rural districts log among the highest closure totals.
18. Indiana Snow, ice, and freezing rain are the main factors. Indianapolis sees several cancellations each winter.
19. Missouri Ice storms and snow regularly close schools. Tornadoes can also disrupt the school calendar.
20. North Carolina Snow shuts schools more often than in northern states because the region is less prepared. Hurricanes and flooding also play a role.
21. Virginia Snow, ice, and hurricanes lead to a mix of closures. Rural Appalachia and coastal regions see the most.
22. Tennessee Snow and ice create disproportionate closures because of hilly terrain and lack of plowing resources.
23. Maryland Snow and coastal storms close schools regularly, especially in suburban areas.
24. Washington Snow in Seattle can paralyze transportation. Wildfires and smoke increasingly cause closures in eastern Washington.
25. Oregon Snow in Portland and wildfire smoke in summer/fall lead to school disruptions.
26. California Wildfires and smoke are the biggest causes of school closures, especially in Northern California. Some mountain areas close for snow.
27. Texas Ice storms and hurricanes cause widespread closures. Extreme heat is becoming a growing factor.
28. Louisiana Hurricanes, flooding, and extreme heat regularly shut schools across the state.
29. Florida Hurricanes cause large-scale closures statewide. Flooding and storm surges are recurring risks.
30. Alabama Snow is rare but disruptive. Hurricanes and tornadoes also cause closures.
31. Georgia Snow and ice shut schools occasionally in Atlanta, but hurricanes and tropical storms affect the coast more often.
32. South Carolina Hurricanes and flooding drive closures. Ice storms occasionally hit inland areas.
33. Oklahoma Ice storms and tornadoes cause sporadic closures. Severe thunderstorms with hail also contribute.
34. Arkansas Snow, ice, and tornadoes are the main causes of cancellations.
35. Kansas Blizzards and ice storms close schools in rural districts. Tornadoes are another risk.
36. Nebraska Snow, blizzards, and extreme cold lead to closures in both rural and urban districts.
37. Montana Snow and extreme cold cancel classes, especially in smaller rural schools.
38. North Dakota Blizzards and cold snaps routinely shut schools for safety.
39. South Dakota Similar to North Dakota, winter weather is the main driver of closures.
40. Alaska Despite harsh winters, schools rarely close except for blizzards and extreme cold. Communities are generally prepared.
41. Arizona Extreme heat is the top cause of school delays. Monsoon flooding also contributes.
42. Nevada Heat waves and flooding cause occasional closures, especially in Las Vegas and Reno.
43. New Mexico Snow in the north and extreme heat in the south both contribute to occasional cancellations.
44. Hawaii Hurricanes and flooding occasionally shut down schools, but closures are less frequent compared to mainland states.
45. Delaware Snow and coastal flooding occasionally close schools, but at lower rates than neighboring states.
46. Rhode Island Snowstorms cause closures, though the small geographic size helps districts respond quickly.
47. Idaho Snow, avalanches, and flooding occasionally cancel classes, mostly in mountain towns.
48. Wyoming Snow and high winds lead to occasional closures, but the state is less populated, so numbers are small.
49. Mississippi Hurricanes and flooding occasionally shut down schools. Snow and ice are rare but very disruptive when they occur.
50. Washington, D.C. Snow and ice close schools multiple times per year, despite smaller snowfall totals, because infrastructure is less prepared.
Each year in the United States, school shootings generate headlines, spark debates, and raise concerns about student safety. While definitions differ between organizations, one of the most widely cited sources is the CNN School Shootings Database, which tracks incidents at K-12 schools and colleges in which at least one person (other than the shooter) is shot. This article examines trends since 2008, with a focus on how 2025 is shaping up compared to previous years.
Defining the Numbers
School shootings are measured differently depending on the source. For example:
CNN’s Database includes shootings on K-12 and college campuses that result in injury or death.
Everytown for Gun Safety takes a broader view, counting any incident where a firearm discharges on school property, even without casualties.
Education Week limits its count to K-12 shootings where someone was injured or killed during the school day.
For consistency, we use CNN’s approach, which provides annual totals back to 2008 and is frequently cited by national outlets.
Year-by-Year Totals
According to CNN’s Fast Facts and database entries, the annual totals since 2015 are as follows:
Looking further back, CNN’s database confirms that annual totals before 2015 rarely exceeded 30 incidents, which means the last decade has been far more violent than the decade prior.
2025 in Context
With 47 shootings already recorded by early September, 2025 is tracking ahead of several past years. For comparison:
By September of 2019, the U.S. had fewer than 40.
By September of 2022, the total was near 50, eventually reaching 80 by year’s end.
By September of 2024, the total was in the mid-50s, finishing the year at 83.
If trends continue, 2025 may end with another record-setting number, though the final months of the year will determine whether it surpasses 2024.
The Long-Term Rise
Why have school shootings increased so sharply? Experts cite multiple factors:
Increased gun availability: More firearms in circulation correlate with higher risks of violence.
Campus accessibility: Many schools remain “soft targets” with limited entry controls.
Social factors: Mental health crises, online radicalization, and bullying contribute to risk.
Copycat effect: High-profile events can inspire subsequent attackers.
The decline in 2020, followed by a dramatic rebound, shows how school attendance itself influences the count. With students at home during pandemic lockdowns, opportunities for on-campus violence plummeted. But once schools reopened, incidents surged to unprecedented levels.
Comparing K-12 and Higher Education
CNN’s methodology includes both K-12 schools and colleges, which makes its numbers larger than those of Education Week. For example, in 2022 CNN recorded 80 shootings, while EdWeek (K-12 only, injuries/deaths) counted 51. This difference highlights how college campuses, sports fields, and dormitories remain part of the school safety conversation.
Regional Patterns
School shootings are not evenly distributed across the country. States with large populations—Texas, Florida, and California—report more incidents simply due to size. But per capita rates are often higher in smaller states with fewer restrictions on firearms. Urban, suburban, and rural schools all face risks, though the type of incident differs:
Urban schools often see drive-by or parking lot shootings.
Suburban schools are more likely to experience mass-casualty events.
Rural schools sometimes report domestic or hunting-related incidents.
Impact on Students and Communities
The immediate tragedy of a school shooting is obvious, but the ripple effects last years:
Mental health toll: Students exposed to violence show higher rates of anxiety, PTSD, and academic decline.
Economic costs: Security upgrades, counseling, and lawsuits strain district budgets.
Community trauma: Parents and teachers often leave schools or districts after major incidents, destabilizing communities.
Policy Debates
Each new spike in the numbers reignites debates around prevention. Proposals range from stricter gun control to arming teachers, with little national consensus. Current approaches include:
Mental health investment (school counselors, hotlines, early intervention).
Threat assessment teams that track warning behaviors.
Legislative changes, such as red flag laws or safe storage requirements.
Despite these measures, the trend remains upward—suggesting that piecemeal solutions may not be enough.
Technology and Data
Organizations now track incidents in near real-time. Databases like CNN’s allow researchers, journalists, and policymakers to spot patterns and react faster. However, critics argue that the constant flow of statistics risks desensitizing the public, turning tragedies into mere data points.
How Parents and Schools Respond
Parents increasingly demand transparency from districts about security measures. Many schools now conduct lockdown drills, though some psychologists warn these can traumatize young children. Others have invested in anonymous reporting apps so students can flag threats. While these tools can prevent some attacks, they also reveal a grim reality: students are expected to prepare for violence as part of everyday life.
Media Coverage and Public Awareness
News outlets like CNN update their tallies regularly, ensuring the issue stays visible. At the same time, advocacy groups such as Everytown for Gun Safety publish broader datasets that keep attention on the scope of the crisis. Together, these sources push the topic into political campaigns, school board meetings, and parent discussions.
What the Future May Hold
If 2025 ends above 80 incidents, it will be the fourth consecutive year of record-high shootings. That trajectory suggests the U.S. is entering a new normal where annual totals exceed 80 or even 100. Unless substantial reforms occur, schools may continue to struggle with balancing education and security.
Conclusion
The story of school shootings since 2008 is one of escalation. While 2020 offered a temporary dip, subsequent years shattered records. Now in 2025, with 47 shootings by early September, America faces another grim milestone. The data show that school shootings are not rare anomalies but recurring events, deeply tied to broader issues of gun violence, social stress, and political inaction.
Until a coordinated strategy addresses root causes—access to firearms, mental health crises, and campus vulnerabilities—the numbers may continue their upward climb, leaving students, parents, and teachers to bear the consequences.
The Evergreen High School shooting in Colorado on September 10, 2025, marks yet another devastating reminder of the ongoing crisis of school violence in the United States. Located in Jefferson County, just west of Denver, Evergreen High School became the scene of an active shooter situation that left at least three individuals critically wounded. The community, the state, and the nation now grapple with the aftermath of a tragedy that raises painful questions about safety, preparedness, and the lingering shadow of Colorado’s history with school shootings.
This article provides a comprehensive overview of what happened in Evergreen, the immediate responses from law enforcement and government leaders, and the broader implications when compared to past incidents like Columbine and the STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting.
What We Know So Far
At approximately 12:40 p.m. MDT, the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office received reports of an active assailant near Evergreen High School. Deputies and tactical units rushed to the scene, securing the school and surrounding neighborhoods. Early reports confirmed that two students were shot, but updated information later clarified that three people—including the suspect—were hospitalized in critical condition.
The victims were transported to CommonSpirit St. Anthony Hospital in Lakewood, where emergency teams worked to stabilize them. The suspect, believed to be a teenager connected to the school, was also among the wounded. Authorities have not released the identity of the shooter, citing the ongoing nature of the investigation.
Law enforcement urged parents not to rush directly to the school, a protocol now standard in active shooter situations to avoid chaos and allow emergency responders to secure the area. Parents and families were directed to a reunification site away from the school grounds, where counseling teams were also made available.
Law Enforcement and Government Response
The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office declared the area an active crime scene and continued to sweep the premises for any potential threats. SWAT teams, K-9 units, and tactical vehicles were deployed as helicopters circled overhead.
Colorado Governor Jared Polis issued a statement expressing his concern and solidarity:
“I am closely monitoring the situation at Evergreen High School. Students should be able to attend school safely and without fear. We are all praying for the victims and the entire community.”
The governor confirmed that state troopers and additional law enforcement agencies were assisting in the investigation. Meanwhile, Evergreen School District officials announced that all area schools would be closed the following day, giving students and staff time to process the trauma.
Colorado’s Troubling Legacy of School Shootings
Colorado is no stranger to school violence. The Evergreen High School shooting immediately reignited painful memories of past tragedies that shaped the state’s—and the nation’s—conversation on school safety.
Columbine High School (1999)
Perhaps the most infamous school shooting in U.S. history, the Columbine massacre occurred just 16 miles from Evergreen. Two heavily armed students killed 13 people and injured more than 20 before taking their own lives. Columbine shocked the nation and remains a point of reference in discussions about gun control, bullying, and mental health awareness.
STEM School Highlands Ranch (2019)
Twenty years later, another Colorado community endured tragedy when two students carried out a shooting at the STEM School Highlands Ranch. One student, Kendrick Castillo, was killed while heroically tackling one of the gunmen. Eight others were injured. This shooting highlighted both the bravery of students and the gaps in preventive measures.
These incidents underscore Colorado’s enduring struggle with school violence and how communities continue to live in the shadow of such events.
How Evergreen Fits Into the Pattern
The Evergreen High School shooting shares troubling similarities with prior incidents:
Location: Suburban areas near Denver have repeatedly been targeted.
Age of Suspects: Most shooters have been young—students or former students.
Aftermath: Communities experience long-lasting trauma, with anniversaries of past shootings often resurfacing in the public consciousness.
Yet, Evergreen also stands apart because it took place in 2025, a time when schools had already implemented multiple security reforms—from locked doors and ID systems to drills and resource officers. Despite these measures, the tragedy illustrates that preventative strategies remain incomplete and reactive.
Community Impact and Healing
For Evergreen residents, the shooting is more than a headline—it is a direct disruption to their sense of safety. Parents rushed to pick up their children, terrified of the unknown. Students described hiding in classrooms, texting their families, and hearing the chaos unfold around them.
Local churches, community centers, and nonprofits have mobilized to provide counseling, vigils, and spaces for collective mourning. As seen after Columbine and STEM, community solidarity is one of the first steps toward recovery. Still, survivors of past tragedies warn that trauma lingers for years, requiring ongoing resources for mental health care and survivor support.
School Safety: What’s Being Done?
In recent years, Colorado schools have introduced a range of security protocols, including:
Active shooter drills at least twice per year.
Controlled entry points and secured doors during school hours.
School resource officers stationed on campuses.
Anonymous reporting apps like Safe2Tell, which allow students to report threats.
Despite these measures, Evergreen reveals the limits of security when firearms are still accessible to students. Lawmakers are once again debating whether stricter gun laws—such as safe storage requirements, background checks, and age restrictions—could reduce such tragedies.
National Implications
The Evergreen shooting is not just a Colorado story; it adds to the national debate over gun violence in schools. Every incident reignites the polarized debate between advocates for stricter gun control and those emphasizing mental health and personal responsibility.
According to the Gun Violence Archive, the number of school-related shootings in the U.S. has risen sharply since the pandemic years, with incidents recorded in both urban and suburban communities. Evergreen now joins that grim list, forcing Americans to confront uncomfortable questions:
Why do school shootings persist despite decades of reforms?
How can schools balance education with the constant fear of violence?
What role should lawmakers, educators, and parents play in shaping solutions?
Comparison Table: Colorado School Shootings
Incident
Date
Location
Fatalities
Injuries
Notes
Columbine High School
April 20, 1999
Littleton, CO
13 (+2 shooters)
20+
Landmark case that changed national policy on school security
STEM School Highlands Ranch
May 7, 2019
Highlands Ranch, CO
1
8
Student hero Kendrick Castillo tackled shooter
Evergreen High School
Sept 10, 2025
Evergreen, CO
0 (as of reports)
3 (including suspect)
Investigation ongoing; all wounded in critical condition
Looking Ahead
The Evergreen High School shooting is still under investigation, and many details—including the motive, background of the suspect, and how the weapon was obtained—remain unknown. Authorities will continue to release updates in the coming days, while families and community members focus on healing.
What is clear is that Evergreen joins a heartbreaking lineage of Colorado schools touched by gun violence. For students, teachers, and parents, safety cannot be taken for granted. As officials at every level debate solutions, one reality remains: each new shooting deepens the urgency to find lasting answers.
Conclusion
The Evergreen High School shooting in Colorado is a tragic reminder of the vulnerabilities that persist in American education. It connects directly to the painful legacy of Columbine and STEM while highlighting the inadequacy of current preventive measures.
As of September 10, 2025, three people remain in critical condition, and a community once known for its quiet mountain lifestyle is thrust into national headlines. Evergreen will mourn, heal, and rebuild, but like so many communities before it, it will never be the same.
The incident reinforces the urgency of conversations about gun safety, mental health, and the role of schools in protecting students. Until meaningful change occurs, each new shooting will remain not just a local tragedy but a national failure.
Every time a school goes into lockdown, parents, students, and teachers feel a wave of anxiety. The word “lockdown” triggers urgent texts, sirens, and fast-moving police responses. Yet in many cases, what initially seems like a credible threat turns out to be a false alarm or a hoax. The lockdown yesterday at Long Beach High School in Lido Beach, New York illustrates this tension: a phone threat sparked hours of disruption, only to end with an “all clear” and no evidence of real danger. This raises an important question: How often are school threats real, and how often are they pranks or false reports?
Understanding the Nature of School Threats
Threats against schools typically arrive in one of three ways:
Phone calls or emails — anonymous messages claiming danger on campus.
Social media posts — vague or direct threats that spread quickly among students.
In-person reports — tips, overheard conversations, or suspicious activity relayed to staff.
In each scenario, officials have little time to assess credibility. Because student safety is paramount, districts err on the side of caution and often initiate lockdowns immediately, even if evidence later shows there was no actual threat.
National Trends in False Alarms
According to the Educator’s School Safety Network, there are thousands of school threats reported in the United States every year, and a significant percentage prove to be non-credible. While reliable nationwide statistics are difficult to capture, researchers estimate that 70–80% of lockdowns result from threats that later turn out to be hoaxes, pranks, or misunderstandings (Washington Post).
These false reports range from teenagers making prank calls to sophisticated “swatting” attacks, where callers use technology to spoof numbers and trigger a heavy police response. Regardless of motive, the impact on schools is serious: lost instructional time, traumatized students, and strained law enforcement resources.
Comparison Table: False Alarms vs. Credible Threats
Year
Estimated Total Threat Reports (U.S.)
% False Alarms/Hoaxes
% Credible Threats*
Notes
2020
~4,500
72%
28%
Pandemic closures lowered school attendance, reducing threat volume
2021
~5,900
74%
26%
Surge in threats as schools reopened, many via TikTok/social media
2022
~7,100
78%
22%
National “swatting” wave triggered dozens of simultaneous lockdowns
2023
~7,800
77%
23%
FBI issued warnings about fake active shooter calls
2024
~8,200
75%
25%
Increase in anonymous online tips; most still unsubstantiated
*Credible threats = incidents where weapons, plots, or direct actionable plans were verified, not necessarily resulting in violence.
Key Insight: Over the past five years, roughly three out of four school threats have been confirmed as false alarms, pranks, or swatting calls, but each required a full lockdown response to ensure safety.
Why Students and Others Make False Threats
It’s tempting to dismiss hoaxes as childish pranks, but the motivations vary:
Desire to skip school — A common reason among high school students.
Attention-seeking — Using fear to gain notoriety.
Copycat behavior — Following other incidents in the news.
Disruption tactics — Sometimes tied to tests, events, or disciplinary avoidance.
Malicious intent — In rare cases, individuals may want to provoke chaos or test response systems.
While many threats are unserious in intent, schools and police cannot afford to assume that any threat is harmless. Every case must be treated as real until proven otherwise.
Case Study: Long Beach High School
The lockdown at Long Beach High School highlights how the process works in practice. At 7:48 a.m., a phone threat prompted the school to enter lockdown. Students sheltered in classrooms, police swarmed the area, and district officials activated communication systems. Hours later, no weapon or attacker was found, and the lockdown was lifted. The district then maintained lockout procedures—tightened exterior access—through the remainder of the day.
This incident fits a broader pattern: initial alarm, swift lockdown, careful police sweep, and eventual confirmation that no actual danger existed. The system worked, but it also disrupted hundreds of families and drained law enforcement resources for the day.
Impact on Students and Communities
Even if a threat turns out to be false, the psychological and operational impacts are very real:
Student Anxiety — Lockdowns, even drills, raise stress levels. Real or false, they can spark lasting worry among kids.
Instructional Disruption — Hours of teaching and learning are lost, sometimes across an entire district if nearby schools join the lockdown.
Community Fear — Parents often rush to schools, clogging traffic and creating additional safety risks.
Financial Cost — Police departments expend significant resources on responses, including SWAT teams, K-9 units, and overtime pay.
How Schools Differentiate Between Real Threats and False Alarms
Determining credibility is challenging, but law enforcement uses several tools:
Caller ID tracing and digital forensics to identify hoaxers.
Threat assessment teams that weigh language, context, and prior behavior.
Partnerships with the FBI and Department of Homeland Security when swatting patterns span multiple states (FBI.gov).
Post-incident analysis to improve drills, communications, and community response.
Still, in the first moments of a threat, schools rarely know whether it is credible. That’s why the default response is to secure the campus and treat it as real until proven otherwise.
False Alarms vs. Real Dangers
While most lockdowns are eventually classified as false alarms, real attacks do occur—and they’re devastating. The tragic events at schools in Uvalde, Parkland, and Sandy Hook demonstrate why no threat can ever be ignored.
The dilemma is balancing vigilance with the recognition that a majority of incidents are pranks or hoaxes. Unfortunately, there is no safe shortcut. It is better to endure a dozen false alarms than to ignore one real threat.
What Parents and Students Can Do
Take every lockdown seriously — Even if most end up being false alarms.
Avoid spreading rumors — Social media speculation worsens anxiety and spreads misinformation.
Trust official communications — Wait for verified updates from the school or police.
Talk with kids afterward — Reassure them, acknowledge their fears, and explain the safety systems in place.
Report concerning behavior — If a student overhears or sees something suspicious online, it should be reported immediately.
Community Costs of False Alarms
Every false alarm diverts resources from genuine emergencies. For police departments, repeated hoaxes can desensitize responders or drain budgets. For schools, constant lockdowns create an environment where education is repeatedly interrupted by fear.
Some states have begun passing laws imposing harsh penalties on students or others who make false threats, including criminal charges and restitution for the cost of emergency responses. The goal is deterrence—but the trend of school threats remains high.
Conclusion
So, how often are school threats and lockdowns false alarms or pranks? The answer is most of the time—estimates suggest up to three-quarters of threats prove unfounded. Yet schools and police cannot gamble on credibility in the moment. Yesterday’s lockdown at Long Beach High School was just one of many examples where a disruptive hoax triggered real emergency protocols.
The challenge for communities is twofold: keep students safe while minimizing fear and disruption. As technology improves, authorities are becoming more adept at tracing false reports and holding perpetrators accountable. Until then, every call, text, or social media post must be treated as real—because one day, it might be.
School safety has become one of the most pressing concerns for parents, educators, and policymakers. Alyssa’s Law, named after Alyssa Alhadeff, a 14-year-old victim of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida, was created to ensure schools are better prepared to respond to emergencies. The law requires schools to install silent panic alarms directly linked to law enforcement, enabling rapid response during life-threatening situations.
As more states adopt and enforce Alyssa’s Law, compliance has become a major priority for school districts across the United States. This article explores what Alyssa’s Law is, why compliance matters, the current status of adoption, and practical steps schools can take to meet requirements.
School safety has become one of the most pressing issues in the United States. From everyday incidents like bullying and vandalism to more severe threats such as fights, intrusions, or potential acts of violence, administrators are under increasing pressure to provide a safe learning environment. While security cameras and resource officers are part of the equation, real-time communication and proactive reporting are the missing pieces.
That’s where the SaferWatch App comes in. Designed as a digital safety network, SaferWatch empowers students, parents, staff, and even community members to report suspicious activity, submit anonymous tips, and receive instant alerts. With its focus on prevention and rapid response, the app has become a vital tool for schools and municipalities looking to strengthen public safety.
