Innovating for School Safety’s Sake : Picus urges rewards go to students who tip off officials about guns taken onto campuses

Recent shootings at two high schools have made it clear that Los Angeles can’t tolerate political foot-dragging on school safety.

Efforts to speed a program to put more metal detectors in schools are a start. But officials must also look to other innovative approaches. That means fully considering all serious new proposals for campus security.

One such proposal is a motion introduced this week by Councilwoman Joy Picus directing the City of Los Angeles to make available $15,000 in rewards for schoolchildren who turn in fellow students possessing guns. (Students who surrender to authorities firearms that they possess also would be eligible for rewards.)

To prevent intimidation or reprisals against students who provide information, youngsters could anonymously call the Los Angeles Unified School District’s toll-free hot line, (800) 954--HELP. That number is already in place for students to report schoolmates who take weapons to a campus or who participate in violent acts near or on school property.

The proposal does raise some thorny questions. What safeguards can there be to ensure that information received is truthful? What is the maximum amount of reward money that any individual could be given? Is the $250 reward that is initially proposed too much or too little? Higher individual payouts could mean that the $15,000 might result in fewer weapons confiscated; for example, cutting the reward to $150 would mean that 100 weapons could be seized rather than the 60 taken under a $250 reward. And, if the proposal is successful, how much more money is the city willing to put up?

Assuming that such questions can be satisfactorily answered, Picus’ plan is worth trying.

So are other ideas, including the placement of undercover officers in schools to search out weapons and gather information on students who threaten the safety of teachers or schoolmates.

More aggressive attempts at student outreach--such as increasing peer counseling and improving relations between school administrators and students--could also be useful.

Of course, these and other efforts rely on money and political cooperation, both of which appear to be in very short supply here. But the alternative--to do nothing--would surely mean more violent incidents and further erosion of confidence in the school district’s ability to protect its students.

And that would be a tragedy not just for education but also for Los Angeles’ children and future.