Problem and solution.
Can emergency exit equipment effectively protect a facility, the lives of employees or visitors without restricting freedom of movement?
The main and most critical point for the owner of the facility when organizing evacuation routes is to meet the requirements of fire and construction regulatory authorities and reduce the risk of abuse of evacuation exit doors.
It is this point and the question in the title of this article that are the stumbling blocks and often force building owners to resort to tricks that, under the most unfavorable circumstances, can easily transform into crimes. But really, how can you make a door that was originally intended for easy exit in an emergency impassable for people with dishonest intentions? How can you distinguish a law-abiding citizen from a person intending to steal in a supermarket or museum? How can you know in advance who will use the emergency exit — a bank client in the event of an earthquake or fire or a robber trying to take out valuables obtained by simple means? What is more dangerous for children in a kindergarten: a fire or an easily opened emergency exit door leading to the street or roadway? How can you separate an everyday situation from an emergency, for example, in psychiatric hospitals, because people with limited mental abilities should also be able to leave the premises on their own when their lives are in danger? This list can be continued indefinitely, but we can also recall tragedies that have already occurred, such as the terrible incident last year in a night club in Perm — these are all links in one chain of problems, which are based on organizational, logistical and technical shortcomings.
Of course, one can understand the investor to some extent: when there are requirements for the minimum necessary and at the stage of delivery/acceptance of the facility sufficient set of equipment for emergency or evacuation exits, why pay more? Why think so far ahead? Especially if the investor is not aware of existing technical solutions, and the contractor, even if he knows, will not say, since he is not interested in increasing costs, which for him are a direct factor in reducing profits.
In a word, no one wants to pay voluntarily, especially for some illusory functions, the advantages of which are unclear to many.
So, the facility has been successfully handed over/accepted, and the period of everyday operation begins. Here, security services or other internal supervisory bodies discover that the emergency exit in everyday life is a source of increased risk, which does not increase the level of protection of material assets (after all, the door as an element of the building structure is intended not only to protect against drafts) and is the object of constant abuse or violations. It turns out that people go out, for example, to smoke through the emergency exit door, because it is closer. But what if it is a disco, a cinema or another place where idle people stay, and those looking for an opportunity to get inside for free or uncontrolled? In a word, security services begin to look for methods to strengthen the protection of these high-risk areas and find (usually without putting in much effort, both intellectual and material), blocking these exits with simple improvised means: additional locks, chains, bars, etc.
Don't believe me? Look at the photo, realizing that this is only a small fraction of such «solutions».
Are there any real solutions to this problem? It turns out there are.