In article <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
(Patricia Reynolds) writes:
> In article <[log in to unmask]>
>            [log in to unmask] "Hank Burchard" writes:
> Replying to Susan Patterson's post of Sun, 15 Jan 1995
>>      As a professional museum visitor I am delighted that someone on the
>> inside of the business is taking a fresh look at the role of guards. Most
>> museums model their guard forces on police forces, which seems reasonable
>> until you think about it.
>>      Security is in reality a rather minor function of museum guarding.
>> Aside from the occasional exuberant child, teenage vandal or nutso,
>> visitors present virtually no danger to themselves or the collections.
 
I agree that guards to a lot more than police work, and I'm in no position to
comment on vandals and nuts, but exuberant children are NOT an occasional
phenomenon.  Most of my work day is behind closed doors, but virtually every
foray into public areas shows children running (and tripping), climbing on
exhibits, trying (not always successfully) to get past barriers and grope the
exhibits, and climbing up the "fence" that protects people from a 4-story fall
at our front and rear airwells.  I have seen children breaking off plants and
prying up pebbles from exhibits that are not behind glass.  Throughout this,
parents make little or no effort to stop (much less prevent) such behavior, so
it becomes necessary for our guards to intervene.
 
Robin Panza
Carnegie Museum of Natural History