The cons and pros of fair value versus historical cost accounting and Essay

The cons and pros of fair value versus historical cost accounting and deprival value - Essay Example Financial reporting requires extremely accurate form of measurement to deliver information to lenders and shareholders who are obliged to know how wisely their money is being spent (Barth 2007). Van Zijl & Whittington (2006) reveal that the current form of measurement is increasingly emphasizing on the use of current value to replace historical costs. The principle reason behind the establishment of accounting standards was to ensure that financial information produced by organizations are accurate, reliable, complete, timely and relevant. In addition, accounting standards would ensure that organizations not only demonstrate accountability but also maintain it while meeting statutory reporting requirements such that the stakeholders are accounted for organizational financial performance to support decision making (Cooper 2007). Currently, the measurement basis for measuring amounts in financial statements includes among others historical cost, amortized historical cost, fair value an d value in use. This paper evaluates the pros and cons of fair value versus historical cost accounting and deprival value. 1.0. Current cost should be used in financial reporting Historical cost accounting works well for liabilities that are not traded; representation of liabilities for contractual business obligations like long term deferred revenue, and other complex issues of life insurance and pension liabilities (Macve 2010). However, more emphasis is given to existing stakeholders and stewardship compared to service to investors in capital market and usefulness in economic decisions emphasized by fair value approach which replaces historical costs (Whittington 2008). Historical cost accounting and deprival value characterize the conceptual framework of ASB while fair value is a recent concept that is available only for the last 20 years in FASB, the IASB and the ASB and is increasingly applied in financial reporting. Penman (2007) argues that while historical cost accounting h as been used in items whose measurement using fair value would be unreliable or expensive to quantify, fair value is considered to be informative given that it is applied within mixed measurement system. Defining and measuring current value Fair value is defined by Penman (2007) as the amount that would be obtained from selling an asset or the amount that would be given away in defrayal of a liability in a transaction deemed as methodical and between wiling and well-informed participants. As a result, fair value accounting information reflects the future and not the past, events or transactions (Whittington 2008; Barth 2006). Barth (2007) reveals that the measurement decisions are made by standard setters through focusing on the application of the definitions of elements in financial reporting and the qualitative attributes of accounting information on the basis of financial reporting objective. The use of qualitative attributes is intended at recognizing the desired measurement cha racteristics while the financial reporting objective brings out the context within which the evaluation of measurement will be evaluated (Barth 2007). 2.0. Importance of deprival value concept Van Zijl and Whittington (2006) argue that deprival value is the implying measurement at substitute cost for an asset that has a recoverable amount superior than the costs to be incurred for replacement. The value of an asset is restricted to replacement costs since the loss incurred in losing an asset

UNIT 2, MANAGING FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND DECISIONS Essay

UNIT 2, MANAGING FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND DECISIONS - Essay Example As a financial advisor, the business performance can be evaluated on the basis of the information that is obtained from the owner. In explaining the source of finance for Motors Parts Direct Limited, it is important to understand its meaning for the business. Financing is extremely important for starting a business and draw profit from it. There are various sources of finance when a business is looking for start-up. The need for source of finance varies according to the type of business. For processing a business huge amount of capital is needed (Iowa State University Extension, 2013). The source of finance for a business is basically equity or debt. In case of MPD Ltd only debt financing is used as source of finance. However, there are both long term and long term debt for the business. The short and long term debt instruments for the business are discussed hence forth. From the above table it can be stated that the business has started its operation with the help of loan and overdraft. The two types of debt instruments are noted as the liability for the company (Iowa State University Extension, 2013). This liabilities aims at decreasing the liquidity of the company, if the current asset base is not high; even the business does not have enough cash position to maintain a stable working capital. For maintaining its working capital the company requires short term finance of  £ 1,200,000. He also needs the finance for paying the suppliers and make payment to its employees. He needs the amount as these cash are paid even before payments are received from customers. Loan is a useful source of finance for business, which is provided by a single entity at an interest rate. This interest rate is specified by the lender of the loan and it is not decided on mutual basis. If the lender is a bank then the interest rate depends upon the demand of the loan and the rate that are imposed on the banks by the central banks (Steffan, 2008; Fabozzi, 1998).

History And Background Of The Unilever Company

History And Background Of The Unilever Company Unilever began with British soap-maker company named Lever Brothers. Their revolutionary action in business was by introducing the Sunlight Soap in 1890s. That idea was from William Hesketh Lever, founder of Lever Brothers. This idea helped the Lever Brothers become the first company that help popularise cleanliness in Victorian England. Moreover, the product rapidly emulated globally after that it was a success in UK and made Lever Brothers obtained more business worldwide. One of the reasons of this success was the strategy from William that not only prioritize on selling the products but also focus on manufacturing them. On the other side, in 1872 Jurgens and Van den Bergh created a company that produces margarine. Since there were many competitors in the margarine industry in Dutch, in 1920s, Jurgen and Van de Berth decided to strengthen their company by joining another margarine manufacturer in Bohemia. In 1927, there were three companies including Jurgen and Van de Berth compan y which formed Margarine Unie located in Holland. In 1930, the Lever Bros merged with the Margarine Unie and even though, an international merge was an unusual move at that time,   both of the two companies have the same vision that by doing this merge with strong global networks would create new opportunities. Finally, the name of Unilever was created by the merge of the companies. Not too long after Unilever was formed, they got a big problem which was that their raw material companies were reduced from 30% to 40% in the first year. As that problem started to attack, Unilever had to react quickly by building up an efficient system of control. In September of 1930, Unilever established the Special Committee that was designed to stabilize British and Dutch operate and concern as an internal cabinet for the organization.   Since William Levers death in 1925, it was Frances DArcy Cooper who replaced him to become the chairmen of Lever Brothers. Cooper made several benefits for Unilever, one of his revolutionary action was that he led the various companies that included Unilever into one Anglo-Dutch companies. According to The Netherlands official UK site, Anglo-Dutch Companies is the British and the Dutch historically joined forces to form some of the strongest companies in the world, and until now their position is still strong. In 1937, when the correlation between the profit-earning capabilities of the British and Dutch companies found itself overturned, it was Cooper that came to solve the problem by convincing the board of the necessity for restructuring. In the 1930s, Unilever continued to grow their business when they promoted their products in America Latin. To keep it growing, Unilever adapted a new strategy in 1940s by widening their business areas and create new areas such as particular food and chemical manufactures. Furthermore, Unilever recognized that there were something more important than widening their areas, it was the relationship between marketing and research that they must focus on. Therefore, Unilever expanded their operation by making association by two important actuations in US, those are Thomas J. Lipton company, manufacture of tea, and the Pepsodent brand of toothpaste in 1944. In 1957 Unilever continued their actions by associating with U.K. frozen food maker birds eye, and in 1961 with U.S. Ice cream novelty maker Good Humor. In the 1980s Unilever made a revolutionary restructuring by selling most of its subsidiary business to concentrate the companys core business. Eventually, foods, toiletries, detergents and special chemicals were the Unilevers core business. This restructuring also helped Unilever to make a collaboration with Chesebrought-Ponds in U.S. in 1986. That collaboration made a big impact to Unilever, their profit margin increased. Furthermore, Unilever bought Chesebrought-Pond in 1987. Nowadays, Unilever become the worlds most consumed product brand in home care, personal care and food. In 2002, Unilever had a worldwide revenue around à ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬48,760 million. Unilever has two main parenting companies, they are Unilever NV in Rotterdam and Netherland and Unilever PLC in London, UK. However, Unilever still has two major competitors named Nestlà © and Procter Gamble. Unilever has several worldwide products in foods such as Lipton, Knorr, Blue Band, Ben and Jerry, Walls, and Brooke bond. In home care, they have Surf, Sun, Radiant, Domestos and Skip. In personal care, they have Ponds, Vaseline, Rexona, Lux, Dove, Lifebuoy, Pepsodent, Sunsilk and Axe/Lynx. Social and Environmental issues Besides Unilevers success, there are also some social and environmental issues that affects Unilever. There are several damages created by Unilever during their processes in manufacturing, supplying, and labouring. Palm oil issues that affected by Unilever Unilever is the company with the worlds largest buyer of palm oil. They turn the palm oil material to their products like detergents, cosmetics, bio-fuel and soaps. Their actions by cutting down the palm oil of the most area in Kalimantan was slowly destroying habitat of Orang-utan, an endangered species which lived almost everywhere in the rainforest of Kalimantan. This action resulted in the extinction of the Orang-utan species in Kalimantan. An expected of two million acres of the rainforests in Kalimantan have been cut down annually. This action is also damaging Indonesias rainforest, eventually leading to a severe climate change. Unilever created their products to help people in doing their daily life, but in fact they are also destroying other endangered lives. In 2008, Unilever was criticised by Greenpeace UK because of these actions. In November 2009, Unilever announced to cancelled and stop buying palm oil from Indonesian company, PT Smart for environmental reason. In April 2010, Unilever had secured GreenPalm certificates. GreenPalm endorsed By RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil), Organization formed by several stakeholders in the palm oil industry, to protect the environmental impact of palm oil and endorse sustainable agriculture. These certificates have function to cover the supplies of its European, Australian and New Zealand businesses. Unilevers Mercury Waste In 1983, Chesebrough Ponds Ltd, one of U.S. company bought an area near Kodaikanal. They relocated their thermometer-making factory that had been in Watertown, suburb of New York to this area. In 1987, Unilever bought Ponds and the thermometer-making factory in Kodaikanal and became the biggest facility in the world. Then, Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL), the subsidiary of Unilever which operates and located in India, took charge of the factory. Early 2001, there were 7,4 tonnes of mercury-contaminated wastes around Kodaikanal in Tamil Nadu found. Kodaikanal has beautiful lakes, perennially cool weather and rich forests which is why it became the most popular tourist destination in South India. After investigating the source of those mercury it was found to be from Hindustan Lever Limited factory. Mercury is a toxic metal that can harm humans liver and brain.   Once mercury come into the environment, it will be changed during natural method into a structure that works its way quickly through the food chain where it can contemplate to hazardously high levels. Mercury is the basic material to create thermometers. In March 2001, four hundred people from Factory workers unions and local communities protested and complained about the unsafe waste disposal methods from Hindustan Lever Limited factory. They gave an ultimatum of either closing the factory or remove it from Kodaikanal areas. They also said since the mercury disposal happen in this area, it was destroying the Shola ecosystem of Western Ghats. After that incident, Unilever decided to postpone their thermometer production in Hindustan Lever Limited factory near Kodaikanal until they find a solution to the problem. However on June 21 2001, the Government of India ordered HLL to close the factory and ship the rest of the mercury waste to the U.S. Unilever Use Child Labour in India In India, Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL) has employed for expected number of 25,000 children, mostly girls in cotton seed production. They worked usually between ten and thirteen hours per day and they only got 40 Eurocents per day. Sometime, they are exposed to toxic pesticides during their work. The reason company prefer employed child than the adult was to save money in waging the labour. Usually, a child only receives 55% less than a man and 30 % less than a woman. One of their labour was Narasamma, 12 years old. She was a migrant who worked in cotton seed field for the last three years. She worked more than 12 hours per day with only two breaks. During work, she was regularly sprayed by pesticides and got ill after. However, she only earned Rs. 800 a month. In early 2003, many countries in Europe such as Germany, Netherlands and Ireland started do the campaign to stop Child labour. This campaign started from Germany, then to Netherlands and the campaign finished in Ireland. The main message from those campaigns was that school is the best place for children, so stop child labour. In may 2003, Unilever announced that they would solve the child labour problem in India. Unilever told Hindustan Lever Limited to start rejecting the use of child labour. Conclusion Unilever is one of most influential companies in the world by providing products that help people in their daily life and also supporting global economic growth. They improve their strategy to create products time by time until they meet customer requirements. That is why most of their product trustable and convenient to be used. Some survey showed that every houses in the world at least has one of Unilever product. This is showed that Unilever is very influential in human social life. Perhaps giving value to the brand is the best action that Unilever had done. However, Unilever made some environmental and social issues in their history. Many had protested what Unilever had done in the moment. In fact, Unilever is one of the companies which have been responsible for their actions. Unilever reacted quickly by fixing the problem.

Rhetorical Analysis of The Talking Heads’ “Once in a Lifetime” Essay

Rhetorical Analysis of The Talking Heads’ â€Å"Once in a Lifetime† Kenneth Burke’s Five Master Terms exist to bring to light the motivation behind, theoretically, any bit of text to which we care to apply them. The beauty of this Pentad is its fundamentality in regards to the motivations humans have in creating words and meaning using the tools of language available. This doesn’t just apply to long-winded theses regarding the nature of dramatistic meaning, though perhaps something like that would be more up Burke’s alley. No, in this case I plan to utilize his methods for a more seemingly mundane example, the motivations behind something as simple as song lyrics. I say song lyrics are simple, but in this case I am going to attempt a feat of rhetorical analysis few have considered possible by analyzing the song â€Å"Once in a Lifetime† by The Talking Heads. I emphasize the difficulty of this analysis because I fear that I am about to embark on a journey to make sense out of madness; a 1984 documentary of the band’s music is entitled Stop Making Sense, for one example. For another more drastic example, songwriter David Byrne was one of the most intentionally abstract lyricists of his time; in an early episode of apparent madness, he took to the stage of his college and shaved his hair and beard in front of the faculty to the accompaniment of piano accordion and a showgirl displaying phrases in Russian. He was promptly ejected from that school. Regardless, his song â€Å"Once in a Lifetime† is symbolic of the introspective, neurotic, and post-modern approach he often uses to create his lyrical identity. Though I at first fo und it to be a rough fit, I believe the Pentad can be successfully applied to describe the motivation ... ...it becomes clear that everything is unclear. I will summarize my application, however, for the sake of my own understanding. The dominant Term here is Act, the balance between essence and existence carefully held by Byrne’s dialectic of water and time as a unified sameness. Working symbiotically with Act is the idea of Agent, a theoretical character defined as finding, investigating, and determining a situation without Acting within it. Byrne’s purpose is to know right or wrong in the Scene of his lifetime. The Agency through which he defines truth within the Scene is time, which shares more than a fingers’ breadth of space with my first term, Act. I’ve come to the end of the analysis with a sense that I’ve just begun: a lot of fancy words to describe the futility of change. I did preface this application by noting The Talking Heads’ propensity to stop making sense.

Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime Early Reflections

What I’ve written below are the sorts of things you could think up as you develop your own reflective reading journal based on your own â€Å"interpretations† or â€Å"reading† of the text and issues that arise in class discussion. Themes that underly â€Å"The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night Time† 1) a study of an adolescent boy isolated from normal inclusion in society because of Asperger’s Syndrome 2) A mystery about the slaying/murder/slaughter of a dog 3) A study of a broken family – betrayed trust ) The curse of limited means – working class status or struggling financially and the pressures that brings A study of: †¢ Relationships †¢ Pressures of life †¢ Society’s attitude to those who are â€Å"different† or clearly intellectually handicapped †¢ How things taken for granted by conventional or â€Å"rank-and-file† society are confronting for those marginalised groups without reli able social support networks or with limited trust networks What are the ramifications of the novel – what moral lessons does it provide – about how we should could consider the disabled more sensitively?It also examines the importance of roles of authority (eg police, teachers, parents) for people who rely heavily on clear parameters of hierarchy and role expectations for them to maintain a sense of security and the fulfilment of expectations. Whereas we can most frequently â€Å"read† people’s emotions from the tone of their voice and visual cues (ie facial expressions, body stance, arm gestures), someone like Christopher Boone is not afforded that luxury Consequently, he is confronted with difficulties associated with taking words upon a â€Å"too literal meaning†.Furthermore, his understanding of what is normal and his interpretation of reality is different from that of other people. He lives in a virtual â€Å"emotional cocoon† like Rai n Man †¦. Christopher Boone is a reliable narrator in-so-far as he is meticulous in his recollections of detail and specific events. None of his recollections are tainted by his own vested interests or prejudices. However, his account is noticeably naive because he is completely oblivious to the shenanigans that have occurred in his street and involving his parents.He has no understanding of the tension that existed in his parents’ marriage. Furthermore, although he can recall various tantrums and spats, he is unable to make any subsequent links between those and empathy (understanding the way other people feel) with the stress they felt nor an demonstrate an awareness of the way in which his specifically taxing condition contributed to their circumstances. That is not to say, however, that Christopher Boone is totally to blame.There are the aspects of his parents’ character, their social status and their lack of affluence which leaves them short of the necessary acumen nor understanding of welfare that may have been available to help them through their trying circumstances. Therefore, the account provided us, although factually correct, leaves ample scope for us to read between the lines and to form our own interpretations about the character of those other people including Siobhan, Mrs Anderson, the policemen, Mr & Mrs Sheers, and Christopher’s parents. Haddon leaves these textual gaps for us to fill admirably.

Whether Or Not Armed Security Guards Should Be In Schools?

Whether or not armed security guards should be in schools has been a debate for years but has really been brought into the limelight since the most recent tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook. The supporters of having armed security in our school districts believe that it is a needed layer of security and helps to diminish response time if necessary while keeping children, parents and teachers feeling safer to be in school. The ones against having guns in the schools believe that we have had armed guards in schools and it did nothing to stop it.They also believe that the cost is too high while also worrying about their children’s psyche from being around loaded weapons every day. No matter which side you are on, there are great arguments for both sides that are logical as well as emotional and it is everyone’s job to listen to all of the information that is available and make their decision based on what they feel is the best choice. That choice could be one of the most important decisions that they ever make because it could mean the difference between life and death.Sandy Hook Elementary School, Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and the University of Texas at Austin were some of the most televised and the deadliest school shootings that have ever occurred in the United States. Since 1992, there have been over 387 school shootings which are way too many for the United States which poses the question, why did these tragedies happen in the first place? If we had armed security guards or a military/police presence at our institutions of development and higher learning would these tragedies have been prevented or could there have been less loss of life?The answer is that having an armed guard would not have prevented these attacks from individuals whose entire intention was to commit murder. Look at Columbine and Virginia Tech, both of these facilities had armed guards on their campus and it did nothing to stop the attack. The att ackers observed the guards behaviors and learned their routines for patrolling and made their moves when they could get past the guards without detection.This also raises the question is if the school is liable for the deaths of these students since they had trained professionals on site and they did nothing to stop the attack could the school be charged with negligence? So with the evidence of having two of the most brutal school shootings of all time happen while armed security was present, what makes you think that they could stop an incident somewhere else? Deciding whether or not armed security would actually stop an attack is important but so is figuring out how to pay such high costs to have these armed personnel on site to protect our children.Most schools are struggling as it is to keep viable programs such as the arts running while also trying to keep their schools staffed with teachers and other personnel. How could they even fathom paying more money for security when the y cannot even keep an art class going? The average salary for armed security guards across the country is around $55,000 per year then you have to factor in training, equipment, uniforms, and benefits so, on average a school would have to pay $100,000 per year for one security guard for their school.Now some school districts only have a few schools but others have a lot more and they would have a hard time paying for that. Of course, a lot of people would argue that you should not put a price tag on our children’s safety but in many cases the price of their educations would diminish because less money would be spent there to be able to pay for security. Could a school district along with the parents choose to take education away from the students in order to add armed guards in the chance that something goes wrong?Education is a key component in raising a smart, self-sufficient adult. The other factor that becomes a part of cost is having the money to pay for the lawyers and incidentals in the chance that the security guard acted inappropriately. What if there is an accidental shooting or a guard becomes over zealous in what they feel that their responsibilities are? These factors could lead to major lawsuits that the school would be responsible for by either having to represent that officer or in paying settlement and court costs for a lawsuit.These are added costs that the majority of the schools across the United States cannot afford to take on. The safety of schools have been tested more in the recent years with news coverage of the most recent incident in Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where twenty children and six staff members lost their lives. With the recent rise of school shootings it is no wonder parents are concerned for their children’s safety in schools.Where drugs and peer pressure were once major concerns, in today’s society, we worry about our children dying in the hands of armed shooters. While ther e is much controversy over how to protect the future of America’s children, lawmakers are supporting a bill to allow armed guards to stand and protect our children in the school systems by creating laws to allow armed security in the schools. â€Å"The Indiana amendment's sponsor, Rep. Jim Lucas (R), said he believes mass shootings like the one in Newtown could be prevented by more firearms. † (Resmovits, 2013).In support of armed guards, the National Rifle Association has paid for research and found among the study’s central conclusions is that ‘‘the presence of armed security personnel adds a layer of security and diminishes response time’’ in a shooting, (Asa) Hutchinson said. (Asa Hutchinson) cited a 1997 Mississippi incident in which an assistant principal ran to his truck to retrieve a . 45-caliber semiautomatic pistol and subdued a gunman who had already shot two students (Stolberg). † New legislation would allow armed teac hers, staff members, or on-duty patrols to respond if a situation were to occur.†Ã¢â‚¬Å"The (National Rifle Association's) model legislation would lift restrictions on guns in schools and require specific training for school employees who choose to carry guns. † (Resmovits, 2013). In this time of uncertainty, President Barack Obama, is trying to pass stricter gun laws. â€Å"As President Obama tries to persuade a reluctant Congress to pass new gun laws, the poll found that a majority of Americans -54 percent- think gun control laws should be tightened, up markedly from a CBS News poll last April that found that only 39 percent backed stricter laws.† (Cooper and Sussman, 2013).There is much speculation this increase could be as a result of the Newtown shooting. Meaning people are seeking security, parents are worried for their children, and there is widespread fear of a situation like Newtown ever happening again. Which brings us back to our controversial view, why is having an armed guard important? Having an armed guard might also dissuade any possible shooters from attempting to attack the school, avoiding the situation altogether. The armed guard would be a figure of authority and possible intimidation of any gunmen.As the saying goes ‘you can’t bring a knife to a gun fight’ therefore it would be hasty to think schools can stop armed intruders with anything other than a gun itself. Usually these gunmen are suicidal and seeking attention, where they understand their outcome is death, therefore restraining is not enough. A gunman at this level would not hesitate to shoot first, regardless of who is in their way, which is why having someone on site ready to respond and taken the gunman down is an ideal solution. As a parent there is nothing more important than keeping your kids safe and the same goes for a teacher and their students.Many parents feel that whatever a school needs to do to keep their children safe they are more than willing to agree with. Teachers feel more relaxed that they have someone there to help them in an emergency situation that can help protect the children and children feel safer knowing that they have someone to turn to when their parents are not around to protect them. Some people might argue that having a loaded gun in the school might mess with a child’s mental state because it makes them feel that guns are the only form of protection so they would prefer them not to be there.The reality of the situation is that we live in a world that can be tragic and devastating at times and a lot of kids are forced to see things that are way beyond their years and they are circumstances that no child should have to deal with. But, the great thing about kids is that they are resilient and very smart and with the proper education could be taught about right and wrong and why they need to have armed security guards at school. It is just like explaining to your kids how to dial 91 1 or where in the house the smoke detectors and fire extinguishers are.You also make your kids wear seatbelts and bike helmets to protect them so that they do not get hurt in case of an accident. Parents do these things not to scare their kids but to prepare them in case of emergencies. Children are not equipped to handle an active shooter in school nor should they ever be expected to just like you would not teach a child how to fight a fire but teaching them that this person(s) on campus are there to protect them in that small chance that someone comes into their classroom wishing to do them harm.Parents and teachers would love nothing more than to let their children believe that the world is filled with rainbows and teddy bears but the reality is that it is not and no matter how much people try to protect children from evil you are doing them a disservice by not telling them the truth. It would be morally wrong to lie to children and to make them feel safe when there is a potentia l for danger. Ethically it is the responsibility as parents and teachers to teach children that there may be evil in the world but there is also a lot of good and that there are always people here to protect us.Making a child feel safe and secure while also making the parents and teachers that are responsible for these kids is clearly more important than what it might cost or the possibility that having proper security might possibly fail. There have been too many shooting incidents in the United States but who knows the number of shootings that were prevented because a school chose to have security on campus. Proper knowledge and training is key to making sure that these security guards can do there jobs to protect the innocent.Another option for a school that may not have the financial resources is to hire off-duty police officers to work details on there days off because this would cost a lot less and you are guaranteed to have highly trained and dedicated people willing to put t heir life on the line for your children. As a society why are we more willing to pay for name brand clothes for our kids then add security that can save their lives?During a situation as horrific as an active shooter in a school is a serious issue that unfortunately is our reality today and we have to prepare that it could happen and having armed and trained security personnel on site could mean the matter between life and death and is this something we really want to chance because of money or the possibility that it is for nothing? We do not get into car accidents every day but we always make sure that are children are buckled up so why should adding security measures to schools be any different?