Within state budgetary constraints that should be a really strong position.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Remember, my article offers two alternatives.Divided Attention wrote:Then there is the BIG question in my mind... Who is going to pay for the reinforcements and additional securities at the schools?That's going to be my position in Austin also.
Chas.
What I worry about is the Feds coming in and making the price a moot point for the states. Whether it is significant federal funding for state/ISD administered security or no-kidding TSA in every school, how could it be countered? The federal government is bound and determined to spend us into oblivian, which seems to leave, as the only remaining argument, the TSA's repugnance to liberty and decency. And we already know with what little regard those values are held in D.C. I hope there is another good practical reason to avoid option 1 when the cost doesn't matter, but I'm not aware of it at this late hour.
If I remember correctly, we've already heard of doctors and school personnel questioning children about guns in their homes. Obviously a security force operated by anti-[our]gun people with similar access to the children is significantly worse; especially if mental evaluations become part of gun ownership.