I was watching C-Span last Friday when Wayne LaPierre, President of the National Rifle Association, responded to the Sandy Hook School shooting tragedy. His solution to such an attack was to have armed personnel at each school in the country.
Now a significant portion of the Juneau population is against unfunded Federal mandates, many are averse to increasing Federal spending, and the State of Alaska seems loath to increase education funding. That seems to leave only one solution, providing our own locally funded armed guards in the schools.
Let’s assume the Juneau Police Department installs 2 patrol officers in each of our 14 schools. This increases their total personnel from 93 to 121 and their salary and benefits cost by over $3 million annually, from $10,243,000 to $13,295,000 based on their FY 2012 budget. Mr LaPierre did suggest that we could arm teachers, so I would suggest, in all fairness, we divide the $3 million among the teachers that want to carry a gun on their hip all day.
To pay for this public safety improvement, based on the CBJ’s FY 2012 revenue projections, Juneau taxpayers will have to increase both sales and property taxes by 3.67%. Not bad, considering the extra protection.
On the other hand, there are approximately 27,271 firearms in the Borough, assuming the private gun ownership in Juneau is proportionate to the USA in general (88.8 guns per 100 persons). If each firearm was taxed $112 annually, then the Juneau taxpayer will see no increase.
We can certainly continue unfettered gun ownership and provide the armed presence as the NRA suggests. The only question then is which method of payment you prefer.
•• Minch is retired, a gun owner, and a 44-year Juneau resident and taxpayer.
Comments (264)
Add commentConcealed carry.
A number of school districts down south simply allow teachers that are licensed to conceal carry to be armed on campus. They screen teachers that apply and can show proficiency, responsibility and discretion. They don't pay them extra. They don't even publicly identify staff that carry for security reasons. I wouldn't hand out guns to teachers any more than I would hand out them out to students. I'm not thrilled about the introduction of badges in the schools. But, you may be interested to know of the existence of school resource officers that JPD already has in our schools. But I think that their purpose is geared more toward sniffing out pot. And while we are on the subject of Juneau, we could hash out the need for extra cruise docks, new libraries, bridge parks, new skating rinks, bronze whales, etc. ad nauseum that we spend millions on that do nothing keep our kids secure in their schools. So, I submit that since we are already paying more than enough to fund a little bit of school security, but on fluff and special interest, how about revisiting priorities.
One way we could pay
Let's look into how the 11 armed guards are paid at the school attended by the Obama children, and we can pay for them the same way at all other schools. Here's an excerpt from a news report and opinion piece on the very topic of those guards:
The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak. If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point. The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC's David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren't used (and weren't even allowed).
Shame on President Obama for seeking more gun control and for trying to prevent the parents of other school children from doing what he has clearly done for his own. His children sit under the protection guns afford, while the children of regular Americans are sacrificed. This is exactly like Al Gore flying his personal jet across the US to talk with Brad Pitt about global warming; liberals say, "Do as I say since I know best but what I do is none of your business."
Mr. Minch,
I respectfully disagree with your premise, CC would correct most of the violence caused by these nuts. Check out the FBI government site for the figures that show the decrease when CC is approved. Those are facts, not supposition.
Armed guards at schools
While I understand how nice it sounds, does anyone realize there was an armed guard at Columbine? Armed guards don't guarantee safety for our children. I believe Sandy Hook had put in a new security system, that is a good idea, it just needs to be monitored. We need to do more than worry about guns, we need people to be aware and talk when they see something out of sorts. I had a friend who killed herself and her buddies knew she was going to attempt, but didn't say anything because they weren't sure, what a shame. Automatic weapons aren't needed by the general population, maybe not even semi-automatic, but guns are needed for hunting and other recreation.
We, as a nation and people, need to become more involved with life, with each other, with our children. Put away the technology we have given them, send them outside to play, go to the park, interact with each other. We are losing the ability to speak eye to eye because everything is email or text. AND lets put God back in our lives and schools.
Armed guards at schools
While I understand how nice it sounds, does anyone realize there was an armed guard at Columbine? Armed guards don't guarantee safety for our children. I believe Sandy Hook had put in a new security system, that is a good idea, it just needs to be monitored. We need to do more than worry about guns, we need people to be aware and talk when they see something out of sorts. I had a friend who killed herself and her buddies knew she was going to attempt, but didn't say anything because they weren't sure, what a shame. Automatic weapons aren't needed by the general population, maybe not even semi-automatic, but guns are needed for hunting and other recreation.
We, as a nation and people, need to become more involved with life, with each other, with our children. Put away the technology we have given them, send them outside to play, go to the park, interact with each other. We are losing the ability to speak eye to eye because everything is email or text. AND lets put God back in our lives and schools.
Roughcut and glacierdogs.....
Roughcut - what is your free solution to the growing problem of gun violence in schools?
glacierdogs - the armed guards at sidwell pay upwards of $33,300 each year for each child - that's how they pay for their security at the school. I don't have kids in school, so if parents want to pony up - by all means.
Comment for Connie
It isn't for hunting and recreation that we need guns although guns work well for that. We need guns to protect us from government, and in fact that is what was intended by the drafters of the Bill of Rights. Here is some food for thought.
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Another 45 million were murdered during the reeducation process of the late 1950's and early 1960's.
------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981,100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 to 100 million.
------------------------------
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. That is why government wants good records as to who owns guns in the United States of America.
I know a few teachers
No chance on Earth that I want one of them packing heat in school with my kids.
Better a real police officer. I'd be willing to pay a registration fee for the guns I own to fund that program. It's not like I own 47 of them like Mrs. Lanza did.
And geedogs, the Sidwell Friends school is a private school that the uber-wealthy send their kids to. They pay for that security with their high tuition. Just another benefit of being in the .01%.
And I'm entirely OK with the children of the President of the United States having enhanced security. I'm not worried about Al Qaeda coming for my kid, along with every other nutcase extremist in the country.
geedogs
Are you saying that our Constitution is inadequate?
If gun regulations are passed by our legally elected representatives in congress, and signed by our legally elected president, and upheld as constitutional by our legally appointed Supreme Court, are you saying you will violate those regulations?
You understand that by doing so you would become a felon and lose all gun possession rights whatsoever, right?
Or are you proposing treason or civil war?
Please, explain how you are above the laws of our constitutional republic.
Who should pay
We without children should pay for the guards?
With this logic, a pack of smokes should be about $25, and a bottle of Vodka about $250?
What about those of us who do not ski, and pay for Eaglecrest. Wonder what the CBJ subsidy will be this year?
Let's have shootouts in the schools!
Great place for a shoot out-a school.
Columbine had two armed guards.
Did you forget about the mass shooting at Ft. Hood? You know, an army base.
and look. Gdogs cuts and pastes another batch of statements in whole from another website.
Guess what gdogs? In all of those cases of genocide, there was a military dictatorship abusing a minority combined with either a the aftermath of a world war or an actual civil war.
So...if this were to happen in the USA you are advocating for a white minority-cause its Republican white males who own most of the guns-shooting at the United states Military.
Are you excited to be able to shoot your first GI when they come for your guns?
More for gdogs...
Canada has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Ireland has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
The UK has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
France has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Spain has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Portugal has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Greece has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Italy has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Brazil has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Japan has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
Australia has gun control. Look at that horrible genocide there!
get the point? get the drift? gun control does not cause genocide.
All about the second,
If one wishes insight into the second amendment, here is a site that will enlighten those who wish information, and infuriate those with a closed mind.
three ws, uhuh.com/guns/2ndquotes.htm
El-whatsyourface, I would not want to live in any of those countries, and I don't want this one to stoop to their level!
Race card? Really?
The amendments in the constitution were specifically addressing protections against military dictatorship at a time when said dictatorship was of the same race. For shame. El_Boorba, for shame.
Arm the teachers and staff
We do not need to spend MORE money on the schools by adding armed security. Arm the teachers and staff.
I am willing to bet there are plenty of teachers and staff in our school system that would CC given the chance. This notion that having guns in school is all about nothing and is an invented outrage by people that want someone else to do their dirty work. Freedom is everyone's responsibility. The second Amendment was added to our imperfect Constitution to provide the means to protect ourselves. legally.
For far too long these weak kneed liberals have had the rest of us carry their freedom burden and suffer. like fools, the facade of security at the loss of our freedoms. It's time you appeasers step back out of the way and let the freedom loving people of our nation arm the teachers and staff and provide the precious minutes needed until help arrives to stop or at least slow down the nut jobs.
Is this concept really that hard to understand? I mean really? Is it? The school personal are in place at the schools. They are then the first line of defense. Shouldn't we provide them with the tools to protect themselves? Isn't it time that we teach our children that they too have some skin in the game and that they too must learn to protect themselves and not rely on the police that are too many precious minutes away to save them?
I am not suggesting the students have guns but by our school personal setting the example of being prepared we teach the students that they do not have to be victims and that they too have the power to protect themselves.
Glacier Dogs
Your comment that the second amendment of our constitution was inserted "to protect us from government" is not correct.
For those interested in the real reasons the amendment was made, and not some fairly recent right wing interpretations I recommend an article by Mr. Parry - the link is below
consortiumnews/2012/12/21/the-rights-second-amendment-lies
@wmolson
What does it provide to us then? The Bill of Rights are there to prevent the Government from enacting laws in the stated Amendments. If not for protection against what ever then what?
One more time...
Are you excited to be able to shoot a GI when the US Government comes for your guns?
Or is it a Police Officer you imagine that will come for your guns?
Or is it, as commonly found, almost "routinely" found, on conservative blogs, a young black man that you imagine your gunsights on?
This is a major thought point for anyone who says any gun control will lead to genocide and tyranny. You imagine that someone will be coming for your guns. In this fantasy, who do you imagine shooting when they come for your guns?
@skirkz
The US Constitution was written in 1787 well after the American War of Independence in (1775–1783).
Please tell me where in the Declaration of Independence you find a reference to gun control.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
@el_boorba
Your fantasy! No one here is talking such rubbish. Sounds like you are the instigator here! Why would you do that? Are you afraid that people being in possession of firearms is a threat to you? Move then and take your racist hatred with you!
@akjustice
Gun advocates spew a basic thought train...
Gun control leads to tyranny which leads to genocide. They say that in order to prevent this, they have to have guns.
So... If the Government of the US of A enacts legislation on gun control and the US Government actually does come for their guns (a routine fantasy "Obama will take my guns!") what do you think is implied will happen?
An official of the US Government will becoming for their guns in this fantasy. What is the implication of these thoughts? Will they give their guns over to the tyrannical US Government intent on genocide? Or will they defend their right to have a gun with violence and save the white minority from the impending genocide?
this is the fantasy clearly implied by commenters here and clearly stated on many right wing blogs-ones that are quoted by commenters here.
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/RKBA/genocide.html
http://www.lookintoit.org/Gun-Control-Leads-To-Genocide.html
http://www.ubm1.org/?page=gunlaws
@el_boorba
@el_boorba
Your fantasy! No one here is talking such rubbish. Sounds like you are the instigator here! Why would you do that? Are you afraid that people being in possession of firearms is a threat to you? Move then and take your racist hatred with you!
How is it that you spend so much time finding these sights? Are you one of them? Do you have a split personality?
Unbelievable
This is pretty wild. We now have people in this country frothing at the mouth, advocating that we inch ever closer toward Sierra Leone circa 1990's. And they're calling it "freedom-loving." Awesome.
Professor. You of all people...
...should have a little more perspective on the constitution than an article by some contemporary. The amendments to the constitution aren't a list of disjointed subjects. They specifically address rights protecting citizens against governmental powers that would usurp authority over the populace. Expressly the rights to speak up in disagreement without retribution, to protect oneself, family and community against tyranny, to maintain privacy without having military or police commandeering our property and occupying our homes. The crafters of these amendments had just won freedom from these invasive government practices and said, "We're not going to take it any more!". They set up a new government with a document that guarantees citizens against that new goventment's power to revert to the same oppressive policies. You may pick the 1st amendment to harp on, but, that doesn't mean the 2nd is any less important or pertinent.
Ak Justice , Glacier Dogs
One must remember that when our Constitution was being composed that there had been Shay's Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion that the new states were unable to manage. Also as a young nation, the drafters were wary of any attempt by a European power to attack.
That is why they wanted an armed militia - to strengthen the new federal government that was being established. It was intended to support the central government in case there were other uprisings by individuals, Native Americans or slaves. It was not, as some say today, intended to arm the populace to rise up against the federal government.
It is only in the past century or so that people have pushed the idea that it was meant to arm the people against the national or state governments.
Tweet of the day...
After Trayvon Martin was shot, I don't remember the NRA saying that every black teenager should go out and get a gun for protection...
— @OlaBetiku via Facebook
http://twitter.com/OlaBetiku/statuses/282562455392100354
a focus on public schools alone
as in need of some plan to prevent shooting is a misguided view of the problems. NO doubt there have been these incidents at schools. However there have been similar killings at theaters, malls, churches, military bases and colleges. To not include an overall set of things together in an overall plan is a failure to identify the problem.
I do not advocate for a mass armament at these locations nor any beliefs that some gun control alone is the solution. I believe this issue is complex and will require a number of individual items combined to arrive at a comprehensive means of lowering the risk that can never be completely eliminated.
To all
Going shooting today with the old AR-15 and my 1911. Should be a great day!
I want...
...an AR-15 and a 1911. Just can't justify the expenditure for another gun right now. Have a blast, AKJustice! Because you CAN!
Comments
Wally, you are absolutely wrong about the reason for the Bill of Rights. You were a professor so I am not surprised but I am disappointed. However I am reassured by anecdotes cited to me by your former students over the years; they didn't believe you and they knew they were regurgitating nonsense in order to obtain their marks.
The militia were to counter-balance the need for a standing army. Militia units lasted until WWI; at least one from Indiana went off to France in WWI. Militia fight as a unit. Members don't fill in for vacancies in other units and people from other units do not fill in vacancies in a militia unit. Most importantly, officers are elected by a vote within the unit. Small arms are provided by the militia members. Ammo, and sometimes artillery, are provided by the communities originating the militia unit. Any student of history can see that these units could be better trusted to defend rather than turn on their communities, and that is what the people originating and the people voting to ratify the Constitution intended. These are the inconvenient facts that the liberals must confront.
Latitude, I think it's fine that Obama and members of the left-wing, anti-gun rights media can send their children to a school that has armed security. However, I think it is characteristically dishonest of them to not acknowledge the same when they put forth their agenda.