I ended my opinion piece last week with the following question,  “Why don’t these insane individuals attack our city halls, court houses and seats of legislation?”  Next week, “What constitutes an adequate response by those that have sworn to serve and protect?”

We all believe in protecting the things we value.  We build fences around our property.  We place locks on our doors, set up neighborhood watches and install alarm systems.  We spend money on protecting the “things” we value.  Is there anything we should value more than our children?  How can our society scream and wail at the loss of a school child when we annually abort nearly 1,000,000 (1 million) children.  We are talking out of both sides of our mouth.  

How can we claim that we value our children when we send them to schools that are not protected. Now that statement may generate a response that they are protected but, not like we protect other institutions and individuals.  Our president has a small army around him that is armed with the finest weapons available.  Many of our national leaders are provided full time, armed security.  Many of our public buildings, courthouses, legislatures and city halls have armed individuals on premise.  

We have placed our children in an area where we have banned effective protection.  School systems in our state have attempted to arm school resource officers and that has been prevented by the state.  The very people that write laws governing our ability to protect our school children work in an environment that has controlled access, metal detectors and armed guards.  The kindest thing I can say is that there is an obvious double standard at work.

One of the prevailing arguments is we can’t afford to place a policeman at every school.  How can I shout in print?  What value do we place on our children?  Every election we are besieged with arguments that we must do it for the children.  In the Sandy Hook massacre, we saw teachers put their lives on the line for the children they served.  Is it unreasonable to ask our politicians to put the life of their pet projects on the line by using the money to purchase armed protection for our children?  

I was amazed to see the video images of the police response to the Sandy Hook massacre.  The police swarmed the place dressed in body armor and transported in armored vehicles.  Impressive!  How long did it take for the police officers to get their gear on, load it into  the vehicles and make it to the school? You can measure that time in minutes, seconds or children’s lives.  This is not the individual policeman’s failure.  They did what they have been trained to do.  They used the equipment that had been purchased for them.  The problem is that the training and equipment was a total, terrible  mismatch for the problem.

What was needed was a rapid response, not an armored response.  Would the money spent on armored vehicles have been better spent on a dedicated, armed guard for the school?  What constitutes an effective police response?  A timely response that saves lives.  If we want to prevent these heinous acts in the future, we must ask the hard questions and demand answers that are logical.  

We have gone down the wrong path with our efforts to safe guard our children.  We can’t save a child’s life by holding up a piece of paper that states it is against the law to have a weapon on a school campus and then do nothing to prevent that law from being broken.  We must ask the correct questions.  

What can be done to prevent the loss of life on school property?

What are the available opportunities to identify those that would take the life of our school children before they act?

What can be done structurally to safeguard our children?

If a person slips through the barriers and protective processes designed to be a safeguard, what can be done structurally to limit their actions?

What constitutes a reasonable on campus defensive capability to disrupt such actions or apprehend a person determined to harm our school children?

What should we expect of our local police in response to an attack on school children?

There are many things we can do but only if we are to ask questions and demand answers and implementation.  The last massacre happened in Newton, Connecticut.  Can we prevent one from happening in our own community?   More than a politicians words, we need real changes in attitude and posture that will provide real, actual protection for our schools.  There are many excuses for not providing adequate protection, money, jurisdictional issues and fear of failure.  Reasons not to act should not be tolerated by the public.  Real answers, real solutions and real protection for our schools represent the only acceptable response from our government leaders.

Ed Tyler lives in Pell City. He may be reached at ed@edtylerinc.com