What's your opinion? Is this a way for the governor to give the gun lobby what it wants without taking the blame for it? Or does the fact that setting up proper security in public buildings is expensive have nothing to do with the gun-rights issue?At this writing, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is contemplating whether to sign HB 2729, which would mandate local governments that do not allow people to carry firearms into public buildings to meet several criteria.
Those criteria include:
• Posted signs saying guns are not allowed;
• Armed guards or police officers at entrances during all operating hours;
• Metal detectors and lockers for storing firearms.
An Arizona state legislative fiscal study found that the costs to secure buildings typically range from $5,000 to $113,800 per public entrance initially, with recurring costs of $54,400 to $108,800 per year.
And of course, this state mandate does not include any funds to help cities, counties or schools pay the cost of implementing this new law, so each local governing body faces the prospect of additional operating costs for each entrance to public buildings where firearms might not be the best idea.
Clearly the intent of this proposal is to push local governments toward acceptance of allowing firearms everywhere, based simply on the cost of creating “gun-free” public buildings.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.