Our Opinion: Security firm plans premature plea to schools

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

We encourage local school board members to seek clarification of a mixed message being sent by a local security company.

In a news release titled “confrontation planned for upcoming school board meeting,” J & J Security and Investigations LLC announced its employees, who also are district parents, will urge the school board on Thursday to “hire armed private security officers to guard” Jefferson City public schools.

First — admittedly a minor point — “confrontation” is an unfortunate word choice; it implies conflict.

More problematic is whether group members are issuing their plea in their capacity as parents, security officers or both.

In the news release, company owner and CEO Jim Clark said: “We are trained professionals who specialize in keeping people and property safe, but we are also concerned parents. We’re not just anybody.”

As parents, they represent a subset of a larger group of district patrons interested in the safety of students.

As security officers, supporters would consider their plea heart-felt while detractors would deem it self-serving.

As employees of J & J Security and Investigation LLC, their proposal is premature.

The local school board has made no decision to hire private, armed personnel to patrol the schools. If, at some point, they approve the concept, they would be required to seek proposals through a competitive process.

On the issue of enhancing school safety, any discussion on how to do it must precede discussion on who should do it.

More like this story

WayneLee 4 months ago

For the sake of clarification, I feel obliged to response to this editorial.

Regarding the characterization of J & J Security's appeal as a "mixed message": The message is not mixed. Rather, it is simple, clear and direct. We want the School board to consider hiring armed, private Security Officers to guard Jefferson City schools. This statement is not ambiguous.
Regarding the use of the word "confrontation": I don't know how else you would describe a face-to-face meeting for the purpose of resolving a difference of opinion; namely, the School Board apparently does not view armed Security Officers in the schools as necessary or prudent, but we do. We seek to change the School Boards minds. This situation, by definition, is a conflict. However, conflict is not necessarily a bad thing. In American democracy, citizens are traditionally afforded the opportunity to shape public policy through public discourse and debate. We are simply availing ourselves of that right.
On whether the Security Officers are taking their stance as concerned parents, or as paid professionals: The answer is both. Many of the officers are parents who happen to work in the field of security. That makes them particularly suited to speak on the issue of the safety and security of their children in school. There is an underling implication in raising this "concern" that, because the parents work for a security company their sincerity and motives are somehow suspect; that "they're only out to make money." I would like to point out that school teachers are also professionals who get paid for their services. No one questions their motives, or the sincerity of their desire to educate our children. Raising such a concern with respect to J & J Security personnel is disingenuous at best.
Regarding the assertion that we are making our appeal prematurely, since the School Board hasn't made a decision on the issue yet: That is the whole point. The School Board has not made a decision on the issue, and we want them to make a decision on the issue. Consequently, the timing of our appeal is perfect. Once again, there is an underlying implication here; namely that J and J Security is lobbying the School Board to specifically hire it's Security Officers to guard the schools. Obviously we would be pleased if that were to eventually happen, but that is not our message. We simply want the School Board to consider hiring armed, private Security Officers to guard Jefferson City schools. Once that threshold decision is made, the school district has a procurement process in place for the acquisition of goods and services that would apply to this situation. But first, a decision must be made. Our goal is merely to facilitate the decision-making process.

Hopefully, I have helped to clarify J & J Security's position in this matter.

Sincerely,

Wayne Lee Development Director J & J Security and Investigations, LLC

Sequoia 4 months ago

You want the board to consider hiring YOUR company. It's an advertisement, plain and simple.
How about discussion, conversation, proposal, request, plan or dialogue? Debates about gun policy shouldn't be an all-or-nothing, my-way-or-the-highway "confrontation." Frankly, people are sick of this over-hyped language where every discussion turns into a hulabaloo about freedom and tyranny. I can't believe you couldn't think of a better word than "confrontation." Is every discussion you have with a prospective customer a "confrontation"?
Please. Teachers are already getting paid by the school district. That's why no one questions their motives. They've already been hired into a profession that people don't enter unless they're concerned about kids. You, in contrast, are SEEKING to get paid by the school district, and doing so by exploiting parents' fear and anxiety. Give me a break.
Hopefully the school board's decision will be made with sober cost-benefit analysis, not an emotional response to a recent tragedy and a "confrontational" sales pitch by a company trying to exploit that tragedy. If they do decide to hire a security company, I pray they don't hire a beligerent huckster reading from the latest NRA press release.

eileen10 3 months, 4 weeks ago

Yep, yep. yep and yep. Way to go Sequoia!! If I were that good with words I would have said the same thing.

MO4LIFE 4 months ago

We already have SRO's in our schools there is no need!!!!!!

JCLifer 4 months ago

Besides, we don't have any real crime in this sleeply little town. No gangs, no drugs, no teen pregnacies, etc. Just happy little kids from happy little families where everyone is way above average. This talk is for the big cities where everything is terrible, not for Jefferson City.

sonny100 3 months, 3 weeks ago

Did you just seriously say we don't have gangs, teen pregnancies or drugs! What rock have you been hiding under! I hope you were joking but without seeing expressions, I have to on the assume you are serious. WOW!

eileen10 3 months, 3 weeks ago

sonny100...Lifer was being sarcastic.

Sequoia 3 months, 4 weeks ago

No comment:

gawker.com/5977112/security-officer-hired-by-school-in-response-to-sandy-hook-shooting-forgets-to-take-handgun-with-him-when-exiting-student-restroom

eileen10 3 months, 4 weeks ago

WT+!!!!!!

Mr_Grimm 3 months, 4 weeks ago

I wish some one from the school board would contact safeplans, or maybe the Tribune could do a piece on them. I saw one of their presentations and if floored me. I think more guards in schools is a good idea. It means more protection for the kids and more trained armed targets a would be attacker has to worry about.

gofish 3 months, 4 weeks ago

Armed guards will not prevent a school shooting any more than having armed police prevents murder anywhere else. At best it might reduce body count. At worst it will INCREASE the body count from "friendly fire" or encourage hostage taking. Mass shootings are a rare event. More people die in Cole county from failure to wear seat belts than murder. Our resources are better spent elsewhere.

sonny100 3 months, 3 weeks ago

Maybe not prevent, but can reduce the damage if properly trained. Yes, mass shootings are rare - tell that to Obama, Pelosa, Biden and Feinstein. These weasels attack schools BECAUSE they KNOW that is one of the FEW places in this country that are never protected. And one SRO cannot do the job. And in many cases they are not there every day - some rotate - maybe not JC - but I know that's the case in other towns. Any smart weasel is going to case the school, know the patterns and routines of personnel, and is going to take that RSO out first - or make sure he isn't where he plans on starting the damage. I'm not sure how hostage taking would be any more of a possibility than without. Whether J&J is used or not, I think we need them in the schools. Our schools wear a big red bullseye on every door.

wow 3 months, 4 weeks ago

Said it when I first heard this horse manure.....there's only ONE thing J & J is concerned about and it's MONEY!!!!! If this were not the case as the J & J boss says...then why hasn't his company offered their services in any of the current war zones. I mean that little Afghan Girl would have loved to have been protected by these "big tough and seriously dedicated to the safety of children" J & J Security professionals.. Perhaps their prressence would have convinced the person(s) who shot her in the head to go elsewhere looking for innocent victims. Noooooo these J & J fella's wanna corner the market here in good ole Jeff City. I know we have some issues here, but we haven't gotten that bad. Also I don't get how J & J can say with a straight face I might add....that putting more police officer's in the schools isn't cost effective...but hiring their security officer's to do the same thing the Cops would be doing fit's right into the tax payer's budget. Please explain how that works!!!! Let the Cops handle this problem....I'm all for creating jobs, but not like this...again let the cops handle school security

Ducky 3 months, 4 weeks ago

Sequoia is quite accurate on all accounts. In addition, my personal experience with local private security is a joke. Security officers at a local hospital are a joke. They are not physically capable of chasing down anyone. I have first hand experiences of situations which required security assistance, and when the going gets tuff, they disappear, it is the staff who have had to respond, until the police arrive. As a parent, I would be quite frightened to have this type of individual in the local schools, armed. They, themselves , will become the security risk. But keep in mind, JCPS seems to have a lot of money , available to them, they might just choose to spend it on yet another project, which lacks community support, and is not in the best interest of kids.

BelledeBoscop 3 months, 4 weeks ago

I can't believe I am reading these comments. Sequoia, Ducky, Wow - It is so easy to be critical with a few strokes of the keyboard . No need to think past the tip of your nose! I happen to disagree with you. This company is proposing a business transaction to the school board. How many other companies are in this area that could provide this type of service? Have they approached the school board? Why do you have to lash out at the one business that is making a proposal? Of course they benefit if they receive the contract, that is why this is a business transaction. I happen to think it is a good idea to look at these scenarios BEFORE something happens. AFTER something happens everyone will be screaming why the school board did not take action. So, lets address this BEFORE it happens. Ducky, you seem to be such an expert, have you dealt with this particular company before or just some run-of-the-mill outfit? Like I said, it is soooo easy to sit at a keyboard and be critical of others. As a parent I am in favor of armed security guards in school instead of armed teachers. Let the teachers do the teaching of our schildren and let the security guards see to it that our children are safe. Besides, they would not be employees of the school district, they would be contractors and if the school district is not satisfied with their services the contract can be cancelled,

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune