Breaking News

Not guilty verdict in JC murder trial May 6, 2016


  • Now that your account is set up, Please sign in and sign up to receive Breaking News and other Alerts of your choice.


WayneLee 3 years, 3 months ago

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

  1. First, 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.

  2. Second, 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.

  3. Third, 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.

  4. Finally, 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.


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


JCLifer 3 years, 3 months ago

Clear to me. Good job!

Thanks for your concern for the safety and well-being of our city's children.


Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting