Parting ways with some other Republicans, Gov. Jan Brewer said Thursday she does not want armed teachers, principals and volunteers in public schools.
In an interview with Capitol Media Services, the governor said she is instead leaning toward the idea of restoring at least some of the state funds that schools used to hire trained police officers.
Cash for these "school resource officers'' has been cut sharply in prior years to help the state balance its budget. But Arizona now is looking at a possible $600 million surplus for the coming fiscal year.
Her stance puts her in the same camp as House Minority Leader Chad Campbell who advanced his own plan for more school resource officers earlier in the week.
"I believe in safe areas,'' she said.
"We need to make sure that our most precious resources are safe,'' the governor continued. "I will do what it is I can do moving forwards in regards to school safety.''
But Brewer said that, given all the demands on state funding, she cannot agree to the $100 million price tag on Campbell's plan for more officers. She called that unrealistic.
Details of her own plan will come Monday when she gives her State of the State address.
Brewer acknowledged that some of her Republican colleagues believe the best way to protect children is to have more people with guns in schools to offer protection.
Attorney General Tom Horne proposed having each school designate a single individual who would have access to weapons that presumably would remain locked up until needed. Horne offered to make his 36 investigators, all of whom are sworn peace officers, available to provide training to those who are designated.
And earlier this week, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said he sees no reason why individual teachers who own guns should not be able to bring them to work.
Brewer said she's not interested in anything like that.
"I guess they're entitled to their opinion,'' she said. "I'm not a supporter of that.''
Brewer also has to make a decision soon on whether the state will expand the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, the state's Medicaid program, to cover everyone up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level. That's about $25,400 a year for a family of three.
Arizona currently provides care up to the federal poverty level. But even there, there are exceptions as the state, in a budget-cutting move, stopped enrolling single adults even if their income put them below the federal poverty level.
While the main focus is providing health coverage, with the federal government picking up most of the cost, the governor's decision is also linked to the question of gun safety.
That is because an expanded program would also mean more people who could get mental health coverage. And there is evidence that some people involved in mass shootings, including Jared Loughner in the 2011 Tucson incident that left six dead, had fallen through the cracks and not received treatment that might have precluded their action.
Brewer, though, reiterated her stance that additional restrictions on weapons are not appropriate. And she chastised those who are making such calls.
"You know, some people want to make this such an exaggerated issue,'' she said.
"But the bottom line is that it's part of the Constitution,'' the governor continued. "It's the Second Amendment of the land.''
Obviousman posted at 12:34 pm on Sun, Jan 13, 2013.
Why is Jan Brewer unable to think straight?
Her PRINCIPLES are wrong. She invokes the Second Amendment -- which is a right of THE PEOPLE -- to support a program where GOVERNMENT AGENTS (police) can be armed inside schools… but not THE PEOPLE. Hypocrisy.
Her ECONOMICS are wrong. Instead of a program where state-licensed adults (teachers, administrators, staff) VOLUNTARILY arm themselves against extremely LOW-PROBABILITY threats FOR FREE, she proposes PAYING police officers to stand around IDLE on "school duty." Why pay for what people are willing to GIVE YOU?
Jan Brewer doesn't understand liberty, and she doesn't understand the constitution.
cchamb2 posted at 12:16 pm on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
Sure. We'll just call it the "Arizona Peace Officers Employment Enhancement Act".
hamguy posted at 11:38 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
Main problem is funding no matter what you do. We can not get anything done for free and I for one am taxed out! We can try to get the law changed to where we can round up the known nuts roaming our streets and see if we can determine if they are a risk to us or themselves.ACLU blocked that years ago but seems the question needs to be raised again since most of these people that have done these things were already suspected of being a bit off center. California kid seems to have warped out because of bullying and that is a whole horse of a different color.
hamguy posted at 11:32 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
I don't see any one armed guard as being a deterrent as he may be on one end of the grounds and the nut-ball comes in on the other. I also don't see hassling innocent people with undue regulations as the nut-ball and the criminal will get his gun either way. We need to re-look at the ACLU's job on getting a law enacted saying we can't take nut off the street until they do something. Most of these guys doing these things were already know to be in need of having there heads thoroughly explored.
As it is we are in a bad situation "A person who will give up a little freedom for a little security deserves neither and will lose both." - believe it was Ben Franklin said that.
PHXie posted at 11:21 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
Part 1 of 2:
I am very pleased that Governor Brewer is on the side of the People, the US Constitution, and the Arizona Constitution and is not succumbing to the gun-control hysteria, but rather working to address the problem in a level-headed and reasonable manner.
I do not, however, believe that having an armed police officer on every school campus is going to do much to safeguard our young people. From what I've been told, most police officers get less practice time at the firing range than most average firearms owners in this state.
Having a badge does not necessarily make one capable of dealing with a mass shooting at a school. To my understanding, each armed school guard would have to receive specific and ongoing training for that type of event in order to be truly effective. This, I believe, would be cost prohibitive. And who with all that training and tactical value is going to want to spend their time standing around a school that may or may not be attacked someday? In any event, is a single guard (as opposed to several) going to be sufficient to handle the chaos of a school shooting, especially if there is more than one shooter?
downtownresident posted at 11:11 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
Only idiots would advocate giving guns to untrained individuals in schools.
It's bad enough that Horne advocates arming teachers, but for Bill Montgomery to say that any teacher who owns a gun should take it to school is the height of both ignorance and arrogance.
I know plenty of gun owners who have absolutely no clue regarding the use of deadly force.
KEEP GUNS OUT OF SCHOOL.
I have 3 students in the Mesa Public School system and I DO NOT WANT TEACHERS CARRYING GUNS TO SCHOOL!!!!!
Everybody who has a gun on campus is a potential killer, until their identity is verified by authorities. Let's not make it any more confusing than it already would be.
mikedurham posted at 11:02 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
Sanity creeps into the discussion.
Mike McClellan posted at 9:11 am on Fri, Jan 11, 2013.
I agree with the Governor, that if we believe having an armed adult on campus, it should be a police officer, trained to deal with a possible mass murderer on campus, trained in crowd-shooting scenarios, trained to be disciplined in chaotic situations.
The "let's arm the teachers" crowd argues that more guns make us safer. Let's be real: If that's the case, this country should be the safest in the world, since we have more private gun ownership than any other country in the world.
But let's also be real: To actually put a police officer on every campus makes the school safer, but not safe. It might deter some nutjob from coming on campus, but it might not deter another. And with luck, the officer could confront the shooter before the carnage began, but more often, as in the case of Columbine, the officer gets to the shooter after the shooting began. Still, that is better than no presence.
But let's be real, part III: Is the legislature ready to put funding into police officers on campuses? Is the governor ready to expand that program, because if she isn't, some schools will have SRO's, others won't. How many parents will be satisfied with that plan?
Maybe we could have a state/city partnership with the police on campus; the problem with that is, the legislature's cut so much funding to cities over the last few years that they are cash-strapped as well. The Phoenix PD is currently understaffed, as is the Gilbert PD. How many other municipalities are in the same boat?
Finally, let's be real, part IV: In the best case scenario, we have police presence on every campus, which deters the madmen. So what's next, daycare centers? Libraries? Malls, again? Bus stops? Light rail or subway stations?