As the recent failure of the Senate to pass even the most basic gun regulations on background checks shows, the rhetoric and responses to the tragedy at Sandy Hook and other incidents remains polarized. Concerned that the “easy way out” is to put more armed security in schools, many advocacy groups have begun to speak out with notes of caution – that what sounds simple and safe may, in the end, be neither simple or make schools safer. In fact, schools can (and some are already doing so) taking steps to make their schools safer, perhaps by restricting free access, improving monitoring and supervision capabilities, and improving mental health services for children. But, putting more armed guards, too often with limited training, or putting more law enforcement officers in schools may lead to some unintended consequences, namely increasing the likelihood of tragedies as well as the number of youth referred to courts as the result of misbehavior that gets treated as delinquent.
 
In response to a recent National Rifle Association (NRA) proposal, the National Juvenile Justice Network (NJJN) released a statement, Why We Don’t Want the NRA Handling School Safety, challenging both the assumptions and the recommendations the NRA makes about how to improve school safety. As this discussion is likely to continue, at the federal, state, and local level, we need to take a step back and look at what really works.     by Jim Moeser