During a recent government meeting, significant concerns were raised regarding the expansion of the guardian program in schools, with critics questioning its effectiveness and safety. One speaker highlighted the disparity between the number of air marshals and the vast number of daily flights, arguing that the presence of armed personnel does not guarantee safety. They criticized the push for more guns in schools, suggesting that it is based on flawed reasoning and insufficient data.

The discussion also touched on the recent firing of a qualified professional, which some attendees believe could have mitigated negative press surrounding the Board of Public Safety (BPS). The speaker emphasized the need for better communication from the board, criticizing the quality of press releases and the overall governance of the BPS.

Concerns were raised about the implications of having armed guardians in schools, particularly regarding the potential for confusion and fear among students and parents. Questions were posed about how the community would be informed about the presence of armed individuals and the protocols in place to manage such situations. The speaker called for transparency and access to data that demonstrates the program's effectiveness, arguing that the lack of public involvement fosters distrust.

Another participant, a school shooting survivor, shared alarming statistics about gun violence in schools, asserting that armed guards have not proven effective in preventing shootings. They pointed out that the majority of gun violence incidents occur even with school resource officers present, and emphasized the risks associated with arming staff, which could endanger students and create chaos during emergencies.

The meeting underscored a growing divide between community members advocating for safety measures and the board's approach to implementing the guardian program, with calls for more inclusive dialogue and evidence-based decision-making.