Liberty vs. security at the legislative building
Published May 31, 2018
by Peg O'Connell, healthcare analyst and NC SPIN panelist, May 28, 2018.
I just made my first visit to our Legislative Building since the new security procedures went into place. There were seven people working as efficiently as they could to move people through the screening machines at the front door. I went out the back door of the Legislative Building to the Legislative Office Building (which has no security, by the way) and then returned to the Legislative Building via the back door. There were five more people working as efficiently as they could to get the crowds of people through the line. That is 12 security people working the lines at the legislature.
I write this not to point out the irony of some legislators getting security protections while our schools are struggling with how to keep their students safe. That is the subject of a whole different column. I am writing about this because it makes me truly sad that our Legislative Building—The People’s House—is becoming a fortress, keeping legislators on one side and the people on the other. And I personally wonder how many times I can go through x-ray machines and metal detectors before I start to grow a second head.
I understand the need for common-sense security measures in this day and age, but instead of being greeted by the lovely ladies at the front desk of the Legislative Building, visitors are now met with the clanging and banging of airport like security. At least we can keep our bottles of water.
I was always proud that our legislative leadership has resisted the urge to make it harder for people to get into see them. Our democratic system is a careful balancing act between liberty and security. I always lean toward the liberty side, but I understand why some prefer security. I do worry, however, about what Benjamin Franklin said, “Those who would choose security over liberty deserve neither.”
May 31, 2018 at 4:44 pm
Norm Kelly says:
'I write this not to point out the irony of some legislators getting security protections while our schools are struggling with how to keep their students safe.'
First, I know it's not the point of this editorial. But some just can't help taking jabs.
Second, there's a huge difference between a single building and every building in all the schools across the state.
Third, isn't it time to ask what local school boards are doing to secure schools? What part of changing school building construction has changed since the first shooting at Columbine? Has a single school layout changed to enhance security since Columbine? DOn't local school boards have SOME responsibility to improve security? Or is it only their job to whine about more gun control, like inexperienced school kids who have no life history yet pay attention to gun control advocates?
Adding security make sense. If you didn't see this security, wouldn't you be wondering why this simple step hadn't been implemented? What part of adding security where possible DOESN'T make sense to you? It's not that there's a fortress, but simple sensible security, from what I can tell. If this security had been implemented when demons ruled Raleigh, would you still whine about it?
