Craig Deluz of FPC explained that armed guards are a potentially viable option, as long as gun owners are not singled out to foot the bill.
Via Fox 40:
As the conversation around mass shootings is shifting toward prevention, a California bill aims to impose fees on all gun and ammo purchases, and use the revenue to put more armed officers and counselors inside schools statewide...
...“The idea of more armed officers in schools in and of itself is not a bad one. The question we’re talking about here is, who’s supposed to be paying for it,” said Craig DeLuz, a gun rights activist with The Firearms Policy Coalition.
Deluz says by charging gun buyers a fee, the state is essentially punishing legal gun owners. He argues the fee is actually a tax because those on whom it would be imposed wouldn’t necessarily see a benefit from it.
“We’re making it more challenging to buy firearms. We’re doing everything possible to make it such that law-abiding citizens are being punished,” said DeLuz.
DeLuz argues the training law enforcement officers receive with firearms isn’t sufficient enough to qualify them as firearms experts. He cited the armed deputy who failed to enter Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida while a gunman killed 17 people in February.
“That is an example of why many of us have decided not to leave defense of ourselves up to someone else,” said DeLuz.
Read more here.