Gun Control and Security Employment

The effect of gun control on security employment is complicated. Although the debate on gun control continues to develop, its perception of importance seems dependent on how recent incidents of mass violence occur. Nowhere is this seen more readily than in the areas of security employment for the schools and businesses in general.

Security Employment Increase In Schools

Aside from the primary issues of the Bill of Rights and what many consider an encroachment to the 2nd Amendment right of American citizens to protect themselves, having security employment for schools is a very hot button item for other reasons.

Measures recently proposed and adapted by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy of Connecticut essentially call for the implementation of emergency services.

However, basically consisting of education departments working together to develop school security standards and have them revised every 2 years does nothing to ward off danger. When a hostile attack on school grounds is underway, it is not time to review a procedure manual.

The new guidelines address building entryways; bullet-proof glass; alarm systems; and closed-circuit television monitoring. However, the only truly practical thing these measures bring about is the hiring of additional security people to “keep an eye out for trouble,” so to speak. Unfortunately, once “trouble” does break out, there is no defense except calling for more unarmed security guards.

Gun Control: Job Killer or Creator

Interestingly enough, another aspect of how gun control affects security employment emerges when considering the number of people employed as a result of these measures.

Sturm Ruger Co. is one such example. Had anyone invested a simple $100 in the company back in 2008, they would have returns of about $532 today. Thanks to policies perceived as anti-Bill of Rights and anti-2nd Amendment, the company quickly launched into gun production at double its capacity. This in turn resulted in stellar figures for gun sales, gun-related products, and increased hiring of armed security people.

Recently, Connecticut-based Colt Manufacturing Co. opened a factory in Osceola County, FL under the promotion of Florida Gov. Scott’s program for business-friendly policies. No doubt fleeing Connecticut’s plans for gun control, that decision by both the Colt Manufacturing Co. and Florida added 63 jobs to the company. More impressive were other employment opportunities that affected other sectors surrounding the company’s prime product.

In earlier years, the same happened to Italian gun-maker Beretta in 1977 when it set up a factory in southern Maryland. Expanding and hiring rapidly, it won the contract to manufacture pistols for the U.S. military and its allies. Consequently, the Maryland economy was noticeably invigorated as security firms now responded to a spiraling increase in job filings for guard positions.

“Not Connecting The Dots”

Unfortunately, many gun-control advocates fail to yet “connect the dots,” so to speak, in realizing the almost obvious. Typically, gun sales in no gun control states produce more jobs and stimulate local economies. Businesses and residents simply feel more confident knowing they can protect themselves against violators. Moreover, according to much research, these very states have a seemingly lower crime rate than gun control states.

In some cases, gun-control measures do increase the employment ratio for more security hiring. However, employment applications for security people drop once a weapons removal policy begins. The solution may simply rest in going back to one’s future; implementing the existing laws and then backing them by force–as they once were effectively carried out.

In a nutshell, the 2nd Amendment doesn’t need tweaking or replacement. The Bill of Rights simply needs enforcement by that intent on protecting the innocent against the violent.