The conversation about having an armed guard on campus is inevitable, especially in Santa Barbara, a liberal-leaning and relatively safe community.

The Channels believes that an armed officer should remain a last resort for our campus’ safety.

The College Planning Council is proposing to hire a Santa Barbara Police Department trained armed officer with a salary of $250,000.  This officer would work year-round from 9 to 5 p.m. and would carry a loaded weapon at all times.

An armed guard as a prophylactic measure is excessive. Were an active shooter on campus, an armed guard would (theoretically) take down whoever is at large. However, an additional lethal weapon would provoke unnecessary bloodshed.

Granted, action needs to be taken in preparation of an active shooter, but this is not an effective deterrent. By using a gun to deal with high-risk issues, we would be condoning gun use for handling serious problems.

An inherently non-violent society cannot endorse this frame of mind. If you incorporate a gun to solve a problem, you have already lost yourself to the problem.

Fundamentals aside, a single man or woman could not possibly guard our 74-acre campus as comprehensively as a security team.

We propose amplifying our security staff’s potential without equipping them with firearms. Campus security should be allowed non-lethal weapons, like tasers, mace, or LED incapacitators. Security should also be allowed to enforce citations for any misdemeanors or felonies committed on campus, a privilege officers have.

Currently, our security guards are outfitted with a flashlight, radio and ticket writer. It’s a joke that we are proposing an outside force to patrol the grounds when these items are the height of our security’s defense.

Campus security officer Erik Fricke said approval from the Board of Trustees is needed to arm officers with electroshock weapons.  He said regardless of whether an officer is hired, campus security would benefit from receiving tasers.

While a taser, mace or incapacitator would never victor in an old-western shootout against a handgun or assault rifle, the playing field is much more leveled.

Emergency management expert Kim Aufhauser was brought to City College on three separate occasions to inform faculty and students on how to respond to high-risk firearm situations. City College administration also invited the Santa Barbara Special Weapons and Tactics team to visit and study the campus and inform its beneficiaries on defensive methods.

Administration has become annoyed by the low attendance from faculty and students at the meetings. Student and faculty apathy concerning being prepared should not be an incentive to hiring an officer. This would be a shortsighted drive.

Teaching self-defense is another important defense mechanism in an emergency. Faculty should show an emergency preparedness video to students at the beginning of each semester.

If a gunman knew of a guard on campus, he or she would prey on the officer as the biggest threat. Several security guards across campus could efficiently handle a situation the way a single armed guard couldn’t.

We are always in support of full campus safety and absolute protection for the students and faculty members. However, the best way to teach is by example. We cannot enforce the idea that this is a wholesome method for defense.

We applaud City College administration for making safety a priority, but a gun is not the answer.

This editorial was written by opinion editor Scott Buffon and reflects the opinion of the Channels editorial board.