The murders of adults and children at a school, like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary, should always spark a higher level of scrutiny to determine whether school leaders are doing as much as possible to provide a secure educational environment.

What qualifies for “as much as possible,” however, is really the crux of the debate over school security. Does it mean locked doors, panic buttons and more video cameras (which seem to serve only to give us video of the carnage after the fact), or does it mean armed police officers at high costs to educational budgets, or does it mean training and licensing staff and teachers to wield deadly weapons in defense of their students?

Given the history of teacher reactions to school violence, I have no doubt most teachers would fight to the death if they believed they could save the young people entrusted to them. We’ve seen a multitude of examples of unarmed teachers standing in harm’s way, suffering injury or death in an ultimate testament to their commitment to nurture a community’s young students. Faced with an armed assailant walking down a hallway toward their classroom, I’d bet many of them would in that moment use whatever tools are available to protect lives and bring carnage to an end. Forget guns in that moment. They might take a grenade or cannon.

But most of them will never see an assailant. The public policy debate demands honest evaluation of the likelihood of an attack. The slim probability factors into the extent educators should modify day-to-day behaviors to deal with a potential threat. If my family has a history of high blood pressure and stroke, for example, I’m going to modify my diet, perhaps take some medication and get medical checkups periodically. I’m less likely to hire a full-time nurse and pay for an ambulance to sit in my driveway just in case my arm starts feeling numb.

School security was at issue again last week in Little Rock, where the head of a state board that voted to allow some public school districts to arm teachers and staff said he opposes arming teachers. John Acre, chairman of the state Board of Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies, said the board voted with the expectation the Legislature would take action on the matter.

The board had licensed some school officials for years as security guards, giving them authority to be armed. The practice received scrutiny last year after stories about the Clarksville School District’s plans to arm two dozen teachers and staff members by getting them licensed as security guards. These districts thought they were on the right side of the law, but Attorney General Dustin McDaniel offered an interpretation of state law that disputed that.

Rather than shut down existing school efforts, the state private security board more or less grandfathered those districts in as it voted not to accept any new applications. Standing in the mushy middle sparked criticism from some lawmakers who accused the panel of disregarding the law. The panel is caught in a state-level debate over what should be permitted within schools in the name of security.

Here’s what I suggest: State government should get out of the way and let local school districts make decisions in the best interests of their employees and students. State government, including the Arkansas Department of Education, should stand ready to assist local school districts, but state officials should remember this: They are not in charge of local schools.

Our state’s education system embraces local control of schools, with the state standing in to ensure adequate and equitable education across all 75 counties and 273 school districts. The state Department of Education has a vital role in support of consistent curriculum and educational offerings, adequate school facilities, child nutrition, professional licensing, financial accountability, educational technology, school health and administration of federal programs. It does not have an office focused on school security, much less one that takes responsibility for security at the 1,075 schools in the state.

If, God forbid, a school shooting happened in Arkansas tomorrow, who would have responsibility — and potentially the blame — for any security shortcomings? Local school leaders would.

Folks, I don’t know what the security answer is, but I know enough about Arkansas to know what works for a school district in Desha County isn’t necessarily going to work for a district in Washington County. The kind of security required at a Little Rock School District high school is not the same needed at a Bentonville high school or a Lincoln elementary school.

Unless and until state government accepts the responsibility for protecting school facilities — which it cannot adequately do — its leaders should take care to avoid putting up barriers to local decisions designed to protect students, teachers and staff .

GREG HARTON IS OPINION PAGE EDITOR FOR NWA MEDIA.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 01/13/2014