SECURITY AND FREEDOM: A TRADE-OFF

Each time there is a tragedy like the killing of to officers in the U.S. Capitol, there is widespread concern that something like this could happen at other public buildings around the nation.

In the case of the Capitol, as with so many other important public buildings, there have been attempts to provide some sense of security by using armed guards, X-ray machines and metal detectors. Often, the mere fact that such scrutiny is in place has been enough to thwart mayhem in the making.

The issue that butts heads with strict security is the fact that our public buildings are -- well, they are open to the public. Government buildings are where our government functions, and as citizens we have both a right and a duty to participate. So where do we draw the line between absolute security and open government?

The sad fact is that absolute security may simply not be possible, at least not in our society where the public has always had the right, at a minimum, to observe government in action. The closest thing to absolute security would be solid walls and barred gates and heavily armed guards every few feet. Instead of working in public buildings, government would become imprisoned for its own safety.

Surely Americans would prefer to visit the state capitol and wander around looking at the many interesting displays or the Thomas Hart Benton murals or stopping by to see a senator or representative without contending with prison-like security.

The trade-off, it seems, is realizing that there are lunatics in the marble halls of government just like there are on our city streets and remote country lanes.