I came across this story while doing an Internet search on court security/violence. Minnesota is fortunate to have one of the preeminent judicial security practitioners in the USA living in the state. I am referring to Steve Swensen of the Center for Judicial and Executive Security. For the last 6-years of my career I worked in the U.S. Marshals Service's Judicial Security Division (JSD). I provided oversight to all of the judicial security programs. Steve Swensen was literally the go to guy for every single area of judicial security. From physical security to personal security. From threat management to high threat trials. Up to, and including, the planning and execution of personal protection details on judicial officials. He has been ahead of the curve for decades. If the State of Minnesota is in the process of evaluating its court and judicial security programs, there is simply no better person in the USA to assist the state than Mr. Swensen. R. Friederich Chief Inspector (Retired) U.S. Marshals Service

I am not advocating that prosecutors carry guns. I just think that prosecutors should not be prohibited from carrying if they face a safety threat. A state statute prohibits prosecutors employed by a county or city from carrying “while on duty”, even it they face a safety threat. The statutory prohibition applies to local prosecutors, but not other attorneys. To me the statutory prohibition was just an annoyance, until an alleged drug dealer allegedly tried to hire a hit man to kill one of my assistant county attorneys. Some people think that prosecutors should carry a firearm all the time, like cops. Some people think that nobody should ever carry, unless they are cops. My view, for me personally, is that I don't plan to carry, unless I think there is a safety threat. If I get a call today that somebody I prosecuted has been released from prison and has told people he is coming to kill me, I would want the authority to carry until the threat has expired. I can't do that now, while on duty. If the Lake Crystal city attorney gets a call today that somebody he has prosecuted has been released from jail and that defendant has told people he was going to kill the city attorney, the city attorney could carry (provided he has a permit). The Lake Crystal city attorney can carry, because he is an independent contractor, not an employee of the city. That doesn't make much sense to me. If the prohibition was lifted, in order to carry, county attorneys and their assistants would have to go through a permit to carry class and get a permit from the sheriff, just like anybody else. In Mankato they would also need written permission from the sheriff or chief of police if they wanted to carry in a courthouse complex, just like anybody else. (There is a standing “Administrative Order”, issued on May 23, 2003, by the chief judge of the fifth judicial district, and applicable to all courthouse complexes in the fifth judicial district, that states in order to possess a firearm in a courthouse complex, they would have to get written permission from the chief of police or sheriff.) If a county attorney or assistant county attorney was to ask permission of the chief of police or sheriff to carry in a courthouse complex the sheriff or chief of police could say “no” , say “yes”, say “yes” but with restrictions, or even require additional training first. I was at a county board meeting Tuesday morning. Those meetings are not held in the courthouse. A reporter for the local newspaper attends those meetings. He is not prohibited from carrying a gun at the meeting, so why should I be? Ross Arneson

Let's see. The judges have armed, sworn deputies to protect them at work. The rest of us don't. From whom do we face the greatest risk? The repeat, violent offenders that these judges catch and release with little or no incarceration time. Perhaps if they did more to look after our safety, we would feel more like looking out for theirs.