Real Safety? Or Eye Wash?

Anyone who has been in local government facilities lately has noticed an increasing presence of armed security personnel.  With the increased incidence of attacks on civilians, government is feeling a need to do something, at least as pertains to publically-own facilities. But do what?
I was speaking with a friend recently who attends a large church in Florida, and this church is very much concerned about the same issue. Now, at every service, they have three paid uniformed armed guards and five armed retired policemen in civilian clothes strategically placed throughout the auditorium. They have a plan, and they drill for dealing with different types of emergencies. 
Compare that to what we see locally. The courthouse appears similarly well protected, but what about the local campus of Atlantic Cape Community College?  On a recent visit to the campus I observed an armed guard at the entrance. That guard would no doubt be beneficial in protecting a person coming or going after dark, but for that he would generally not need to be armed.
He would need to be armed for the types of attacks recently experienced in Paris and California. But, a single armed guard would be powerless against even a single armed person intent on mayhem at the college. Armed with the element of surprise, it would be nothing for an assailant to take out that guard, and then be about his (or her) evil intents. The new measures at the county administration building appear to present a similar vulnerability.
My wife and I were in Central America and noted how they were dealing with their security issues. A McDonalds had an armed guard walking the parking lot and another obviously vigilant guard pacing back and forth on the roof.  In another town in front of a tiny bank stood six uniformed men with rifles.
Am I suggesting that taxpayers spend the enormous sums it would take to protect ourselves in a similar fashion?  I am not suggesting anything other than, if we are going to undertake protective measures, those measures need to be adequate to address the issues. If we are not going to do that, then what we are doing ends up being eye wash.
The public is not stupid, and the more government treats it that way, the more people become fed up, and the more popularity the Donald Trumps of the world gain in backlash to prudent candidates.
So why are such half measures even being implemented? To create the appearance of doing something? Half measures create less confidence in government, not more.
Art Hall 
P.S.: After writing this piece, I asked a female co-worker and my wife to read it and comment. My co-worker said, “You are right to write on this topic because everybody is talking about it. Some of my friends are getting guns.”
My wife said, “What you are suggesting is that we create the police state that we so disliked in Central America, and said at that time that we are so glad that we don’t live in such a country. Are you suggesting everybody get a gun? If so, we would have more violence and killings, not less, because angry people would now have guns in their hands.” I answered, “I am not suggesting any given solution, as I have none in mind, only that eye wash is not going to serve, that we need real solutions. Besides, everybody knows this issue doesn’t pertain to only governmental facilities. Given the magnitude of this national challenge, the people are going to have to take part in whatever decision is come to; otherwise they won’t accept it. ” 
From the Bible: If you don’t know what you’re doing, pray to the Father. He loves to help. You’ll get his help, and won’t be condescended to when you ask for it. Ask boldly, believingly, without a second thought. James 1:5-8