Terrorism preparedness and response (and attempts to prevent terrorism altogether) have added significant strain to already stretched state and local budgets. If local governments determine their own level of risk/vulnerability and act accordingly, other programs will suffer as a result of budget reallocations. Should local governments establish minimum standards and levels of preparedness, regardless of the impact on other programs? Consider and discuss the following:

1) What duty is owed by a local government for the protection/safety of its citizens?

2) If there is a duty to protect, how should that duty be balanced against other duties of government?

3) What options are available to meet the requirements of public safety, given the increased demands on scarce resources? (Be creative, think "outside the box.")

Be sure to link back to one or more of the American Founding Principles.Your thread must be at least 200-300 words. This range is a minimum requirement, and NOT a maximum limit. You may write as much as you need to make your strongest arguments. Although more is not necessarily "better," it is reasonable that the best discussions are the ones that show the best evidence in support of the assertions.