If probation and parole officer Kimberley Davenport worked in Georgia or Alabama, she’d take a gun with her on the nights she ventures into high-crime areas alone to check on the offenders she monitors.

But Ms. Davenport works in Tennessee, one of just 10 states that don’t issue firearms to people who supervise parolees and probationers.

In May, the Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole gave her an expandable baton, pepper spray and a bulletproof vest for protection during home visits. And she learned that the state is conducting a pilot study to see if it would be prudent to give her a gun, as well.

“I’ve always felt pretty safe because I know my offenders, but one day they may be on drugs or something, and they may flip out,” said Ms. Davenport, who is based in Chattanooga and checks on convicted felons everywhere from housing developments in East Lake to rural areas in Ooltewah. “There’s always the potential to have difficult situations in the field.”

The parole board is well aware of possible dangers, according to member Yusuf Hakeem, a former Chattanooga City Council member. But the board must consider other issues before rushing to arm all officers all the time, he said.

The board began discussing the possibility of its officers carrying weapons about a year ago, Mr. Hakeem said. It wasn’t until this summer that members finally agreed to provide nonlethal weapons to officers statewide and to begin a pilot study on guns, he said.

“We’re going to take our time with this,” Mr. Hakeem said. “It’s something that’s going to be scrutinized and evaluated, because it’s a big step. We have to look at the budget situation and the effectiveness of what they’re doing.”

IN OTHER STATES

Most states already have had this debate, according to the American Probation and Parole Association, which keeps statistics showing that the first armed parole officers emerged in the 1960s and 1970s. The trend escalated during the 1980s, according to the association’s executive director, Carl Wicklund.

Forty states were arming at least their parole officers under some, if not all, circumstances as of 2006, according to the Probation and Parole Association’s latest national survey on the issue. It’s become the rule rather than the exception, as philosophies on offender supervision have shifted to focus more on law enforcement than social work, Mr. Wicklund said.

In Alabama, probation and parole officers have been gun-toting law enforcement officials since 1975. Georgia parole officers have been armed since 1982. That state’s probation officers have had the option of carrying guns for decades and have been required to do so since 2002.

It makes sense just based on FBI statistics, according to Robert Oakes, assistant executive director of the Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles. The FBI’s Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted report from 2006 shows that 25 percent of those who have killed officers over the past decade are on probation or parole.

The American Probation and Parole Association, which provides training, technical research and advocacy for those in the corrections field, does not necessarily advise going straight to carrying guns, Mr. Wicklund said.

“We don’t say that it’s a good or a bad idea to be armed,” he said. “There’s no real research out there that shows someone is safer carrying a gun than not carrying a gun. There’s anecdotal evidence both ways. If you’re carrying a gun, there’s always a risk someone will get a hold of it and use it against you.”

Officer safety is one of the most important considerations, Hamilton County Criminal Court Judge Barry Steelman said. Public safety concerns are addressed through a state law that prevents those committing the most violent offenses from probation eligibility, he said. But the safety of probation and parole officers can be threatened even by someone deemed “nonviolent” who reacts badly in the wrong situation, he said.

“The probation officer is put in a really tough spot,” Judge Steelman said. “They have to sit across the table from these offenders, who know that this is the one person who stands between them and the judge and the jail cell.”

Mr. Oakes said that in Alabama he has seen the benefits of probation and parole officers being able to serve their own violation warrants. At the same time, they can arrest violators on the spot rather than having to call police to do it for them, he said.

But such policing capabilities sometimes undermine the social service aspect of the job, Mr. Oakes said.

“You run the risk of an offender not opening up as much to you because they look at you more like a cop than a counselor,” he said.

FACTORING COSTS

On top of that, Mr. Oakes said, costs to train and equip sworn officers mount quickly. Alabama spends between $350,000 and $500,000 a year to train its estimated 400 probation and parole officers, he said.

Other costs include equipment updates and salaries and benefits commensurate with other law enforcement professionals, Mr. Oakes said.

In Tennessee, Mr. Tullock estimates it would cost about $3,000 to send each officer to an accredited law enforcement academy. Add to that another thousand or so to outfit the officer, several hundred a month for a secured patrol car and more money in years to come for annual training, replacement clothing and ammunition, he said.

The state can’t afford to do that right now for all 774 of its case-carrying officers, he said — especially if officers with guns wouldn’t be any more efficient than the police in getting violators behind bars.

Ms. Davenport said she, for one, would love the added security of a firearm in all situations.

“I’m very excited about that program,” she said. If it goes statewide, she added, “I’m going to be the first to sign up.”

Tech Talk