Gettysburg reviews security for 150th anniversary commemoration
Last week's bombings at the finish line of the Boston Marathon prompted organizers of this summer's 150th anniversary commemoration of the Battle of Gettysburg to review their security plan.
“The question came up (on Wednesday) while we were updating state lawmakers about our plans for the event,” said Norris Flowers, president of the Gettysburg Convention & Visitors Bureau. “Security has always been a top priority for us, so the events in Boston certainly have affected the conversation.”
Flowers met with members of the House Tourism and Recreational Development Committee at the Lutheran Theological Seminary in Gettysburg.
An estimated 200,000 people are expected to visit Gettysburg between June 28 and July 7 for hundreds of activities. They include encampments and demonstrations on the battlefield; children's programs, talks and book signings by Civil War historians; and the opening of the Seminary Ridge museum.
The Battle of Gettysburg was fought from July 1-3, 1863.
Flowers said he cannot discuss specific details of security measures.
State and local police have scheduled a public seminar in Gettysburg May 29 to discuss elements of the security plan and what residents can do to assist, he said.
“The need for people to be watchful will certainly play a major role in preventing any problems,“ Flowers said.
Tony LaRussa is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7987 or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- For Steelers outside linebacker Jones, size is not an obstacle
- Pirates top Cardinals, 5-2, on Davis’ homer; Alvarez, McCutchen hurt
- Steelers cornerbacks Allen, Gay, Taylor have something to prove
- Steelers notebook: Team cuts 15 players, including LB So’oto, RB Hall
- Latrobe law firm’s secretary pleads guilty to income tax evasion
- Pittsburgh paramedics treat 38 people at Stage AE concert
- PSU notebook: Freshman cornerback Haley soars up depth chart
- Indiana County township ‘afraid for the water’ fights waste well
- Harmar police make 2 drug arrests as part of crackdown on crime
- 2 top technology officers leave UPMC
- Western Pennsylvania drivers at bottom of insurer’s safety rankings