The debators favoring the use of private police for nuclear sites argue that private police can be specifically selected and trained for the particular security demands of nuclear sites; whereas, public police, particularly those in rural areas where nuclear facilities are often located, do not receive the specialized training required to meet the complex demands of nuclear site security. It is further argued that public funds are not sufficient to permit the full-time use of public police at nuclear facilities. The debators arguing against the use of private police at nuclear facilities and for the use of public police maintain that since private police are ultimately paid and supervised by management, they will not act in the public interest should company profit interests and public safety conflict. Another argument against using private police is that management will tend to cut on security costs, because security is not directly related to profitmaking. The broader jurisdictional power of public police and the backup resources available are also cited as reasons for favoring the use of public police over private police at nuclear sites. The arguments of each position are challenged on cross-examination by the opposing debators.