Posted on 12/21/2012 9:27:58 AM PST by Red Steel
National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre on Friday dismissed calls for increased gun control in response to the Connecticut school shooting, calling instead for Congress to support a plan putting armed police officers in "every single school" in America.
In an impassioned speech, marking the NRA's first in-depth public comments since the Newtown tragedy, LaPierre pointed the finger not at gun proliferation but violent video games, the media and the absence of armed guards at schools.
He argued that if banks and members of Congress can have protection, schools across America should be afforded the same security.
"It's now time for us to assume responsibly for our schools," he said. "The only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be permanently involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It would have been better for him to at least point out that 99%+ of the time, on every (school) day, millions of kids attend 125,000 schools across the country and DO NOT get shot or killed.
Even worse, he blamed movies, music & video games. I look forward to the coming coalition with Tipper Gore...
So how do you propose we protect the ones that do get shot 1% of the time?
Are you saying that sending kids to shcool is a game of Russian Roulette but with better odds so we shouldn’t worry about it?
It’s amazing to me how many people don’t want to spend the money, or don’t want to create a police state -whatever that means-, or don’t want to defend their children, but want to cry about it and scream whatever will we do when they get murdered.
Americans never cease to not amaze me.
Then, homeschool. Or get a CCW and volunteer at your children's school, if the school district doesn't infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms.
As I said, if money is more important to you, then expect this to happen again.
It's not about money. I have no issue with paying for National Defense. It's about effectiveness and continued/increased infringement. If a security officer is a good idea, then surely someone will want body scanners and stip searches. Why stop at the school? Set up road blocks within 1000 yards of all schools and search vehicles. This doesn't enhance security. It narrowly defines it.
It all boils down to what is more important to the parent, .... What happens when you leave treasure undefended or inadequately defended?
If your "treasures" were that important to you, you wouldn't send them to the statist indoctrination centers known as government schools. (Private schools are not that different). All my children have been homeschooled throughout their entire academic carrer. It is an economic burdern to have only one parent working while the other performs his or her function as primary teacher, but what is more important than one's treasures? Every teacher is able to care for his/her charges, even with lethal force, if that should be necessary. And not just at home, but on field trips as well. Some of the students are armed as well--pepper spray, tactical folding knives, and, if old enough to open carry, firearms. Our treasure is defended.
Well, first, do the math. It's far, far less than 1% of the time.
Are you saying that sending kids to shcool is a game of Russian Roulette but with better odds so we shouldn’t worry about it?
No, I'm saying people who equate sending their kids to school with russian roulette have lost perspective and are severely over-reacting to a situation that ALMOST NEVER happens.
Americans never cease to not amaze me.
Me, neither. We have gotten quite weak as a country.
Even teachers can recover from their brainwashing. I've seen it.
Have you forgotten how hegemonic is the control of the Teacher’s Unions, and how they can already dictate what teachers can and can’t and won’t and wouldn’t be obligated to do in their highly ritualized function as teachers?
Lol. You clearly did not avail yourself of the link provided. Further, you do know that principal had the guts to attack the perp even unarmed. Do you really think she didn't have the wherewithal to have used a weapon had she been so trained and equipped?
Far better to have at least one retired cop who’s used to carrying a weapon, and knows from his training how to use it.
Oh, and you think that "retired" soon to be double dipping cop won't be a union thug too? Chances are he'll take every precaution in the interest of "officer safety." It was seven minutes between the time officers arrived on scene at the school in question and the discovery of the first body. What the hell were they doing? The shooting continued until the perp committed suicide some six minutes after officers entered a building they could have traversed in thirty seconds. Yeah, right. For all your shouting you just proved yourself a fool.
A single armed guard presents an attacker with an easily soluble problem that is, shoot the guard first. No one will know the intentions of the visitor until that first shot. After that the gun-free zone is also a free-fire zone just as if there were no guard, If the teachers and staff may be armed, then the killer no longer has a safe path to realizing his fantasy of making a big splash with his murderous final "statement" be he schizo or jihadist. One theme common to all these incidents is that the killer wants to go out in a blaze of glory, to have a publicized effect on the world. Well, the jihadist just wants to kill a lot of infidels before he dies. But if the killer thinks he will probably get himself killed before he can make his statement he will not do the deed or he will seek another stage for his drama.
It’s one thing to point to evil and sound an alarm, it is quite another to posit tangible means to trim the fins of the Leviathan.
He is wrong. An armed guard is an unnecessary and large expense and armed teachers works better. An armed guard is too easy to surprise with the first shot then there is that “gun-free zone” again. Multiple guards becomes prohibitively expensive. Just let it be known that teachers and staff may be armed. There will be no attempts at massacre again. Israel is the model. That does not preclude explosives but nothing really protects against that.
Today Wayne LaPierre and the NRA did the exact OPPOSITE of what I thought they'd do and I'm pleasantly surprised at the strong stand they're taking.
It should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that "gun free zones" are really nothing more than KILLING FIELDS for those who want to do harm. I really like their upping the ante and saying if they (the politicians) really want to protect our children that there'd be armed security guards in each one.
If banks can protect money, and these worthless politicians - all the way up to Obama - can have ARMED security guards protecting them, then why aren't our CHILDREN as equally protected?!
Surely our children are worth more than "money" and this POC that sits in the White House!
As for me, I'm going to the next school board meeting and demanding they hire armed security guards in each school. Yes, I know my property taxes will go up some to provide them, but I cannot think of a better investment to protect my kids!
One last thing: After the Sandy Hook shootings last week, I sat both my teenage sons down and instructed them that should their school ever go on lockdown, they are to throw watever they have to through their classroom window, smash it, and get out of the building and run for their lives.
No F'ing way in HELL I ever want my kids to wait for a gunman to kill them because their school went on "lockdown." Whoever thought of this "lockdown" bullshit should have to go through it themselves with a gunman loose in their school. Perhaps they'd realize how WORTHLESS "lockdown" is~!!!!!
I didn’t really mean anything related to a warrior priest. My point is that when people are raised believing and hoping that there’s more to life than being a piece of meat that dies, they don’t do this sort of thing. The last thing I want to do when I meet St. Peter is to explain why I murdered innocent people as my last act on Earth. No matter how angry or despondent I become, the murder of innocent strangers simply isn’t on my list of options.
I’ve got quite a few atheist or agnostic friends, and to me it matters less what they believe in and more on what they hope for. And any atheist who doesn’t believe in God, but hopes nonetheless that God exists, and that their human spirit will live on and be rewarded in a manner commensurate with their behavior on Earth (within the framework of Judeo-Christian values), is a safe atheist to live near.
Oh, and one more thing loudmouth: Columbine High School DID have an armed guard who, when two kids started shooting the place up with shotguns, didn't do squat, and Wayne LaPierre should have known that.
I’m not interested in doing math.
However infrequently it occurs, it’s going to result in the loss of my freedom, and I’m not going to tolerate that.
Here’s a math formula for you to consider:
20 dead kids + 6 dead adults = no more 2nd amendment.
I don’t have any kids, and I’m not going to have any kids.
I am efforting to defend and protect the treasure of other people whom are apparently to dumb and self centered to protect their own.
Teachers are not police.
Older students are not police.
You solutions are half assed.
Good like defending against an AR with a tactical folding knife and pepper spray.
You are of course correct.
I agree. People calling for the banning of guns, etc = severe overreaction on the other side and there obviously needs to be pushback.
In my opinion, this is all a solution looking for a problem.
School shootings in the U.S almost never, ever happen when you look at how many kids go to how many schools every day.
If someone wanted to crunch the numbers, I bet people have a better chance at winning the lottery or getting struck by lightning as they do getting shot in school.
Since Wayne LaPierre came up with the idea, it will be rejected by most public educators.
However all our public high and junior high schools have unarmed officers in them already. All they need to do is arm them.
Is there some reason to have only -one- guard...
The frequency of their occurrence is not relevant outside of the fact that we should be thankful that it hasn’t occurred more.
It only needs to happen once for the enemy to use it as an excuse to take freedoms, and that is already history right now.
We have the freedom currently to defend our children against this, so it’s use it or lose it.
If conservatives have any intent of keeping their freedom at this point, they are going to have to do something that goes against their very nature, and that is smarten up and fast, I mean really fast.
This could happen again in the blink of an eye.
Many schools already have unarmed school security personnel. What cost is there to the taxpayer if they are required to be armed?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.