Posted on 09/04/2004 2:35:18 AM PDT by Cyclops08
"We need a rifle and handgun ---locked cabinet..."
There is an article on this on National Review Online. I think it is posted here somewhere.
"We need a rifle and handgun ---locked cabinet..."
There is an article on this on National Review Online. I think it is posted here somewhere.
It will happen here. God help us all if it does because I know that I will have no remorse killing bastards who do this to children.
thanks Jocon... I'll check that out... great minds think alike!
But sKerry's anti-American supporters will CLAIM he would have done it better.
Save the children, kill a Muslim.(?)
You're so "mean-spirited"...next you'll being saying Michael Moore has an agenda in his "documentaries".
We are actually in "violent agreement" as some talking heads say.
Most schools in this part of the country (No. VA) have police officers on the grounds during part or all of the day and have security trained vice principals. But their approach is law enforcement/school discipline in orientation. Those approaches start with zero to minimum violence and escalate incrementally. For small threats, that works, usually (Columbine being a notable exception).
In this case, the only effective defense would have been immediate maximum force by an alerted force at the school that was at least as large as the terrorist group. Alternatively, you harden the school sufficiently so that the bad guys can't break-in before the calvary arrives.
So, if you play defense you either end up with 30-40 heavily armed defenders hanging around the school all day or build and operate schools that are like forts/bank vaults. Heck of a learning environment.
Meanwhile, the terrorist target surveillence effort reveals that the school is too hard a target(too well defended) and they head over to the nearby mall, senior citizen's home, recreation center.
However, if you choose to lead with a strong offense (which doesnot mean no defense), you hunt the dirty @#$%&%$#@'s down in THEIR countries, and kill them (and their families and friends)in THEIR homes, THEIR schools, THEIR places of worship, etc.
Russia is presently the greatest threat to the Islamist's oil weapon and Russia must use it;s oil weapon to solve it's own economic problems. Now if George W. would have the Churchillian leadership to break through the oil culture that surrounds him and offer solutions instead of subsidies we could win this thing.
Big, centralized schools. Great idea for another time. Bad idea when enemies are looking for soft targets. It's a luxury to have such institutions.
Unarmed school employees waiting for the cavalry? You're right. We disagree.
So be it.
If adult citizens of this nation have a Constitutionally-protected and God-given right to defend themselves, why does that right end at the schoolhouse door and how does that make the schools safer? If the presence of firearms are the danger, the left wins the argument firearms are inherently dangerous in the hands of everyday people and should be taken from them.
Whatever old rules of civilized life have been followed, they are now moot. Innocent people of all ages are now fair game for murder by barbarians who have no rationale but wanton slaughter of innocents. We have to rethink and modify our old rules.
If my children were now attending public schools without protection, I would withdraw them from school.
Public officials are not serious enough to stop this wanton violence. Look at the travesty preventing the arming of airline pilots. Look at the politically correct searches of little old ladies in America's airports while young Middle Eastern males are ignored because it's "profiling."
I absolutely do not trust the "authorities" to protect me or my family. They have publically admitted they cannot.
You know, that makes so much sense that you know in your heart of hearts that it cannot be implemented. There is not a sufficient amount of smelling salts in this country to revive the liberals who would faint dead away if they heard such a proposal.
What you are referring to as "infidels" are the "Unbelievers".
This is a common error to make since Moslems seem to deal with the people of the Book and the infidels in the same manner.
Actually, the rule for them is to kill any infidel or unbeliever who "resists" and does not join their side. It's a convert or die deal. With Christians and Jews, they only kill those who are uppity or don't pay an extra tax levied on them.
That's why it's a very bad idea to live in a Moslem majority country where they get to write and enforce the laws! You simply cannot trust them.
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.