Posted on 12/21/2012 9:27:58 AM PST by Red Steel
Stupid.
Use the power of free enterprise. Any teacher with a CCW gets an extra $50 per week if they bring their weapon to school.
IN addition, these individuals must attend regular classes (i.e. range time!) on “teachers days” with the cops on marksmanship, armed response, etc. School district will pay the expense, trainers must document performance. Poor performance is grounds for rescinding pay.
IF an incident occurs, and they are called on to defend the student body, they get paid $1000; if the bring down any of the shooters, they get $10,000 per head.
Listen, I can’t recall a single teacher that I had at anytime that was intimidating, could be intimidating, had the presence of someone who could and would kill you on the spot or anything of the sort.
If you want school kids to not be murdered, then defend them like you want them not to be murdered. Don’t half ass it and expect that will be enough, because it won’t be enough.
If you would prefer to keep your money, then keep your money and know that kids will be murdered in schools and the government will take our guns as a result.
Choose wisely.
Good grief. First of all, they are not "our kids," Mr. LaPierre; they are MY kids, your kids, and kids belonging to other parents. Cut the collectivist language and use your brain. Are you suggesting that we turn schools into armed camps that can refuse releasing their defenseless hostages back to their parents? Hell, we've got one school here in California that is installing high security fences with only ONE exit.
Until we can rid ourselves of the 19th Century factory model of education entirely, why isn't Mr. LaPierre advocating getting rid of "gun free zones" in schools and instituting free teacher training in the proper use of firearms and maybe even a foundation to supply them. Isn't that what the NRA is supposedly set up to do?
The left loves to shout that prohibition didn’t work so legalize “xyz” (insert special interest).
Obviously, Gun Prohibition in public is not working and it is TIME TO END GUN PROHIBITION.
The problem is, most of them are liberal and will want nothing to do with that idea.
Sounds like a federal program. Which means it'll go wrong; metastasize; waste money; get some people ruined, jailed, killed; erode liberty...
If they cannot keep drugs out of the country, they will never keep guns out of the country. Progresso's need to start dealing with the truth for a change. Put down the crack pipe and forget the fantasy utopian world.
I like your idea.
Why expand Government?
This is a good start by the NRA.
But we need to make the case that an armed police officer is no different than any other citizen who has had approved training.
We should give schools the option of either hiring an armed security officer who is trained and certified AND/OR allowing any teachers who want to carry to undergo training and certification in order to carry.
Personally, I think it would be a huge safety advantage if an unknown number of teachers carried. It would be very difficult for an attacker to know who is armed and would make the potential target far less attractive to the evil and the criminal.
We know how unions work, so how many union workers will be
needed to fill each position?
This sounds like a screwing in a light bulb joke.
And we allow those demented child- and granny-gropers in the TSA to carry firearms, but not a principal, not a teacher, either of whom can be trained and certified and can become as safe and reliable in the use of a firearm as any police officer.
Agreed, but the gun-grabbers’ push for national action should be resisted with a sensible program that is also national.
Wayne just got me to renew my and my wife’s membership for another 3 years.
LLS
We don’t have a gun problem. We have a crazy person problem. If they can’t use guns, they will find another way to mass murder.
You bring up a very good point, and one that was going through my mind all throughout those part of LaPierre’s speech that I heard. What happens with these public statements is that the NRA (or whomever) is put on the defensive once again and is forced to repeat the same basic
commonsensical talking points its been defensively defending itself with for decades. Good as his speech was, one on level
what he’s doing is providing this Administration with a blueprint they will take credit for, as they assure us it’s all being implemented over time.Whatever long-range gun-grabbing designs this Administration HAD for legal gun-owners, it STILL HAS, and those will not be altered or streamlined one degree. The tension between Federal control and State control, as you point out is the “big story” going forward. As we all know,
the current Feds want EVERYTHING to be federalized, and they
won’t surrender that power anytime soon. La Pierre rightly pointed out that this Administration had ALREADY de-funded a few bills that would’ve made school security a lot tougher than it is now. I cannot believe that the Administration appreciated this one bit, and the first idiot surrogate statement demagoguing La Pierre and his speech has already been issued by the idiot surrogate Frank Lautenberg.
Here’s the transcript of the NRA press release.
http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf
Remember when Clinton was lauded for putting 100,000 cops on the streets. 25 years later and putting more cops out there is "reckless", according to the Laut.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., in a statement after the press conference, called LaPierre's plan "reckless."
"It is beyond belief that following the Newtown tragedy, the National Rifle Association's leaders want to fill our communities with guns and arm more Americans," he said.
Yes. Its stupid to even say it - it only plays into the hands of the gun-control politicians and their emotional supporters. Schools do NOT need armed guards. The chance of a Newton-style attack killing an average American child is probably less than their chance of getting struck by lightening twice in the same day.
The only thing worse than the democrats laughing at the plan is the democrats actually implementing it.
I grew up in gun heavy rural Michigan and could even bring guns to school for afternoon hunting into t5he 1980s and there was never a shooting. I’m guessing there was no prohibition against school employees carrying either.
The simple fact is that the answers are in the past, not the future.
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.