Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flashback: Clinton Requests $60 Million to Put Cops in Schools
Breitbart ^ | 12/22/2012 | Chrisnj

Posted on 12/22/2012 5:13:24 AM PST by chrisnj

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last
NRA is proposing same, yet the propaganda machine is blasting NRA!

So they think our children are not as precious as the congresscritters, or the banks, and obama/soetoro/barry/whateverhisnameis is worth all the protection that guns can provide but, OUR KIDS have to be left defenseless

1 posted on 12/22/2012 5:13:31 AM PST by chrisnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chrisnj
It's too bad Wayne didn't use this as a cornerstone of his comments yesterday.
How could the libs argue with their second-most loved leader?

(answer - any way they can...)

2 posted on 12/22/2012 5:24:59 AM PST by grobdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

What happened to the request? Did the GOP oppose it then?


3 posted on 12/22/2012 5:26:55 AM PST by corlorde (forWARD of the state)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Bookmark


4 posted on 12/22/2012 5:30:36 AM PST by The SISU kid (I think they taste like Barbie dolls smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Bookmark


5 posted on 12/22/2012 5:30:55 AM PST by The SISU kid (I think they taste like Barbie dolls smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Bookmark


6 posted on 12/22/2012 5:30:55 AM PST by The SISU kid (I think they taste like Barbie dolls smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Bookmark


7 posted on 12/22/2012 5:31:01 AM PST by The SISU kid (I think they taste like Barbie dolls smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Bookmark


8 posted on 12/22/2012 5:31:47 AM PST by The SISU kid (I think they taste like Barbie dolls smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
How could the libs argue with their second-most loved leader?

Did Clinton specifically propose armed cops in schools?

9 posted on 12/22/2012 5:33:20 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Sorry, but federal funding for this stuff—even on the small scale Clinton proposed—was wrong then and—especially on the huge scale the NRA is proposing—now.

The Clinton program at least was aimed at inner-city schools where the students were so violent that they needed, and routinely have, armed guards.


10 posted on 12/22/2012 5:40:14 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: corlorde
From the article at the link: "Already, it has placed 2,200 officers in more than 1,000 communities across our nation, where they are heightening school safety as well as coaching sports and acting as mentors and mediators for kids in need," Clinton said.

So apparently the program was well underway when he asked for more money.

11 posted on 12/22/2012 5:42:00 AM PST by FairWitness (Everything is easy, once you've done it once)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

Well, we’re broke, remember, and more deficit spending is a bad idea, so how much should taxes go up to pay for the guards and increased mental health treatment?


12 posted on 12/22/2012 5:51:28 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: corlorde

Well, they did point out that Clinton ignored the cultural problems of violent video games and violent movies, because he took campaign cash from Hollywood.

Note that the request Brietbart made wasn’t an initial request, it was additional spending — they had already spent money putting cops in schools before this request.

I don’t think cops in schools IS the long-term solution. The NRA seemed to suggest it as a short-term fix while the schools put in place programs to arm other people.

I think cops in schools are a bad idea. Most of the time they would have nothing to do — unless we fire someone in each school and give their job to the police officer, who no doubt could be trained to teach, or be an administrative assistant, or a janitor.

And I disagree that we need an interim solution, because frankly, kids rarely get killed in school. 500 kids a year are killed accidentally by guns, for example.

58 children age 5-9 were murdered by guns in 2010 that is about half the murders — of the other 53 murders, 13 were unspecified.

But 385 children ages 1-4 were murdered in 2010. And of those, 163 were “unclassified”, and only 43 were by gun.

There just aren’t enough kids killed in schools to make it cost-effective. We’d be protecting some of the safest places in the country (albeit the places most likely to have mass murder).

Now, if you can figure out where the mass murders will take place, you could target police and increase the cost-effectiveness. Good luck with that in this environment. These murders mostly take place in rich white schools, because that what generates the most media attention, the people in those areas are the ones with the most disposable income and therefore spend the most time playing violent video games and watching violent movies.

See, if you look at who commits these murders, and where they happen, it will point the finger at the “wrong” people.

Anyway, by focusing police on schools, we remove focus from all the other places where a mass murderer might attack.


13 posted on 12/22/2012 5:54:55 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Want to know what the best law for this is? DADT. Take down the gun free zone posters and no one knows who is carrying and who isn’t.


14 posted on 12/22/2012 6:06:43 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (You can't bring something to its knees that refuses to stand on its own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj

LIBERAL HYPOCRISY ON DISPLAY!


15 posted on 12/22/2012 6:10:08 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chrisnj
Dang it! This is not difficult! Not police at a school!

Just an armed guard at the door to examine a child or teacher's backpack or briefcase on entry, then buzz them in. Same for visitors or strangers, only more intensive, and with permission from the office.

I've worked in several GE and DuPont research facilities, and visited in several more customers' plants. Works well everywhere, daily, for every entry or exit.

These companies don't require that the population or their own employees turn in their firearms. Just don't bring them to work. Ammo or drugs -- get a trained dog to sit with the guards.

What is the problem with these emptyheaded media, government, and agitator hacks? Even the NRA lackeys!

Forget making laws! Just suggest this to school boards, and let the local administration fund and implement it. Get the Feds and State out of it!

16 posted on 12/22/2012 6:56:35 AM PST by imardmd1 (An armed society is a polite society -- but dangerous for the fool --)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; chrisnj
Safety for one's family has always been valued, but in past times it was only for the wealthy (with their hired bodyguards). Ordinary people had to be careful and arm themselves against danger (whether from criminals, wild animals, Indians or invaders).

The last few generations of Americans have been taught to take security for granted. How many commercials have you seen featuring young women striding off into the wilderness alone? Some young women who foolishly attempted to demonstrate such "independence" ended up raped and murdered.

It used to be the case that a school principal was a man, and being physically imposing was an attribute (in junior high it was a former Olympic rowing champion). Thanks to women's lib, some schools packed with young children have no males to guard them. The reason young children need a capable guardian has been forgotten.

Providing the necessary guardians is easily affordable. A huge portion of the existing "education" budget could be saved by firing incompetent teachers, providing the remainder with modern tools (distance learning, video lectures by excellent teachers) and providing guards with military or police training to maintain order (removing that task from the teachers).

The changes needed will not happen in the government school system. The unions will not allow it, and the sheeple would rather blame guns than assume responsibility for the welfare of their children. The politicians will keep the sheeple mills running, and politicize every tragedy. The Sandy Hook massacre and its aftermath should be the ultimate reason for not surrendering your children to government schools.
17 posted on 12/22/2012 7:12:49 AM PST by Ragnar54 (Obama replaced Osama as America's worst enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: imardmd1; All

It is a matter of setting priority.
Are the children worth the costs of protection?
Until the lunatics/criminals are locked up to prevent further massacre, we need to protect the kids.
At any level, by any reasonable means - locally, at state level or at the fed level.
Locally implemented procedures are good, but the teacher’s unions are idiot gun control freaks - not much chance for armed protection.
States are broke, but if parents want protection for their kids, they will have to help with the expenses for guards/police;
Obozo’s idiotic (and hypocritical) idea on protection is to have ‘gun free zone’ for schools, and, to take away all guns from law-abiding citizens to render them defenseless. So forget about obozo!

Anyway, even their own Dem president Clinton believes in armed protection for our kids! What is the hold-up?


18 posted on 12/22/2012 7:32:44 AM PST by chrisnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
I think cops in schools are a bad idea.

That is a bad idea, Just hire a guard, perhaps not even armed.

Most of the time they would have nothing to do — unless we fire someone in each school and give their job to the police officer, who no doubt could be trained to teach, or be an administrative assistant, or a janitor.

No! you give the guard nothing else to do except to ... guard!

But the whole school is impossible for one, or even many, to patrol if the entrance is open to anyone, anytoime, and unmonitored constantly. The whole principle of security is to control who is in the building, when they are to be there, how many are to be there, what they are there for, and what they bring in or take out.

The idea is to funnel everyone through one entry point.
Every child or teacher with a card.
Every one passes the guard.
Every container may be opened for content.
Containers randomly searched.
Every one passes through a metal detector.
Other building doors allow exiting only into a securely fenced assembly yard.
Vehicles parked outside the fence.
Deliveries passed in only by the guard, positively authorized by the office.
All visitors vetted and permitted by the office.

Etc., etc. write your own scenario, but this requires no roaming guards, only teacher or student monitors.

This does not require an armed-to-the-teeth officer with arresting powers! If the guard does not buzz you in, you go somewhere else. You don't hang around, or enter the building at will.

Is this rocket science, or what?

Is some kind of diagram needed?

19 posted on 12/22/2012 7:34:36 AM PST by imardmd1 (An armed society is a polite society -- but dangerous for the fool --)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: All

The way I look at it -
we have to counter their argument. We can’t just let them scream gun ban to render all of us defenseless!
They want to ban guns from good men,
we want to protect the kids with good men with guns!

With such high unemployment, I think we can easily recruit retired policemen or security guards to be the trained first responders at schools.

It is useless to present them with statistics and data to suggest where the protection is mostly need.

1 innocent child murdered is 1 too many. Parents and people in their community will have to take up the issue and act.
Perhaps different communities will tackle it differently - e.g. some ban guns entirely and some provide armed protection at schools.
We will see whose method works best!
Keep obozo out of this!


20 posted on 12/22/2012 7:49:17 AM PST by chrisnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson