NRA reccomends armed officers in all schools

[RANOVRU]

Originally Posted by GySgt Hartman

Here's a better idea, build/move the police stations within a 1/4 mile of schools.

Problem solved.

In my county alone we've got probably a dozen schools comprised of elementary, middle and HS's. The local PD is about 4-5miles to the CLOSEST one. Most are 15-20+miles. In the city there are two PD stations both of which are 2+miles to the nearest school, and they have many more schools.


Your option isnt really a viable one. There are plenty of deputies at any given time in any of the central counties that could easily be at schools rather than sitting/driving around. And they are, at least around here.

[NoobCrawler]

Originally Posted by GySgt Hartman

Here's a better idea, build/move the police stations within a 1/4 mile of schools.

Problem solved.

This is not a bad idea at all. Here in town there's a 7-11 in a bad neighborhood. There was ALWAYS something happening(granted, not mass shootings). As of a few years ago, they have a police sub-station right next door. Problem solved. I think a highly visible police presence would deter a shooter 9 out of 10 times.

[losikid]

Our school district had afew officers that rotated between schools throughout the day...dealt with the stuff that needed attention beyond the school (drugs or something)...but i'm pretty sure they were always armed...i know he had a taser gun, i can't remember if he had a pistol on him though, not something i ever really pay'd attention too. They were actual police officers, i don't think the school district paid them anything. And i'm not sure about other highschools in the district, but the town cop would be on campus afew times a day. Usually during the morning, lunch, and at the end of the day.

I think, all school principles need to be certified and carry a weapon. And have multiple teachers throughout the building have a taser gun...

[joesbruiser]

A Quick Message from Larry Vickers...

Friends,

I write to you today and ask that you come together and help the firearms community reach out to our political leaders, strengthen the representatives of our industry, and reach out to those whom you know that aren't firmly committed to the second amendment in an effort to change their thinking. Blaming inanimate objects and punishing lawful gun owners will not protect our society from future tragedies.

Because of the senseless act of a madman, all signs point to responsible gun owners being punished by our government once again. This is not the first time we've been punished for the crimes of others and sadly, this will not be the last. It is our duty as citizens of the United States, to contact our representatives in government and urge them to use common sense, protect the freedoms afforded to us in the Constitution, and to make logical changes to our laws to reduce the likelihood of senseless acts like the one in Connecticut from happening again.

Evil will always be with us. Terrorists will always prey on the defenseless. We must make up our minds to take the fight to them before they can bring it to us. Simply enacting a gun ban and declaring areas as safe places, without actually making them safe, is irresponsible and insane. That is not a solution to the real problem... it only advances the political agenda of the left and flies in the face of the victims of terrorist acts like Newtown.

By simply punishing law abiding citizens with further gun legislation, our school systems and public gatherings would be no safer tomorrow than they were a week ago. If all sales of so-called assault weapons ceased today, our gun-free zones would still be a prime target of madmen using whatever weapons they could get their hands on. We need to take a long, hard look at the mental health care system in this country. We need to work in our communities to make sure that our schools have formidable protections from criminal activity. We need to train teachers, parents, counselors, first responders and the general public alike in how to look for trouble, react to violence and how to prevent and contain it using whatever means we have available.

Join me in supporting the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America. You may not agree with all of their tactics, policies or leadership, but know this... they are taking the fight for freedom to Washington on behalf of us... the good guys... the responsible, law abiding citizens who are tired of being punished for crimes we did not commit. Elections have consequences and those consequences are being dealt out by individuals that hate everything we stand for. They hate our industry. They hate our guns. They hate our patriotism and they hate our Constitution that restrains them.

Take the fight for our rights to Washington through the NRA and GOA. Join today. If you're already a member, upgrade your membership today or simply make a donation.

I hope you all have a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year. God bless you. And God bless the victims, friends and families of those in Newtown, Connecticut.

-LAV

[NoobCrawler]

I really hope the left thinks about this. This really is a great idea. As long as the faculty is comfortable with it, why not. Of course no teacher wants to be packing while at school, but it seems to be a step in the right direction. Would it make this kind of nonsense stop? Doubtful. It could however make the death tally a lot less, potentially. I don't have a kid in school, so my opinion is an outsiders view, but it sounds like the majority of parents are with the NRA.

[riflerockmafia]

My school has had an armed office there for at least 10 years. It just makes us students feel a little more safe.

[cbr6fs]

For me it's all about percentages.

There is going to be a certain percentage of society that go bat shit.
The more armed people you put close to kids the higher the risk one of them is going to be the problem.

Plus it's not like they're going to stop a well organised or planned out attacker.
It only needs then to be off guard and an attacker to walk up behind them.

Think about how many banks have armed guards or security staff, made absolutely no difference to thieves, so how is this likely to be a deterrent to a psychopathic murder that's determined to end their own life?

So what comes next, 2 armed guards at schools in case one gets taken by surprise?
What if the killer waits till one has gone for a break?
3 armed guards at each school?

What happens at bigger schools, at my old school it would take at least 5 mins to get from one side of the school to the other.
Should there be 2 armed guards at each section of school?


It's complete insanity to me.
Crazies are always going to exist, if they can easily get hold of weapons of mass murder then this sort of thing is going to take place again and again and again.
Your grandkids and grandkids kids face a real threat simply because a few selfish people are not willing to make an extremely small sacrifice on what weapons are allowed to be sold to civilians, under what circumstances and the inconsequentially small inconvenience of keeping the weapons locked up when not in use.

These Physco's feel like they're going out in a blaze of glory, if they are unable to gain access to weapons of mass murder then they simply won't bother.

The more armed people there is out there the higher the chance of one of them going crazy IMO.

[joesbruiser]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

For me it's all about percentages.

There is going to be a certain percentage of society that go bat shit.
The more armed people you put close to kids the higher the risk one of them is going to be the problem.

Plus it's not like they're going to stop a well organised or planned out attacker.
It only needs then to be off guard and an attacker to walk up behind them.

Think about how many banks have armed guards or security staff, made absolutely no difference to thieves, so how is this likely to be a deterrent to a psychopathic murder that's determined to end their own life?

So what comes next, 2 armed guards at schools in case one gets taken by surprise?
What if the killer waits till one has gone for a break?
3 armed guards at each school?

What happens at bigger schools, at my old school it would take at least 5 mins to get from one side of the school to the other.
Should there be 2 armed guards at each section of school?


It's complete insanity to me.
Crazies are always going to exist, if they can easily get hold of weapons of mass murder then this sort of thing is going to take place again and again and again.
Your grandkids and grandkids kids face a real threat simply because a few selfish people are not willing to make an extremely small sacrifice on what weapons are allowed to be sold to civilians, under what circumstances and the inconsequentially small inconvenience of keeping the weapons locked up when not in use.

These Physco's feel like they're going out in a blaze of glory, if they are unable to gain access to weapons of mass murder then they simply won't bother.

The more armed people there is out there the higher the chance of one of them going crazy IMO.

Could you please explain to us what you consider a weapon of mass murder?

[Rockpiledriver]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

For me it's all about percentages.

There is going to be a certain percentage of society that go bat shit.
The more armed people you put close to kids the higher the risk one of them is going to be the problem.

Plus it's not like they're going to stop a well organised or planned out attacker.
It only needs then to be off guard and an attacker to walk up behind them.

Think about how many banks have armed guards or security staff, made absolutely no difference to thieves, so how is this likely to be a deterrent to a psychopathic murder that's determined to end their own life?

So what comes next, 2 armed guards at schools in case one gets taken by surprise?
What if the killer waits till one has gone for a break?
3 armed guards at each school?

What happens at bigger schools, at my old school it would take at least 5 mins to get from one side of the school to the other.
Should there be 2 armed guards at each section of school?


It's complete insanity to me.
Crazies are always going to exist, if they can easily get hold of weapons of mass murder then this sort of thing is going to take place again and again and again.
Your grandkids and grandkids kids face a real threat simply because a few selfish people are not willing to make an extremely small sacrifice on what weapons are allowed to be sold to civilians, under what circumstances and the inconsequentially small inconvenience of keeping the weapons locked up when not in use.

These Physco's feel like they're going out in a blaze of glory, if they are unable to gain access to weapons of mass murder then they simply won't bother.

The more armed people there is out there the higher the chance of one of them going crazy IMO.

What if there had been an armed guard at Newtown? Heard the first shot and responded immediately. How many lives would have been saved?

[cbr6fs]

Originally Posted by joesbruiser

Could you please explain to us what you consider a weapon of mass murder?

Any gun that was designed purely with the intention of killing people efficiently.
So most semi automatics in my book.

Originally Posted by Rockpiledriver

What if there had been an armed guard at Newtown? Heard the first shot and responded immediately. How many lives would have been saved?

Not a valid point for the simple fact that there wasn't and we have absolutely no idea if it would have made a difference or not.

We do have a precedent though, in banks and armed security guards.
In these instances it's been absolutely no deterrent for career criminals, which oddly enough tend to rate as more thoughtful than psyco's.

[joesbruiser]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

Any gun that was designed purely with the intention of killing people efficiently.
So most semi automatics in my book.



.

You say "most semi automatics" but what is the difference between the ones that you think are OK and the ones that you do not?
And how does making a ban on these certain firearms help stop events like have happened in the last couple of months.Crazy people and criminals are not going to say hey they have banned this gun I should turn it in.
The only thing I see that could have helped in these situations would have been someone trained to neutralize the threat with the correct equipment to do so.

[cbr6fs]

Originally Posted by joesbruiser

You say "most semi automatics" but what is the difference between the ones that you think are OK and the ones that you do not?
And how does making a ban on these certain firearms help stop events like have happened in the last couple of months.Crazy people and criminals are not going to say hey they have banned this gun I should turn it in.
The only thing I see that could have helped in these situations would have been someone trained to neutralize the threat with the correct equipment to do so.

If there are less legal guns in circulation then it's harder for criminals to get their hands on them, it's basic percentages again.

Seems to me that if the mother did not have any guns then this would never have happened.
Even something as simple as the guns being locked in a gun safe with only the mother having the combination would have prevented this tragedy.


As i say, the way i see it is, the more people that have guns the more likely this type of thing is going to happen again.

But then the NRA are only interested in selling more gun to make more money, so they're hardly a unbiased organisation are they.

Effectively what your doing is akin to asking Pablo Escobar (when he was alive) how he thinks it's best to combat the drugs problem.

[JokersWild]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

For me it's all about percentages.

There is going to be a certain percentage of society that go bat shit.
The more armed people you put close to kids the higher the risk one of them is going to be the problem.
You need to post your statistics if this is what you believe (certified armed people? I believe no issues)
Plus it's not like they're going to stop a well organised or planned out attacker.
It only needs then to be off guard and an attacker to walk up behind them.
And who is saying that these are really all well organized or planned out? Seems if it was so planned out they would have escaped not killed themselves
Think about how many banks have armed guards or security staff, made absolutely no difference to thieves, so how is this likely to be a deterrent to a psychopathic murder that's determined to end their own life?
Banks idea of "armed guards" are quite a joke. Over weight, under paid slobs. Not sure why anyone is protecting the banks at all.
So what comes next, 2 armed guards at schools in case one gets taken by surprise?
What if the killer waits till one has gone for a break?
3 armed guards at each school?
You watch too many movies and keep thinking there is this underground lab that these cats have plotted out this to. Like they have a full size diorama built to scale. Nope....
What happens at bigger schools, at my old school it would take at least 5 mins to get from one side of the school to the other.
Should there be 2 armed guards at each section of school?
Is that 5 mins running? Dorking around? Or playing grab ass with your GF?? Average person runs @ 10 mph. Walks about 3 mph. Still point being is this said person is patrolling an area regardless of size there are multiple people who can dispatch this person so said area of attack

It's complete insanity to me.
Crazies are always going to exist, if they can easily get hold of weapons of mass murder then this sort of thing is going to take place again and again and again.
Your grandkids and grandkids kids face a real threat simply because a few selfish people are not willing to make an extremely small sacrifice on what weapons are allowed to be sold to civilians, under what circumstances and the inconsequentially small inconvenience of keeping the weapons locked up when not in use.

Wow..... poorly put. Who is selfish and how? And how is it you are such a big expert on how your "extremely small sacrifice" is such a big help?? Lets lay it to you like this, Brady was all over the "high cap" ban that did get put into effect and was later raised. But how did this relate to what happened to him? Well nothing. James Brady was shot with a .22 revolver by John Hinckley Jr. Was not a high cap firearm nor was it high caliber. Also at not times has it been proven that the firearms were or were not locked up in the Lanza home. You nor anyone else were actually there to know exactly how this transpired in the home. You are going to falsify this up as much as Frank Rosario, Pedro Oliveria and Dan MacLeod in the NY post

These Physco's feel like they're going out in a blaze of glory, if they are unable to gain access to weapons of mass murder then they simply won't bother.

BS it just happened in china..... Min Yongjun killed and elderly woman then went to local school and stabbed children. None of your "weapons of mass murder" were present. Are these "weapons of mass murder" any relation to the infamous "weapons of mass destruction" that we heard so much about but never found?

The more armed people there is out there the higher the chance of one of them going crazy IMO.

Your opinion is far from reality.... these attacks are quite easy to see from a far. They are in zones that have fences around them that state "GUN FREE ZONE" This tells the attacker "hey..... no one in here has a gun". The idea never was to go out arming everybody out there but to put in place a person to secure such zone.... with a weapon and proper training. You dont see attackers trying to hold up gun shops..... or police stations. No you see them entering areas where it states there are no firearms. I think you watch too much fox news and need to get off of O'Rilleys nuts.... you and him have so much in common.

im sorry im just a realist

[cbr6fs]

Originally Posted by JokersWild

im sorry im just a realist

The reality is that having armed guards at schools will do NOTHING to prevent crazies like this doing the same thing again and again.

A armed guard is not a prevention it can only be used AFTER someone has been shot.

Tell me something is armed guards are in any way effective then why does congress have metal detectors and rules against civilian CCW in the building?
They have more armed guards than most of the Greek army.

Simple, the fact is armed guards can only be bought into operation AFTER something has occurred.

If it were my kids i'd be more interested in preventing rather than shutting the gate after the horse has bolted.

[joesbruiser]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

If there are less legal guns in circulation then it's harder for criminals to get their hands on them, it's basic percentages again.

Seems to me that if the mother did not have any guns then this would never have happened.
Even something as simple as the guns being locked in a gun safe with only the mother having the combination would have prevented this tragedy.


As i say, the way i see it is, the more people that have guns the more likely this type of thing is going to happen again.

But then the NRA are only interested in selling more gun to make more money, so they're hardly a unbiased organisation are they.

Effectively what your doing is akin to asking Pablo Escobar (when he was alive) how he thinks it's best to combat the drugs problem.

Your all about percentages.
Look at the percentages of firearms that are in the hands of legal gun owners and especially the percentage of semi auto high capacity rifles and stack that up against the percentage of murders that involved these weapons and you better ban Claw hammers with the semi rifles. I think the Percentage is about the same.

But back on the topic of trained people with guns guarding our schools.
I have 3 school aged children of my own and would much rather know that someone is there to at least stop a bad situation from getting worse than relying on the wishful thinking that stopping new gun purchases will protect them.

[JokersWild]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

If there are less legal guns in circulation then it's harder for criminals to get their hands on them, it's basic percentages again.

They are not coins.....

Seems to me that if the mother did not have any guns then this would never have happened. And if she would never have had sex this wouldnt have happened either. Just a stupid quote. Still cant just say hmmmm people do screwed up things, what if it was a car and he hit all the kids? Can we blame chevrolet and then the gov. cause they bailed them out??
Even something as simple as the guns being locked in a gun safe with only the mother having the combination would have prevented this tragedy.

Still again you are leading to the fact that you have no factual over. Its silly to think guns were in schools long ago and there were no issues. Im blaming the soft fascist society and how people are babied on their emotions.


As i say, the way i see it is, the more people that have guns the more likely this type of thing is going to happen again.

But then the NRA are only interested in selling more gun to make more money, so they're hardly a unbiased organisation are they.

No they have actually came up with a program that was being pushed before this happened and was slapped down. Has nothing to do with the sales of guns but the rights of gun owners. Maybe we should go back and re write a couple more things in there. Fat people.... oh yea i said it. They could roll over and kill a child so we need to get rid of them too. Basically im stating this cause in reality I dont care for them. Never liked em and never had a use for them. I think the government should just get rid of them all together. Quit importing them from wherever they come from and stop the sales of them..... pick up all in "circulation" and have them destroyed.

Effectively what your doing is akin to asking Pablo Escobar (when he was alive) how he thinks it's best to combat the drugs problem.


Again NRA does not sell guns nor does it import them.

.................................................

[CREEPERBOB]

The year was 1973, the state California, armed police were on campus where I went to school. We had next to zero violence and nobody cried about it. No differant than the skating rink or concert hall.

[JokersWild]

Originally Posted by cbr6fs

The reality is that having armed guards at schools will do NOTHING to prevent crazies like this doing the same thing again and again.

And you base this off of what??

A armed guard is not a prevention it can only be used AFTER someone has been shot.

So and armed guard is not a prevention? Then what is it? And it can only be used after someone is shot? Odd if it would have been set in place before hand it could have saved lives. I think you are off your meds and may be reason you prolly own no guns..... cause guns kill people... not people

Tell me something is armed guards are in any way effective then why does congress have metal detectors and rules against civilian CCW in the building?

This really makes no sense to me. Their rules against civilian CCW is to go along with the federal laws that state civilians cannot bring firearms into federal buildings.... they do have lock boxes for you to put your firearm while you are inside. You can get your firearm back from your locked box when you leave. Many senators and congressmen carry conceal to and from the congressional building.

They have more armed guards than most of the Greek army.

The greek army eh? Odd

Simple, the fact is armed guards can only be bought into operation AFTER something has occurred.

If it were my kids i'd be more interested in preventing rather than shutting the gate after the horse has bolted.

..........................................

[cbr6fs]

Originally Posted by joesbruiser

Your all about percentages.
Look at the percentages of firearms that are in the hands of legal gun owners and especially the percentage of semi auto high capacity rifles and stack that up against the percentage of murders that involved these weapons and you better ban Claw hammers with the semi rifles. I think the Percentage is about the same.

But back on the topic of trained people with guns guarding our schools.
I have 3 school aged children of my own and would much rather know that someone is there to at least stop a bad situation from getting worse than relying on the wishful thinking that stopping new gun purchases will protect them.

Look at the amount of murders you have involving firearms compared to say the UK that has strict gun control.

And that's not counting suicides.

Originally Posted by JokersWild

.................................................

Coins were not used in the mass murders of 24 people though were they.

His father and mother not having sex does not detract from the fact that if she was a responsible fire arm owner that kept her guns locked up he would NOT have had access to them.

More guns does not solve a problem that's is already magnified by guns.
Guns are an offensive weapon, they do not atop bullets, block bullets nor prevent bullets from doing as much damage.

An armed guard is only able to respond AFTER something has happened and as this crazy went there with the intention of killing himself, having a armed guard would not have dissuaded him.

The NRA has a revenue of over $200 million a year, if guns are heavily restricted this revenue will drop dramatically.
So they have a vested interest in arming more people.

LaPierre earns just under $1 million a year from his job with the NRA so he has a vested interest in arming more people.


So again, having a organisation that makes money from the firearms industry offer an opinion on a solution exagerated by firearms is absolutely ridiculous.

Originally Posted by JokersWild

..........................................

Based on the fact that the crazy went into the school with no intentions of walking out alive.

If your already committed to die then a armed guard is absolutely bno deterrent.

Could you please explain how a armed guard would have prevented all loss of life that day?

Another thing worth considering is that, unless the armed guard is trained to SWAT and hostage rescue level there is a good chance they'll do more harm than good.
If a inexperienced shooter is put into a highly stressful situation like we had, then it's extremely easy for all but the highest trained shooter to panic.

Not checking backstops, being confronted with the shooter holding a 6 year old hostage, highly stressed guard getting confused and shooting at the wrong person.
A million and one things can and do go wrong when inexperienced and poorly trained people are given guns in an extremely stressful environment.


I wish more than anything i'm wrong, but i will guarantee that if armed guards are put into all US schools there will be a accidental fatality within 24 months.


The problem is crazies having weapons with which they can murder many people.
Stop crazies getting easy access to these weapons and your solving the problem at source.

[War Pig]

Wow, knowing that there are many people like cbr6fs around really scares me. What a twisted sense of reality.....