Nra calls for armed police officer in every school

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PoorKnight said:
As a cop who teaches police officers to respond to this kind of violence, this is an excellant solution, however, there are not nearly enough police officers to pull this off.

There’s also another problem: the schools. We’ve had SRO (School Resource Officer) possitions eliminated in my jurisdiction because the SCHOOL didn’t want armed officers in their school. The department was not willing to unarm their officer - which is a good thing - and the School eliminated the possition from their funding.

Any School with out an armed guard, these days, should be sued for not preparing for what, statistically, will be many times more likely to hurt or kill your children in school than anything else: violence.

As I’ve said on several other threads now: We spend MILLIONS of dollars on schools for what is considered ‘overlapping, multi-layered, redunant safety systems’ when it comes to school fire. The floor tiles, the carpet, the chairs, the doors, the paint the wall boards, the desks, the ceiling tiles have only one requirement for your school: That they are FIRE resistant / fire proof.

How many kids have been killed or injured in a school fire in the US in the last 50+ years? NONE ZERO ZILCH NADA. Yet we still have sprinkler systems, fire drills, fire safety awareness…

And howmany children killed or injured in school violence each year? At the time 1999 was an All time record with 35 killed and A QUARTER OF A MILLION INJURED IN SCHOOL VIOLENCE. How many killed / injured in School fire that year? Zero

But wasn’t that the year of Columbine? Yes. So the stastic is skewed? Negative Ghost Rider. 2004 was a new record: 48 killed and still HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS INJURED in SCHOOL VIOLENCE. How many killed / injured in school fire that year? Zero

I could go on and on but I’ll leave it to the experts. Here’s two articles that detail our DENIAL and a soultion: ret. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman is the world’s leading expert in the phychology of human to human agression, i.e. Combat, which is EXACTLY what is happening in our schools: war.

policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/2058168-Active-shooters-in-schools-The-enemy-is-denial/

policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/6067353-Newtown-shooting-Why-Minutemen-can-protect-against-active-shooters/

GOD HELP US ALL! :signofcross:
Click to expand...
The last major school fire that I can remember was the Our Lady of the Angles in Chicago in 1958. :gopray2:
 
PaulinVA said:
You misunderstand. I am not saying that these young men are looking for the press coverage, I am saying that press coverage tells these whackos what the proper outlet for their rage, their hurt, whatever, is.

We need mental health care for young men. Apparently, mental illness can show up or bloom in the late teens/early twenties. These young men need help - maybe involuntary commitment.

We also need to reign in this gun culture in the United States. I acknowledge the Second Amendment, but I also acknowledge how many times a year guns do violence to people.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I do agree that the motive for this needs to be dealt with as that is the key. I can’t fathom why people do this anymore than I can the parents who kill their own children to “get back at” their spouse/partner.

People keep saying ‘gun culture’ and I have no idea what that means. All the gun owners/shooters I’ve associated with are very peaceable law-abiding folks. The vast majority take the responsibility that comes with owning a firearm seriously. Any that keep them for self-defense (many just target shoot and keep them unloaded/locked at home) see it as very much a last resort. They also have alarms, dogs, alarm signs, lights, because in their view avoiding any confrontation is the primary goal. None of them want to take a life, and none of them want the hassle that would come with shooting someone.
 
Fused_Participl said:
How is that relevant? New gun laws won’t prevent drunk driving either.

If we round up all the guns, it won’t stop all gun crimes, but it will massively reduce them. America has repeatedly shown that it does not have a culture of responsible gun ownership (we are not Switzerland). We have to get rid of the guns.
Click to expand...
Do you think cars should be banned? As of 2005, 40000 die annually because of car crashes, about 4 times as many as die by homicide by gun. You have to pass a test before you legally by a car,
 
Brilliant speech, Mr. LaPierre!

Thank you for finally calling the media out for giving the mass murderer an obscene amount of attention.

Thank you for making the point that other important institutions - from banks to airports to sports stadiums - are protected with armed security, but our feckless government has left students defenseless.
 
gilliam said:
Probably any clip over 10 rounds would be a large clip in my view. That is the same as the old Federal Assault Weapons Ban.

I understand assault weapon is not a standard term. We could start with the definition in the law that was in effect in the past though. That criteria is listed here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon
Click to expand...
More people were killed in 2010 from ‘hands/fist or feet’ than were killed with assault rifles, say FBI stats

The 1994 ban on assault weapons banned new manufacture of magazines that held 10 or more rounds and as can be seen by the National Institute of Justice study, banning high capacity ammunition does not make a difference in stopping gun crime
gunshot injury incidents involving pistols [many of which use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds] were less likely to produce a death than those involving revolvers [which typically hold five or six rounds]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
the average number of wounds for pistol victims was actually lower than that for revolver victims
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
the average number of gunshot wounds per victim [about two wounds per victim] did not decrease
Click to expand...
urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf
 
Schism_hater said:
Because there is no rational reason for non-military or law enforcement citizens to have the ability to kill large numbers of people. There just isn’t. Obviously.
Click to expand...
How many shots does it take to kill a running coyote if you’re an average shot? How many to kill ten feral hogs that have treed you? How many to kill a black bear that’s trying to get into your house?
 
Ridgerunner said:
Defined by “cosmetic features”. That’s helpful. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
On the 1994 assault weaon ban

pjmedia.com/blog/assault-weapons-ban/?singlepage=true
It resulted in a 10-year timeframe where this …
Click to expand...
http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/0...QNOkEHToYHRed0l6xg5So4TvxLUj1Kr0hE14Lvvww.jpg
Click to expand...
… was an “assault weapon,” but this …
Click to expand...
http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/0...nGfalCzEGY_Vh-JUALSB4H8RghrHnBhUPJaEGPi4U.jpg
Click to expand...
… was not.
Click to expand...
These rifles are identical in every regard except that the rifle on the top has a small bit of metal under the front sight to which a bayonet could attach, and a small vented tube on the end of the barrel that redirects unburned gases.
Click to expand...
Both are AR-15-pattern rifles that came off the same assembly line, fire the exact same ammunition, and use the same magazines.
Click to expand...
The former was criminalized for ultimately absurd reasons, so that lawmakers could claim they were doing something about gun violence. Both were legal to sell, buy, and possess during the life of the ban.
Click to expand...
The story was the same for almost every weapon impacted by the law. The offending cosmetics were removed, and the same weapon was sold under a different model number for the duration of the ban — while the “pre-ban” versions became items of interest and demand merely because of the additional features.
Click to expand...
 
Its really funny that when the shooting starts the first thing everyone does is call the cops, yet when someone suggests maybe we should just keep one nearby its controversial.

As to “who’s gonna pay for it” and “where we gonna get the cops”. Kids are important, they are our national treasure, I would think we could spring up some $$ to protect them. As to we won’t have enough cops… there is not a fixed number of law enforcement officers in this nation.
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
Click to expand...
 
Fused_Participl said:
There was another mass shooting again this morning. Guns are the issue. All guns capable of firing more than one shot without reloading should be outlawed. And single-shot guns should be tightly regulated with any violation resulting in jail.

We need Obama to get to appoint one replacement of one of the conservative justices and then pass some new laws.
Click to expand...
Stupid
 
As I mentioned, I’m undecided on this issue. Those of you in favor of an armed police officer in every school, do you think the same should apply to church? Do any of you bring guns to church for protection? If not, why not?
 
Under the old law, Assault weapon (semi-automatic) refers primarily (but not exclusively) to firearms that possess the cosmetic features of an assault rifle (which are fully-automatic). Actually possessing the operational features, such as ‘full-auto’, is not required for classification as an assault weapon; merely the possession of cosmetic features is enough to warrant such classification as an assault weapon. Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again; they do not fire automatically like a machine gun; rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.[2]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features from the following list of features:

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
  • Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
  • Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
  • Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
  • Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
  • A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
  • Folding or telescoping stock
  • Pistol grip
  • Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
  • Detachable magazine.
The Act also defined and banned ‘large capacity ammunition feeding devices’, which generally applied to magazines or other ammunition feeding devices with capacities of greater than a certain number of rounds, and that up to the time of the Act were considered normal or factory magazines. Media and popular culture referred to these as ‘high capacity magazines or feeding devices’. Depending on the locality and type of firearm, the cutoff between a ‘normal’ capacity and ‘high’ capacity magazine was 3, 7, 10, 12, 15, or 20 rounds. The now defunct federal ban set the limit at 10 rounds.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon

Not perfect but a start. And can be added to.
 
gilliam said:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation’s largest gun-rights lobby is calling for armed police officers to be posted in every American school to stop the next killer “waiting in the wings.”

The National Rifle Association broke its silence Friday on last week’s shooting rampage at a Connecticut elementary school that left 26 children and staff dead.

The group’s top lobbyist, Wayne LaPierre, said at a Washington news conference that, quote, “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

bigstory.ap.org/article/nra-returns-public-debate-meet-media
Click to expand...
Obviously, good guys can be outgunned, so what does he suggest we arm the guards with? Grenade launchers? Tanks? Rockets?
 
I don’t say we should armed all teachers, but I say we armed those who wished to be armed. This way your nor forcing anyone to carry a gun, but neither are you denying someone the right to protect their lives and of the students as well.
 
seekerz said:
Obviously, good guys can be outgunned, so what does he suggest we arm the guards with? Grenade launchers? Tanks? Rockets?
Click to expand...
The bad guy spree killer would have the disadvantage of not knowing who has a gun if the school security plan is done smartly. The element of surprise would enable the good guy with the gun to sneak up from behind to stop the spree killer. This concept works on airplanes to prevent terrorist hijackings, so why wouldn’t it work in schools?
 
gilliam said:
Under the old law, Assault weapon (semi-automatic) refers primarily (but not exclusively) to firearms that possess the cosmetic features of an assault rifle (which are fully-automatic). Actually possessing the operational features, such as ‘full-auto’, is not required for classification as an assault weapon; merely the possession of cosmetic features is enough to warrant such classification as an assault weapon. Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again; they do not fire automatically like a machine gun; rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.[2]

In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features from the following list of features:

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
  • Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
  • Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
  • Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
  • Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
  • A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
  • Folding or telescoping stock
  • Pistol grip
  • Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
  • Detachable magazine.
The Act also defined and banned ‘large capacity ammunition feeding devices’, which generally applied to magazines or other ammunition feeding devices with capacities of greater than a certain number of rounds, and that up to the time of the Act were considered normal or factory magazines. Media and popular culture referred to these as ‘high capacity magazines or feeding devices’. Depending on the locality and type of firearm, the cutoff between a ‘normal’ capacity and ‘high’ capacity magazine was 3, 7, 10, 12, 15, or 20 rounds. The now defunct federal ban set the limit at 10 rounds.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Criteria_of_an_assault_weapon

Not perfect but a start. And can be added to.
Click to expand...
No studies that were done on the assault weapon ban show during the duration of the ban homicide declined
 
seekerz said:
Obviously, good guys can be outgunned, so what does he suggest we arm the guards with? Grenade launchers? Tanks? Rockets?
Click to expand...
Armed guards not only act as a deterrent but can be very effective even if outgunned. What happened at Colombine is an example:
He [the guard] traded fire (that is, he drew fire
Click to expand...
) with Harris for an extended period of time, during which Harris’s gun jammed. The deputy and the backup he immediately called for exchanged fire with the shooters a second time and helped begin the evacuation of students, all before the SWAT teams and the rest of the cavalry arrived, and before Harris and Klebold killed themselves in the library. Harris and Klebold had an assault plan — a sloppy plan, but a plan nonetheless. They had dozens of IEDs, some of which detonated, others of which did not. And there were two of them. In this highly chaotic tactical environment, the deputy acted both bravely and prudently, and who knows how many lives he saved by engaging Harris.

At Newtown, Lanza was delayed from entering the school’s main entrance, and had to shoot his way in through a security window. As far as we know he was wearing no body armor, and his tactics were far less sophisticated than Harris’ and Klebold’s. It’s not implausible to think, afforded the time to respond by Lanza’s delay at the front door, an armed officer could have put him down before he began killing in earnest. Not a guarantee, but far from implausible.

nationalreview.com/corner/336338/columbine-had-armed-guard-daniel-foster
 
HansTrappist said:
Brilliant speech, Mr. LaPierre!

Thank you for finally calling the media out for giving the mass murderer an obscene amount of attention.

Thank you for making the point that other important institutions - from banks to airports to sports stadiums - are protected with armed security, but our feckless government has left students defenseless.
Click to expand...
If I could borrow a quote from the NRA: video games don’t kill people, television doesn’t kill people…even mental illness, broken homes…none of that makes a human heart stop beating. So how can we address all those and totally ignore the implement that actually does stop a human heart?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top