NRA proposes armed school guards

myp · Dec 21, 2012

I actually agree on this one but on the condition that municipalities are also on board and can pay for it. Of course all of them won't be able to though, so this is only one of many ways to tackle the issue at hand.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/21/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-idUSBRE8BI1BV20121221

tecoyah · Dec 21, 2012

myp said:
I actually agree on this one but on the condition that municipalities are also on board and can pay for it. Of course all of them won't be able to though, so this is only one of many ways to tackle the issue at hand.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/21/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-idUSBRE8BI1BV20121221

If this is serious...I do not rust teachers with guns.

Pay the taxes for National Guard..at least they are trained.

myp · Dec 21, 2012

tecoyah said:
If this is serious...I do not rust teachers with guns.

The proposal doesn't say teachers should be armed...

It says there should be trained armed guards in schools- basically cops.

Cerise · Dec 21, 2012

Going slightly off topic for a moment...do you know how many police officers are shot each year?

polgara · Dec 23, 2012

Putting armed guards at the schools is a bad idea, in my opinion. I don't see that it would be much of a deterrent to school shootings as the perpetrators always off themselves in the end, anyway. If we want to reduce school violence, we need to stop being reactive and start being proactive with how we approach societal problems.

clax · Dec 24, 2012

tecoyah said:
If this is serious...I do not rust teachers with guns.

Pay the taxes for National Guard..at least they are trained.

Any body who has guns in a school setting should receive specialized training for that setting. I really wouldn't trust the national guard around my kid.

I wouldn't think that teachers or school administrators would just one day come to school with a gun and be expected to act appropriately in an unusual situation. But a training cert and I had to do a personality test, hooked up to a polygraph in order to become a law enforcement officer, it was called the MM, something. Administer the same test to the teachers that want to bring a fire arm to school.

Lack of training I understand why you wouldn't want them there with a gun, but if the teacher is former military, former police, the training is still there. The type of profession shouldn't dictate their ability to protect children.

You don't need every teacher armed, certainly not all could qualify but if rigorous screening, and training are in place I imagine it would be acceptable.

Personally I find it odd that teachers are not evaluated any better than they are. I am a cop, hi work with crooks I received far more training than teachers get, by which I mean specific job training, also a lot more screening. True I have to know the law to enforce it but s simple personality test or something more seems reasonable to me

clax · Dec 24, 2012

polgara said:
Putting armed guards at the schools is a bad idea, in my opinion. I don't see that it would be much of a deterrent to school shootings as the perpetrators always off themselves in the end, anyway. If we want to reduce school violence, we need to stop being reactive and start being proactive with how we approach societal problems.

You hit it on the head. I really think if the killer had survived the sandy hook indent it would have not stirred up so much political rhetoric because we have someone to blame. I heard two things bing blamed that weren't really the cause. Video games television, guns, mom and dad.

Its our culture. I can think of hundreds of reasons that or culture is so violent, but I started a thread in philosophy regarding that.

clax · Dec 24, 2012

Cerise said:
Going slightly off topic for a moment...do you know how many police officers are shot each year?

nation wide I am not sure, my department 5 in its entire existence. it was created in 1907. Most police killed in the line of duty are normally killed in car accidents, it may seem odd but really driving is the most dangerous thing we do.

I know 11 officers that were injured in the line of duty, 9 were injured in traffic, one fell in pursuit, the other was injured in training exercise.

Not sure about just wounded by gunfire, is probably a lot more, where pistol fire is lethal, meaning it can kill you, it I'd often not fatal meaning it doesn't kill you. Close range shotgun is far more fatal, rifle injuries are more fatal.

Stonewall · Dec 24, 2012

Looking at previous eras in America. The absolute violence, number of weapons in households, the violence witnessed by our youth, a divided nation based on hatred and ignorance of each other. It doesn't mention school shootings nor disconnected individuals like this Newtown shooter incidents. A Columbine incident, or Virginia Tech, did those events happen during even these most violent of times?

Maybe it didn't get reported.

diplox · Dec 25, 2012

Columbine had armed guards, it may have reduced casualties but it didn't stop Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold from murdering twelve students and a teacher. I get that the NRA is in the business of promoting firearm ownership, but it seems a bit perverse to politicize a deadly massacre in which twenty-eight people died by firearm to suggest that the solution to America's gun problem is more guns.

Perhaps the ideal solution isn't to either ramp up the level of guns or to reduce them, but to actually develop and put some sort of systems in place that can identify and help the mentally ill before they do something. I mean Lanza was known to be ill, and there's some suggestion that he might've lashed out because he was angry that his mother was planning to get him treatment, but for every Lanza there's probably dozens of kids who wouldn't react negatively to treatment and would benefit.

Just seems to be America is the only Country on Earth where it's seen as logical to try and cure the symptoms of a disease rather than the disease itself.

Protectionist · Dec 26, 2012

Just the knowledge (IF it's publicized) that teachers are armed with guns, would reduce the instances of shooters going into schools. Many of them go there figuring on zero resistance. Up that resistance to the criminal being outgunned, and they won't be so anxious to go into the school with bad intentions. Of course the teachers would need to be trained and vetted properly.

tecoyah · Dec 26, 2012

Protectionist said:
Just the knowledge (IF it's publicized) that teachers are armed with guns, would reduce the instances of shooters going into schools. Many of them go there figuring on zero resistance. Up that resistance to the criminal being outgunned, and they won't be so anxious to go into the school with bad intentions. Of course the teachers would need to be trained and vetted properly.

Yeah....I'm sure they would be okay that everyone knew they were packing.

Oh...Wait:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...lash-after-publishing-map-gun-permit-holders/

Protectionist · Dec 26, 2012

tecoyah said:
Yeah....I'm sure they would be okay that everyone knew they were packing.

Oh...Wait:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...lash-after-publishing-map-gun-permit-holders/

I don't exactly understand the fox news article. What's the significance ? How does it relate to school officials (including teachers) having guns, and being able to defend themselves and their kids ?

And the more people (including criminals) who know they're "packing", the better. That's the idea (or half of it anyway).

clax · Dec 26, 2012

I really think the parents of the children should volunteer to guard the school, it's there kids there, this is a statistical improbability that a school shooter will shot up a school, why waste money for an improbable occurance. There is no need for this.

myp · Dec 27, 2012

clax said:
I really think the parents of the children should volunteer to guard the school, it's there kids there, this is a statistical improbability that a school shooter will shot up a school, why waste money for an improbable occurance. There is no need for this.

A lot of parents aren't going to have that time. And it is not necessarily a waste of money. It is amazing to me how easily you can say something like that after 27 people- 27- died just a couple weeks ago.

Protectionist · Dec 28, 2012

clax said:
I really think the parents of the children should volunteer to guard the school, it's there kids there, this is a statistical improbability that a school shooter will shot up a school, why waste money for an improbable occurance. There is no need for this.

Tell that to the families of the dead kids.

Esperahol · Dec 28, 2012

My deal is - more dakka only works for trolls in Warhammer3000. Sure, you can bring in more guns, but that isn't going likely to make anything better. Regular arms won't be much use against a semi-automatic on the one hand, and everyone having a semi-automatic only means a greater chance of death by friendly fire. Considering potential casualties in a school are likely to be students/children... the less bullets flying the better.

clax · Dec 28, 2012

Protectionist said:
Tell that to the families of the dead kids.

Okay, I will. The problem wasn't lack of armed guards, the problem was a mad man with a gun. It isn't a big risk this is a statistical improbability. Likely not to occur again, why spend the money? It will not bring the dead back to life.

I am sorry, it just seems like it is to late to place armed guards around the school.

I am sure the parents are telling themselves they wish they had been there, I am almost certain they would have taken a bullet for their kid. Perhaps some of the fallen didn't want to go to school maybe mom and dad made them, i an certain they wish they haven't

What I an saying is that hind sight is 20/20, do we guard every theater, every air plane, every building every mall? Is that rational is one guard enough? Should they be tactically trained, should they have a gun at school? For what a very very very unlikely event?

There is nit enough man power, not enough money, there is not really enough trust worthy people in the world willing to work for that small of a salary. Schools are under enough burden with trying to teach children the skills they need to worry about volcanoes, earthquakes our even less likely mass shootings.

My sympathies go to the survivors, my prayers go to the fallen, but the reality doesn't change because their kid died in an unlikely event.

Protectionist · Dec 28, 2012

Esperahol said:
My deal is - more dakka only works for trolls in Warhammer3000. Sure, you can bring in more guns, but that isn't going likely to make anything better. Regular arms won't be much use against a semi-automatic on the one hand, and everyone having a semi-automatic only means a greater chance of death by friendly fire. Considering potential casualties in a school are likely to be students/children... the less bullets flying the better.

I Couldn't disagree more. Everything you're saying is a school killer's dream. A whole school full of unarmed people offering no resistance. That's insane.

A semi-automatic IS a regular gun. Did you thin it was different than an ordinary handgun somehow ? Handguns are all semi-automatic guns.

The less bullets flying from the guns of teachers and school officials, only means the more people including kids will get killed.

Protectionist · Dec 28, 2012

clax said:
Okay, I will. The problem wasn't lack of armed guards, the problem was a mad man with a gun. It isn't a big risk this is a statistical improbability. Likely not to occur again, why spend the money? It will not bring the dead back to life.

I am sorry, it just seems like it is to late to place armed guards around the school.

I am sure the parents are telling themselves they wish they had been there, I am almost certain they would have taken a bullet for their kid. Perhaps some of the fallen didn't want to go to school maybe mom and dad made them, i an certain they wish they haven't

What I an saying is that hind sight is 20/20, do we guard every theater, every air plane, every building every mall? Is that rational is one guard enough? Should they be tactically trained, should they have a gun at school? For what a very very very unlikely event?

There is nit enough man power, not enough money, there is not really enough trust worthy people in the world willing to work for that small of a salary. Schools are under enough burden with trying to teach children the skills they need to worry about volcanoes, earthquakes our even less likely mass shootings.

My sympathies go to the survivors, my prayers go to the fallen, but the reality doesn't change because their kid died in an unlikely event.

You don't need ANY more money. Just let the people who are already working there (teachers, administrators, maintainance, etc) carry a gun, and have them all be trained and vetted (they should already be background checked thoroughly if they're working in a school).

As for the other places, Yes, there should be armed guards there too. And everywhere, if possible. And CCTV security as well.

NRA proposes armed school guards

Similar threads