• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NRA's Newtown solution: Armed guards in schools

which is why America has such a high gun murder rate....

So how did having the strictest and most bans in the country for over 50 years help out here in home of Liberaldumb. (Chicago)? Just how did coming up with all those laws and more restrictions and doing all they could to prevent gun ownership in the City of Chicago work out with those so called numbers that the left likes to cite? What happened? Violence was suppose to go down? Shootings were suppose to stop? Murder rates were suppose to go down. Where are the rationals and excuses? Crime was suppose to be reduced.

Hell Chicago even had it at one time that none could carry a handgun in the city and it didn't matter what the Fed said. None but L.E's and those Occupations that required such. Notice that didn't work either? Just what did happen?

Course I am sure those in California, and Massachusetts can say pretty much the same?
 
There was an armed guard at Colorado school, and still people were killed.

And fewer than otherwise would have been. People are alive today who were students that day because Columbine had an armed first responder.
 
fact
Adjusting for population, the U.S. death rate by firearms -- which includes homicides, suicide and accidents -- was 10.2 per 100,000 people in 2009, according to the Coalition for Gun Control. The closest developed country was Finland, with a firearms death rate of 4.47 per 100,000 people in 2008, less than half that of the U.S. rate. In Canada, the rate was 2.5 per 100,000 people in 2009. In the United Kingdom, the 2011 rate was 0.25 per 100,000 people.

That's a weapon effect.

That is incorrect. The higher rates of violence and murder in the US are unchanged when you control for guns. Yes, we kill more people with guns. We also kill more people with knives, baseball bats, kitchen appliances, cars....
 
which is why America has such a high gun murder rate....


horsecrap, murder rates have been steadily declining as the number of guns in private circulation have increased. Our rate of gun murder rate among white americans is lower than the rate among white Europeans. Black and latino inner city drug gang murders make up a vast majority of the gun related deaths: more than 75% of those killed with guns and those who kill with guns have criminal records. In other words, people who cannot legally own guns (or narcotics for that matter)
 
fact
Adjusting for population, the U.S. death rate by firearms -- which includes homicides, suicide and accidents -- was 10.2 per 100,000 people in 2009, according to the Coalition for Gun Control. The closest developed country was Finland, with a firearms death rate of 4.47 per 100,000 people in 2008, less than half that of the U.S. rate. In Canada, the rate was 2.5 per 100,000 people in 2009. In the United Kingdom, the 2011 rate was 0.25 per 100,000 people.

That's a weapon effect. It's not clear that guns cause violence, but it's absolutely clear that they change the outcome

what does suicide have to do with it? and get rid of black drug murders and what is the rate?
 
Armed guards are a great idea, IMO. Far better to have a few well trained people with weapons than to have everybody carrying a gun.

If you think armed teachers are the solution, I point this out: Ft. Hood is a military base. It's not like the shooter was the only guy with a weapon there.

I thought that the locale in which Hasan opened fire did not allow weapons.
 
One of the NRA's biggest mantras is that US citizens need guns to protect themselves from the government and perhaps even over throw it if required, but their response to this school shooting is to demand that the government get both bigger and carry more guns?
 
One of the NRA's biggest mantras is that US citizens need guns to protect themselves from the government and perhaps even over throw it if required, but their response to this school shooting is to demand that the government get both bigger and carry more guns?


UH police officers already carry guns-its allocation but I disagree with the NRA on this
staff members ought to do what I do

get training
get a CCW
continue to practice

most of the people who attend (I get 16 hours of formal training a year, do another 200 or so on my own with my son and wife) the place I do are far more competent to deal with an active shooter than most police officers
 
What in the heck guarantees that a trained security guard wouldn't ever freak out? ANYONE can freak out at any time. I don't see a problem with arming a few teachers in the school at all.

I mean really, you trust teachers with your children all day long.


Ok...but its not a few theres thousands and thousands and they are not trained security and teaching is their function not security...a few armed teachers is mostly useless
 
Ok...but its not a few theres thousands and thousands and they are not trained security and teaching is their function not security...a few armed teachers is mostly useless

a few armed and TRAINED teachers in each school is far better a solution than the "ban the guns" nonsense that the anti gun politicians propose for reasons that HAVE NOTHING to do with the safety of school kids
 
I love it when the hard right spends most the year castigating teachers as commies, panderers, lazy, socialists, who only want to subvert the bedrock principles our nation was founded on....

NOW suddenly these very same commies are going to strap-on, train-up and become armed guards as well as educators... :roll:

Doesn't make sense.

Now having a truly trained and armed presence dedicated to defending a school sounds good.

But it is alot like placing a soldier every 50 meters, out in the open with nothing between him and the 99th Mongolian Horde. They would dig in, build overhead cover, put out barbed wire and mines... harden their position.

Schools must be hardened, entries controlled, windows and vents designed to not allow them to be breached from the outside and sensors to monitor if someone tampers with them. CCTV on the outside like Walmart, and hall cameras so the administration can inform help where the badguys are.

The first indication a bad guy is present shouldn't be children and teachers being shot, it should be an attempt to breach the outer perimeter. School security shouldn't be playing catch-up surprised and blind.
 
a few armed and TRAINED teachers in each school is far better a solution than the "ban the guns" nonsense that the anti gun politicians propose for reasons that HAVE NOTHING to do with the safety of school kids

Where have I said that banning guns would work ? all ive said is the opposite. There is too many problems trying to arm a few teachers, for one thing it wont work, who chooses which teachers can carry who cant, so along with educational training they now need police training commission training to be able to carry and classroom. You need security and you need cameras and someone watching the cameras from the minute the school is unlocked till the building is secured at night
 
I thought that the locale in which Hasan opened fire did not allow weapons.

I'm thinking that there's probably a few weapons lying around a military base...just a hunch.

Can the city force the military to give up their weapons? That seems pretty idiotic to me.
 
Where have I said that banning guns would work ? all ive said is the opposite. There is too many problems trying to arm a few teachers, for one thing it wont work, who chooses which teachers can carry who cant, so along with educational training they now need police training commission training to be able to carry and classroom. You need security and you need cameras and someone watching the cameras from the minute the school is unlocked till the building is secured at night


Training teachers to be armed security guards is like training the security guard to teach.
 
what does suicide have to do with it? and get rid of black drug murders and what is the rate?

get rid of those things and you still have a cinema full of people that didnt get to see the end of Batman and 20 kids that nvr opened xmas pressies not to mention a few others this year in the US.
 
get rid of those things and you still have a cinema full of people that didnt get to see the end of Batman and 20 kids that nvr opened xmas pressies not to mention a few others this year in the US.

get rid of cancer and no one dies from it
 
get rid of cancer and no one dies from it


mate scraping the barrel! If we could get rid of cancer we would so not sure how your comment works in that argument.
 
Training teachers to be armed security guards is like training the security guard to teach.


There ya go, two totally different professions that should not be mixed. Keeping school safe is going to be expensive and we have to give up some freedom of movement and I said that from my first post
 
mate scraping the barrel! If we could get rid of cancer we would so not sure how your comment works in that argument.

I am saying getting rid of cancer in the near future is about as realistic as getting rid of guns
 
They've been working on a cure for cancer. It's not like you suddenly thought of it.

Liberals and democrats have been trying to ban guns for years. it started with the racists in the Klan and then the anti-papists in New England.
 
I agree and I would agree if a liberal politician or a teaparty politician or group said the same thing.

It is impossible to keep all schools and all kids safe from nutjobs, cant be done. We as society can only minimize it and to do that we have to give up some liberty and do some things many find distasteful, but the end result if it keeps kids even a little safer that it may be worth it. The risk and cost vs results has to be decided.

Some ideas off the top of my head, all doors locked into the school once the kids are inside. Entrance and exit from one door only with an armed guard with metal detectors or at the minimum paddles. All personel, students, parents an ups delivery men and women all get paddled. Windows either barred or the safety glass that has wire mesh in the middle if you shoot it out you still cant get in. Bullet proof glass would cost hugely.
Anyone that believes a ban on assault weapons is going to stope school shootings is as off as the nutjobs that commit those horrific crimes.
Someone armed with a revolver with speed loaders can kill a whole bunch of people in a school before he was stopped. There are people that can speed load revolvers as fast as you can drop a clip and throw in a new one.
Security in every school is the only way to minimize this slaughter...arming teachers that are in individual classrooms is only good in that room...you need armed security that moves everywhere, the bigger the school the more security. America either has to PAY to keep the kids safe and make some distasteful decisions...or keep pissing up a rope whining about gun control that wont work.
Where I disagree is putting working Police Officers in every school...You can hire retired police officers and have them supervise and train a staff if needed for far less of a cost.

The National Rifle Association stunned Washington observers Friday when the group’s CEO announced a plan to install armed guards at every school in the country — its response to the Connecticut shooting last week that left 20 children dead.

Who is going to protect the children and adults from the armed guards? I mean, part of the reason people feel we need guns is to protect ourselves from the police and the government. Would protecting against armed guards not be in the same line of thinking.
 
Who is going to protect the children and adults from the armed guards? I mean, part of the reason people feel we need guns is to protect ourselves from the police and the government. Would protecting against armed guards not be in the same line of thinking.

I suppose anybody could snap...but my kids' schools did have armed police officers (over ten years ago in the case of one of them), and nothing ever happened. Can you direct me to examples of school security guards losing it and shooting up a school?
 
Who is going to protect the children and adults from the armed guards? I mean, part of the reason people feel we need guns is to protect ourselves from the police and the government. Would protecting against armed guards not be in the same line of thinking.

that is an interesting question coming from someone who thinks only the cops and criminals should be armed since you are on record as wanting to ban all private ownership of weapons meaning cops and criminals will still have them

WHO WILL PROTECT US FROM CRIMINALS AND WORSE YET=ROGUE POLICE OFFICERS
 
Back
Top Bottom