• 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

lpast

lpast

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
13,663
Reaction score
4,633
Location
Fla
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
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.
 
Armed guards are the only practical solution. But can we expect our clapped-out government to support such a move? Feds cannot even
protect American citizens from crime spawned by the flood of illegal aliens.
Meantime, the anti-gunners are going down to a crushing defeat simply because their proposals are flawed.
How about taking some of that foreign aid spent of clapped-out "allies" and put it into protecting our people.
 
I had an SRO (School Resource Officer) in my high school that was armed. But how many "armed guards" do we need in each school?
 
Longstreet said:
Armed guards are the only practical solution. But can we expect our clapped-out government to support such a move? Feds cannot even
protect American citizens from crime spawned by the flood of illegal aliens.
Meantime, the anti-gunners are going down to a crushing defeat simply because their proposals are flawed.
How about taking some of that foreign aid spent of clapped-out "allies" and put it into protecting our people.
Click to expand...

Good grief, we are venturing into absurd territory. First, this is a very expensive solution (aren't we in government cost reduction mode and particularly going after government workers, which include the police? make up your mind, Cons!); second, its doesn't work. There was a Sheriff's deputy at Columbine; a police force at VPI.... a lot of good they did.

DEPUTIES_TEXT

There are many schools and few police. You simply can not have adequate coverage unless you want to turn Franklin High into Fort Franklin (maybe only build high schools inside Army posts).... Come on, Get real! This has to be one of the dumbest solutions floated thus far. I feel bad for anyone that wasted an afternoon listening to this yahoo from the NRA.

People that believe that armed guards or armed teachers are the solution to the proliferation of public violence are of limited intellect. The problem is very complex, as are the solutions.

The broad acceptance of arming our schools as some type of practical "solution" makes it obvious that as a society, we have left our thinking caps in the dryer a bit too long.
 
Last edited:
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'm all for it; it was one of the very first things I said about what we should do in response.
 
rocket88 said:
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.
Click to expand...

There was an armed officer at Columbine and what good did that do? How about movie theaters and malls too? Maybe we should hire guards to follow every one of us around 24/7?
Part of the answer is LESS guns and less capable guns not more. More guns=more gun violence.
The conservative case for an assault weapons ban - Los Angeles Times
 
Dickieboy said:
But...but...but gun manufacturers/sales are off the charts (more guns) and there is LESS gun violence...?
More guns
Less gun violence

How does that compute?
Click to expand...

Tell that to the citizens of Newtown.

1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.


2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.


3. Across states, more guns = more homicide

Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).

After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.


4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)

Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.
Click to expand...

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html
 
iguanaman said:
Tell that to the citizens of Newtown.
Click to expand...

Why? With respect to this discussion and more specifically YOUR point are national statistics useless? As to your source I find it quite specious as they cherry picked data to support their assertions; Our review of the academic literature, data from 26 developed countries, ten year period (1988-1997), gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. Note the data I provided was as current as is available from a reputable source…not an opinion…
 
iguanaman said:
There was an armed officer at Columbine and what good did that do? How about movie theaters and malls too? Maybe we should hire guards to follow every one of us around 24/7?
Part of the answer is LESS guns and less capable guns not more. More guns=more gun violence.
The conservative case for an assault weapons ban - Los Angeles Times
Click to expand...

You can't stop everything. It's a sad fact of life. There's so many guns that more gun control laws usually just lead to more creative ways to get around them. Like taxes or voter ID laws.

The first step is to crack down on enforcing the laws that do exist. If we as a nation put as many resources into gun enforcement as we do into marijuana enforcement, we'd see the results that we all wan to see.
 
rocket88 said:
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.
Click to expand...
First, I am not aware of anyone making a SERIOUS suggestion that we have ‘everybody carrying a gun’ which I would be firmly against. However I am for anyone who is willing to comply with ‘rules of engagement’, bear the responsibility of their action and agree willingly to engage in concealed carry. The responsibility and commitment to engage is incredibly difficult for folks to accept. Just saying ‘let’s arm all the teachers’ is impractical at the least and impossible (due to the absence of ability/desire of some) at the most.

As to the Ft. Hood reference, you are aware that MOST folks present on military bases are not armed as they are typically ‘inside’ a secure ‘enclosure’ thus relieving them from having to protect themselves. Considering this IF those accosted, given the training they had received prior, were armed at the time of the incident do you think it would have played out as it did?
 
lpast said:
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.
Click to expand...

There was an armed guard at Colorado school, and still people were killed.
 
Carleen said:
There was an armed guard at Colorado school, and still people were killed.
Click to expand...

Key word Armed Guard...that doesnt get it carleen..if your going to have SECURITY that will be effective you have to do it right...just sticking an armed guard in a school with several doors and windows that can easily be accessed is a waste of money
 
rocket88 said:
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.
Click to expand...
actually the people he attacked were not allowed to have guns the base was a like a city with no CCW-the only people armed were the small number of MPs and perimeter guards
 
Carleen said:
There was an armed guard at Colorado school, and still people were killed.
Click to expand...

he apparently delayed the killers-the problem is the police waited and waited and waited

it was like 9-11, a new situation where the LE response was outdated.
 
lpast said:
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.
Click to expand...

I saw the NRA's responce to this shooting, blaming it on movies, and video games, and other horsecrap, and realized, thank god I NEVER once gave them turkeys one dime. What a bunch of pussified twits. EVERY SINGLE one of these shooters have something in common. They were on pycotropic medication or were coming off it. Pycotropic medication is nothing to fool around with. Tells me EVERYTHING I need to know. I cant believe I am saying this but that fat moron Micheal Moore is right, we need to investigate the drugs these people have been on. The only good suggestion they had was the security aspect. Most everything else they said was bunk. Theres only ONE organiztion defending my second amendment rights and that the GOA. I am writing a check today to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom