NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer (Page 3)

Excellent point.  The only reason more people were not dead was because the murderer himself decided to stop.

Same as at a school shooting a few years ago here in MN.  Guess who the shooter killed first?

People talk about an assault weapons ban preventing mass shootings.

Then there's reality: There will still be plenty of guns that a determined person can get a hold of, and one doesn't need an AR to kill people. The kids at Columbine didn't have AR's and they did plenty of damage. 

Ya... like when the guy started shooting up New Life Church and an armed off duty security guard killed him and saved lives.... and she was held up as a hero by the media....you mean like that?

Yeah, but what if, and this might be a crazy idea, someone saw some red flags and was able to get the gunman some sort of help before he even went to the church ?  

The thing is... out is society we already have "armed guards"... they are called a police force and they are out there to protect and serve. They can't be at every place. They are in the community. At public gatherings or events there is usually a police presence.. there has been for decades.

We can't station police everywhere, but why not start at a place where the public is the most vulnerable, and the loss is so great... schools? I don't even think about seeing an armed guard in a bank. I do not think twice seeing police at sporting events or parades. I do not think twice when I see them at the mall.

What if a meteor hit and took out the bad guy in his car on the way to the church... really... you want to play "what if" all day? How about "what if" there were no bad people in world and nobody was mentally ill and there was no sickness or hunger?

This isn't what if... it is a historical fact... a guy lost his mind and started killing people. An armed church member stopped him... by shooting him. Fact

Unless those idiots stole the guns from the military or police none of them will have "assault weapons".

You are absolutely right Tony... why do we even employ such idiot police officers... we should just disband all the police departments since they are so incompetent and incapable of stopping people from doing bad things.

And it occured in the middle of a Federal assault weapons ban.

Police are paid for at the local level.  In St. Louis, we have about 1400 police officers and over 100 schools in the City.  I do not want to see 10% of the force diverted off the streets.  As it is they're pretty occupied fighting the gangs on the north side, which pose a much greater risk to the safety of me and my family (including two little school age children), than the minuscule chance that some wacko might choose their school to shoot up.  In the entire country, there were 24 students murdered while at school this year, plus 7 more faculty members.  St. Louis alone had 113 murders in 2011, and that is actually a good year for us.  I need police in the streets more than in the schools.  As tragic and disgusting as Sandy Hook was, the odds of it happening to me, you, or anyone you know is so incredibly remote.

I'm not opposed to officers in the schools.  Quite frankly, I'd love to see it.  But despite how Gomesbolt interpreted the message, the NRA isn't going to pay for it.  My City has cut their police force, so clearly they're not going to pay for it.  Guess that leaves the feds.  Are you wanting to set up a new federal branch of education officers?  Because everything runs pretty smoothly when it's done at the federal level.

Fact, I do not want my children to have to attend a school protected by armed guards.  Fact, we do almost nothing about the warning signs of mentally ill people. Fact, it is easy to get assault weapons and as many bullets as you want.  Fact, we can go back and forth all day and neither of us will win. 

Fact, you and your family lives in a world where bad people do bad things. Fact, your daughter knows what a police officer is whether she sees him/her at school or not... and she knows what is strapped to his hip. Fact, there are a lot of guns in America, and there always will be.

Actually just read the estimated cost is 5.4 billion.  but why are we arguing about money.  Is this about money or protecting our kids.  I am sure we can find that money somewhere like I said in my post I am willing to have my taxes raised to do it.  My kids safety at school is worth it.

Fact, too bad, the parents at SH didn't want their kids to die, still happened. Fact, yes mental health needs to be addressed but it isn't going to happen over night. This is a proposal to increase safety right away. Fact, assault weapons are actually very hard to get, lots of paperwork, tax stamps, waiting for 6-10 months etc. Fact, even without a semi-auto gun, without an armed guard a shooter would have plenty of time to kill kids with a shotgun, a revolver or even a bolt action rifle. 

Obviously an armed guard is not going to be able to prevent every incident of mass murder, it can still happen. But gun control laws are not going to stop every incident of mass murder either but no-one was up in arms when Obama proposed more gun control. The weapons ban from 94-2004 did nothing to stop Columbine. 

No one solution will prevent this from happening again, just as all the solutions can't prevent this from happening again. 

But it is a viable option to reduce the risk, if it had saved just 5 kids at SH it would have been worth it to those parents and those children. 

Sigh... deep breath.  First, none of them are AW.  Selective fire to be an AW.  Please use the terms correctly.

Secondly, one of the guns used at Columbine, a 9mm TEC-DC9, was actually part of the Clinton AW ban.  So a banned gun was used in a shooting.

Imagine that.  Banning the sale of a gun does not prevent them from being used in a crime.

I can agree with that... but don't condemn them for doing the exact same thing as the media and the "gun control" lobby does. The gun control lobby does not care about what can be done to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people... all they care about is keeping guns out of the hands of all people. That isn't going to happen.

The media does not care about informing the pubic of a situation... all they care about is driving ratings and revenue through fear and there is plenty of fear to peddle on both sides.

So the NRA is a lobby that speaks for law abiding gun owners. Why is that so bad? And no, I am not defending them... but you know nothing about them because you don't want to... one of their biggest jobs is education and training. Just about any self-respecting training course is NRA "certified" and pretty much every firearm instructor is NRA certified. They do tons of education about responsible care, handling, and storage of weapons. Just because you do not care to give them the time of day, does not means they do nothing.

I'm not arguing that point.

I'm missing your point. My family knows all about guns and bad people, and police officers.  I'm not against guns in America, I never have been.  I don't know why civilians need assault rifles.  I don't know why people think more guns are the answer.  I guess we can wait for someone to snap, then all of the heroes can kill that person with their guns.