Other Resources My Cup of Joe » NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 7
 
 
2012-12-22 9:22 PM
in reply to: #4545517

User image

Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:06 PM
Left Brain - 2012-12-22 9:33 PM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 6:46 AM 

 

this may have been mentioned elsewhere in the thread (did not read the whole thing my bad) but

 

-Columbine had an armed guard. He missed 4 times

-Virginia Tech had its own police force described as a SWAT team

 

I do not want to see schools become fortresses nor islands. They are institutions of learning, where our children also learn trust and empathy. Having a teacher packing heat does not bring up the warm nurturing environment I want for them nor will it stop the random acts of violence.

 

My wish list:

 

-an AWB with teeth - not one with loopholes and workarounds

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

-registry of all guns and gun owners

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

-longer waiting periods and better background checks which also means ending private sales of guns to get rid of the gun show loophole.

 

yes I understand that criminals will not obey these laws. That argument is moot. Fewer weapons out there means less chance they land in the wrong hands.

Fewer weapons means when someone becomes suicidal/homicidal they are less likely to have the means to achieve that end.

 

finally:

 

TriToy - I am virtually impossible to offend, so your picture doesn't....in fact, I find it somewhat comical.  It's comical in that you continue to throw crap against the wall to see what may stick.  

How about this......I'll find a picture of someone dying on the operating table after a routine surgery.....the caption will be, "Doctors cutting into bodies, what could go wrong?"......would that cover the amount of malpractice and incompetent doctors in our country?

I've told you all along, if you continue to make your argument based on emotion you will get NOTHING from the other side.  They are laughing at you.  You have to at least present facts, present accurate data, present a reason why any changes in gun laws will prevent mass shootings.  So far, you've got nothing.

It may be that we can't, or shouldn't, do anything about the 400,000,000 guns in our society (growing with each emotionally charged sentence you, and others, pen.....yes, you scare gun owners and others into buying more guns)....but we're never going to know the way you are going about it....because nobody will listen to ignorance.

 

so you ignore the facts that there have been armed guards at mass shooting - and accuse me of just being emotional - got it.

 

Would love to see more data - but this happened:

 

The nation might be in a better position to act if medical and public health researchers had continued to study these issues as diligently as some of us did between 1985 and 1997. But in 1996, pro-gun members of Congress mounted an all-out effort to eliminate the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although they failed to defund the center, the House of Representatives removed $2.6 million from the CDC's budget—precisely the amount the agency had spent on firearm injury research the previous year. Funding was restored in joint conference committee, but the money was earmarked for traumatic brain injury. The effect was sharply reduced support for firearm injury research.

To ensure that the CDC and its grantees got the message, the following language was added to the final appropriation: “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”4

 

Rest of article:  Silencing the science on gun research

 

frankly when I read things like this, Lott's debunked junk science (yet he still is on the air selling his book), followed by the spew from LaPierre it makes me turn around and want to even go further than I suggest above.  If I were just being emotional I would say repeal the second amendment period.

 

If the research is that important and beneficial why not seek private funds?



2012-12-22 11:49 PM
in reply to: #4544221

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
Just to add... legislation is being introduced in the Colorado Legislature for the state to supply school resource officers to any school that asks for them. This idea was floated long before the NRA opened their mouths.
2012-12-23 6:08 AM
in reply to: #4544221

User image

Pro
4353
200020001001001002525
Wallingford, PA
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
This may be taking things a little off-topic, butnI heard an interesting interview on Fresh Air (NPR program) last week. The interviewee was Tom Diaz of the Violence Policy Center. Diaz is a former gun owner and NRA member who grew up with guns, was a competitive shooter, and collected and sold guns himself. In the 90's, Diaz worked for Rep Schumer as part of the Crime Subcommittee. What he learned about guns and the gun lobby changed his stance, and he has become a staunch advocate of more stringent gun controls.

Here is a transcript of the interview if anyone cares to read it. Here are a highlights I thought worth noting:

"[M]ore people die from gunshot injury than have ever been killed in any terrorist act throughout the history of the recording of these acts... In other words, I'm saying that if you take all of the Americans who have ever died in any terrorist attack that's been recorded, more Americans die every year from gunshot injury...

Since September 11, 2001, we've spent several trillion dollars on so-called homeland security. We have made changes in our constitutional protections, particularly in the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment, against search and seizure and self-incrimination, that would have shocked people, shocked constitutional scholars before 9/11.

And yet we spend a tiny amount of money on public health concerning guns. We forbid the Center for Disease Control and Injury in Atlanta, part of the public health service, from actually researching gun safety."


Diaz goes on to discuss the AWB:

"In 1994, Congress passed a thing called the Semiautomatic Assault Weapons Ban. And it was very flawed. One of the flaws was that it defined a semiautomatic assault weapon in terms of a gun that had at least two of certain features. One of them was the actual crucial feature, which is the ability to take a high-capacity magazine.

But the others were what we call bells and whistles. They were irrelevant, almost decorative features that were on these guns, such as a bayonet mount, which means you could put a bayonet on the gun; a thing called a flash suppressor or flash hider, which means the flash from the barrel of the gun is less observable; a stock in the rear that could be extended or shortened.

None of those characteristics had anything to do, really, with what makes an assault weapon so dangerous. However, the requirement that you have at least two of those meant that gun manufacturers could say, a-ha, we can keep the ability to take the high-capacity magazine and just knock off all the rest of these bells and whistles; we still have essentially the same gun for all functional purposes, but it's now federally legal."


They then discuss trends in gun sales over time. I won't quote this one because it's kinda long, but the readers digest version: sales of basic handguns and hunting rifles have declined, largely because young people are less interested in hunting than they once were. In response to the decline in interest to those kinds of guns, the gun industry has turned to manufacturing and marketing what Diaz describes as "military-derived" semi-automatic guns that "appeal to the inner soldier".

Then some interesting background on the availability of data regarding the use of semi-automatic weapons, and guns in general, in crime:

"...the National Rifle Association have been so very successful in shutting down federal sources of data - for example, from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and basically shutting down cogent research from the Centers for Disease Control and Injury - we don't really know the extent of the use of these guns in crime, because we cannot get even the generic aggregate data. It's been shut down... You cannot get that information from government sources because of something called the Tiahrt Amendment, which has basically shut down ATF from releasing data... ATF collects by make, model, caliber - data about the guns and the type of crimes they're used in... That data is available in the files of ATF, but it cannot release it. It is forbidden by law from releasing it." (so, crusevgas, private sources like the Violence Policy Center would love to do that research, but they don't have access to the data to do so).

The discussion concludes with some discussion of how the NRA gets lots of money from gun manufacturers, and has essentially become the industry's mouthpiece for protecting and promoting the sales of guns and ammunition, and Diaz's thoughts on gun any future regulation.



An honest question for those that seem to oppose any kind of gun regulation -- just how far do you feel he right to keep and bear arms extends? Technically speaking, "arms" could mean anything from a rock or a pointy stick to a nuclear warhead and anything in between. It seems there needs to be a line drawn somewhere along that spectrum for what is reasonable for private citizens to own. The question is - where exactly should that line be drawn?

And does imposing stricter regulations on gun ownership prevent law abiding citizens from actually owning guns? We keep hearing that the majority of gun owners are responsible, stand-up citizens, and I actually agree with that. It seems to me that those rule-following gun owners - the ones we DON'T need to worry about, would follow the rules even if they were a little more stringent, but it might make it a little harder for those who are NOT rule followers to get their hands on a weapon.

I really, truly don't want to take away weapons from the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners who use and store their weapons safely and responsibly. But isn't there room for SOME regulation that would make it a little harder for less responsible people to own them?


2012-12-23 6:46 AM
in reply to: #4544221

User image

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
To echo Powerman, Move-on.org proposed an armed officer in every school a few years ago. Again, not an original idea by the NRA.

And Cat, there is no way the 2nd amendment gets repealed.
2012-12-23 7:21 AM
in reply to: #4545468

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

 So what prevents someone from losing their mind, shooting everyone at the range and taking high capacity magazines from the range. Then taking his rampage to the nearest crowd and killing more people?

 Ammo could be regulated like sudafed, but what amount draws a visit from ATF? Like I said previously, all it takes is fifty rounds; one box. Are you suggesting they limit purchases to less than 20 for rifle and less than 50 for handgun?

 I used to own a pistol. I sold it when we had kids to eliminate any possibility of an accident. It was a choice we made. I'd meet friends at the range and could go through 300-400 rounds every Monday morning. Guys that brought several weapons would shoot up even more ammo. I work with a guy that buys ammo in 2000 round lots and uses it up. What purpose does it serve monitoring ammo purchaeses and who does the follow up leg work on said purchases?

a pistol



Edited by mdg2003 2012-12-23 7:23 AM
2012-12-23 7:42 AM
in reply to: #4545468

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

And our streets are now meth free!



2012-12-23 8:09 AM
in reply to: #4545743

Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
Maybe....nay never mind
2012-12-23 8:10 AM
in reply to: #4545711

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
mdg2003 - 2012-12-23 7:21 AM

TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

 So what prevents someone from losing their mind, shooting everyone at the range and taking high capacity magazines from the range. Then taking his rampage to the nearest crowd and killing more people?



What prevents someone? Umm...how about the dozens of other people at the range standing around with loaded guns? That's the theory, anyway, isn't it?

Edited by jmk-brooklyn 2012-12-23 8:10 AM
2012-12-23 8:56 AM
in reply to: #4545680

User image

Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
@Jsonwash, I would think this would be good timing to get that Amendment removed or repealed. I see no reason that information should be withheld.
2012-12-23 9:01 AM
in reply to: #4545771

User image

Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-23 6:10 AM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-23 7:21 AM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

 So what prevents someone from losing their mind, shooting everyone at the range and taking high capacity magazines from the range. Then taking his rampage to the nearest crowd and killing more people?

What prevents someone? Umm...how about the dozens of other people at the range standing around with loaded guns? That's the theory, anyway, isn't it?

This is enjoyable, the pro gunner saying how dangerous the situation could be at a gun range and the anti gunner saying more guns makes it safer.

I wonder how many mass murders or even shooting have occured at Gun Shows and how many have occurred in Gun Free Zones?

2012-12-23 9:15 AM
in reply to: #4545771

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-23 8:10 AM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-23 7:21 AM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

 So what prevents someone from losing their mind, shooting everyone at the range and taking high capacity magazines from the range. Then taking his rampage to the nearest crowd and killing more people?

What prevents someone? Umm...how about the dozens of other people at the range standing around with loaded guns? That's the theory, anyway, isn't it?

 BINGO, we have a winner. Follow that line of logical thinking. Where does that take you?



2012-12-23 9:22 AM
in reply to: #4544221

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
Here's a hint. It rhymes with " there's a possibility that an armed LAW ABIDING individual just might possibly be able to prevent a mass shooting. Unarmed LAW ABIDING individuals will most likely NEVER be able to stop and armed assailant. Regardless of how he's armed." 
2012-12-23 9:59 AM
in reply to: #4545807

User image

Pro
6838
5000100050010010010025
Tejas
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
crusevegas - 2012-12-23 9:01 AM
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-23 6:10 AM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-23 7:21 AM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:55 PM
mdg2003 - 2012-12-22 9:44 AM Cathleen - Can you elaborate on this?

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

I'm not sure how that will work. Are you suggesting that gun ranges rent them out or store them for customers?

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

Most handgun ammo comes in boxes of 50 rounds, rifle twenty. How many rounds purchased would trigger a red flag and what would determine that number? Fifty rounds would inflict a lot of chaos.

 

yes -store/rent at ranges

we track EVERY package of sudafed - whether you buy a box with 10 pills or 100 why would it be tougher for 50 bullets?

 So what prevents someone from losing their mind, shooting everyone at the range and taking high capacity magazines from the range. Then taking his rampage to the nearest crowd and killing more people?

What prevents someone? Umm...how about the dozens of other people at the range standing around with loaded guns? That's the theory, anyway, isn't it?

This is enjoyable, the pro gunner saying how dangerous the situation could be at a gun range and the anti gunner saying more guns makes it safer.

I wonder how many mass murders or even shooting have occured at Gun Shows and how many have occurred in Gun Free Zones?

 Call it as you see it, but.. my concern in this discussion is not pro or anti gun. I'm looking out for my rights as guaranteed under the Constitution. And the rights of my fellow citizens.

 I'll guess on your questions. Zero and a crapton, respectively.

2012-12-23 11:49 AM
in reply to: #4545528

User image

Champion
6046
5000100025
New York, NY
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
crusevegas - 2012-12-22 10:22 PM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 7:06 PM
Left Brain - 2012-12-22 9:33 PM
TriToy - 2012-12-22 6:46 AM 

 

this may have been mentioned elsewhere in the thread (did not read the whole thing my bad) but

 

-Columbine had an armed guard. He missed 4 times

-Virginia Tech had its own police force described as a SWAT team

 

I do not want to see schools become fortresses nor islands. They are institutions of learning, where our children also learn trust and empathy. Having a teacher packing heat does not bring up the warm nurturing environment I want for them nor will it stop the random acts of violence.

 

My wish list:

 

-an AWB with teeth - not one with loopholes and workarounds

-ban on high capacity magazines except at gun ranges

-registry of all guns and gun owners

-tracking of ammunition sales (we track sudafed )

-longer waiting periods and better background checks which also means ending private sales of guns to get rid of the gun show loophole.

 

yes I understand that criminals will not obey these laws. That argument is moot. Fewer weapons out there means less chance they land in the wrong hands.

Fewer weapons means when someone becomes suicidal/homicidal they are less likely to have the means to achieve that end.

 

finally:

 

TriToy - I am virtually impossible to offend, so your picture doesn't....in fact, I find it somewhat comical.  It's comical in that you continue to throw crap against the wall to see what may stick.  

How about this......I'll find a picture of someone dying on the operating table after a routine surgery.....the caption will be, "Doctors cutting into bodies, what could go wrong?"......would that cover the amount of malpractice and incompetent doctors in our country?

I've told you all along, if you continue to make your argument based on emotion you will get NOTHING from the other side.  They are laughing at you.  You have to at least present facts, present accurate data, present a reason why any changes in gun laws will prevent mass shootings.  So far, you've got nothing.

It may be that we can't, or shouldn't, do anything about the 400,000,000 guns in our society (growing with each emotionally charged sentence you, and others, pen.....yes, you scare gun owners and others into buying more guns)....but we're never going to know the way you are going about it....because nobody will listen to ignorance.

 

so you ignore the facts that there have been armed guards at mass shooting - and accuse me of just being emotional - got it.

 

Would love to see more data - but this happened:

 

The nation might be in a better position to act if medical and public health researchers had continued to study these issues as diligently as some of us did between 1985 and 1997. But in 1996, pro-gun members of Congress mounted an all-out effort to eliminate the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Although they failed to defund the center, the House of Representatives removed $2.6 million from the CDC's budget—precisely the amount the agency had spent on firearm injury research the previous year. Funding was restored in joint conference committee, but the money was earmarked for traumatic brain injury. The effect was sharply reduced support for firearm injury research.

To ensure that the CDC and its grantees got the message, the following language was added to the final appropriation: “none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”4

 

Rest of article:  Silencing the science on gun research

 

frankly when I read things like this, Lott's debunked junk science (yet he still is on the air selling his book), followed by the spew from LaPierre it makes me turn around and want to even go further than I suggest above.  If I were just being emotional I would say repeal the second amendment period.

 

If the research is that important and beneficial why not seek private funds?

 

I gather you are not familiar with how the CDC operates, as part of public health. I am fairly certain it CANNOT get private funds.

2012-12-23 2:02 PM
in reply to: #4545943

User image

Pro
5755
50005001001002525
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer

If the research is that important and beneficial why not seek private funds?

I gather you are not familiar with how the CDC operates, as part of public health. I am fairly certain it CANNOT get private funds.

Apparently the CDC can, through the CDC Foundation. Quite a laundry list of corporations and organizations.

I see all my former (pharma) employers on there!



Edited by BrianRunsPhilly 2012-12-23 2:05 PM
2012-12-23 2:17 PM
in reply to: #4544221

User image

Elite
4435
2000200010010010010025
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?


2012-12-23 2:19 PM
in reply to: #4546063

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer

jobaxas - 2012-12-23 1:17 PM Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?

What's interesting is Gabby Gifford was pro 2A before the shooting... and she still is after. I don't know if that counts.

2012-12-23 3:43 PM
in reply to: #4546063

User image

Champion
6046
5000100025
New York, NY
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer

jobaxas - 2012-12-23 3:17 PM Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?

 

no they were absolutely disgusted with La Pierre's press conference. Horrified.

 

as to CDC getting pharma $$ - that is the issue research $$ are from pharma and the gov. Pharma has no reason to fund gun research and now the CDC is prohibited from using any govt funding for it. 

2012-12-23 3:45 PM
in reply to: #4546119

User image

Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
TriToy - 2012-12-23 3:43 PM

jobaxas - 2012-12-23 3:17 PM Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?

 

no they were absolutely disgusted with La Pierre's press conference. Horrified.

 

as to CDC getting pharma $$ - that is the issue research $$ are from pharma and the gov. Pharma has no reason to fund gun research and now the CDC is prohibited from using any govt funding for it. 

Can't admit when I'm wrong either...

2012-12-23 4:01 PM
in reply to: #4546119

User image

Elite
6387
50001000100100100252525
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
TriToy - 2012-12-23 2:43 PM

jobaxas - 2012-12-23 3:17 PM Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?

 

no they were absolutely disgusted with La Pierre's press conference. Horrified.

 

as to CDC getting pharma $$ - that is the issue research $$ are from pharma and the gov. Pharma has no reason to fund gun research and now the CDC is prohibited from using any govt funding for it. 

If they could come up with a pill to fix it I bet they would be.

2012-12-23 7:14 PM
in reply to: #4546138

User image

Champion
6046
5000100025
New York, NY
Subject: RE: NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer
powerman - 2012-12-23 5:01 PM
TriToy - 2012-12-23 2:43 PM

jobaxas - 2012-12-23 3:17 PM Obviously this is a question that won't get answered on here. I would be interested to know what the parents of those poor murdered kids think and the kids that survived and the surviving teachers. Do they believe having an armed police officer at the school would have stopped this tragedy or prevented said lunatic from trying? Do they want an armed police officer going forward?

 

no they were absolutely disgusted with La Pierre's press conference. Horrified.

 

as to CDC getting pharma $$ - that is the issue research $$ are from pharma and the gov. Pharma has no reason to fund gun research and now the CDC is prohibited from using any govt funding for it. 

If they could come up with a pill to fix it I bet they would be.

 

agreed



New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » NRA: Armed guards for schools is the answer Rss Feed  
 
 
of 7