Posted on 12/21/2012 5:25:35 PM PST by servo1969
Wayne LaPierre, the NRA’s executive VP, says that our violent culture is to blame for gun violence and that, as long as the culture is what it is, school children should have police protection. Despite the fact that the majority of Americans agree with him, the drive-by media is excoriating as if he had just announced that he eats children for breakfast and urges us all to do the same. Americans, who have been schooled out of rational thinking, will soon be referring to LaPierre in the appropriate pariah-like terms and, like the useful idiots they’ve been trained to be, mouth agreement with the same media that espouses values they reject.
Well, that’s all I have to say on the subject, because promised that I’d back off from the gun posts for a little while. That doesn’t mean, though, that I can’t direct you to other people’s. (Hey, I’m a lawyer. I’m always looking for loopholes.)
First, Bookworm room friend Servo1969 put up a solid post at the Free Republic detailing practical ways to protect our children when they’re herded into public schools. And honestly, I had no idea you could holster a gun in your bra.
Second, when it comes to the media’s performance in the wake of this tragedy, Mark Steyn says it best:
For those untouched by death this Christmas, someone else’s bewildering, shattering turn of fate ought to occasion a little modesty and circumspection. Instead, even by its usual execrable standards, the public discourse post-Newtown has been stupid and contemptible. The Left now seizes on every atrocity as a cudgel to beat whatever happens to be the Right’s current hottest brand: Tucson, Ariz., was something to do with Sarah Palin’s use of metaphor and other common literary devices — or “toxic rhetoric,” as Paul Krugman put it; Aurora, Colo., was something to do with the Tea Party, according to Brian Ross of ABC News. Since the humiliations of November, the Right no longer has any hot brands, so this time round the biens pensants have fallen back on “gun culture.” Dimwit hacks bandy terms like “assault weapon,” “assault rifle,” “semiautomatic,” and “automatic weapon” in endlessly interchangeable but ever more terrifying accumulations of high-tech state-of-the-art killing power.
Okay, I’m done for now. But please don’t tune out of this debate. Our fundamental liberties have never been more at risk. The Obama administration has now taken aim at both the First Amendment (religious freedom) and the Second Amendment (right to carry arms). With the media running interference for him, we have to be strong on facts and logic, and willing to take the fight to the Left, if we want our Constitution to be more than just a tattered piece of paper.
By the way, this bit of Israeli satire, especially the first minute or so, explains a lot. An awful lot.
UPDATE: One more. You have to read this one, regarding the lunacy of the Left’s instantaneous negative reaction to LaPierre’s proposal.
Politicians’ kids already have police or Secret Service protection. But the common peons don’t deserve it.
The media wouldn't find that objectionable.
The point of coutrse being that crazies are going to kill with whatever means they can muster proficiency using. I'm no longer tolerant of fools who will accept that their money is so important that their bank must have secuirty protection, but the children they've sired should be placed in 'gun free zones' where they are easy targets for slaughter.
When the damned liberals address the wholesale slaughter of more than a million alive children via liberal supported and promoted abortuaries, then I'll discuss securing other areas on this planet. Until then, I'll remained armed and ready to opposed those who choose to destroy life and property, even other people's lives and/or property.
And I'm learnign to hate democrats and the enemy media who hype this idiocy of the left as if it was 'wisdom of the ages.' Sorry, fools, my tolerant quota is overdrawn now.
Why pay millions to cops when you could get teachers to carry CCW’s for free?
The gummit way is to spend millions for something that can be had for free.
The mass killer will not go near an armed camp because even though he has the death wish himself and intends to end in suicide, he does not want to die without taking as many as possible with him.
That is why he never ever enters an armed camp.
Something like "the next Bill Ayres"?
CCW folks are by-and-large the more responsible of the citizenry. However, what are the odds that even one teacher in San Franxisco would know anything about weaponry much less want to be armed to protect children in an emergency? ... The gene pool is horribly polluted. And those not born ‘defective’ are now targeted in ‘public schools’ to be degenerated into fools and tax slaves.
Bill ‘the bomber’ Ayers is a hero to the left now demanding gun confiscation from private law-abiding citizenry.
Indeed. Why should I turn in my guns for someone who'd kill me with a bomb?
Two points that pretty well end the “debate” on gun control as a means of protecting our children. One, school shootings are going to happen. That is an ugly, yet undeniable fact. With 300 million or so firearms in the us, even if you ban them all, make it stick through the legal challenges, and avoid a civil war - you’re never going to get them all. As the saying goes, outlaw firearms and only outlaws will have them. There is nothing in our history to suggest any reason to believe a ban would be any more successful than prohibition, the war on drugs, or any other of the dozens of failed big government programs. Couple that with the equally sad fact that there will always be evil and insanity in the us (everywhere really)... You have to come to the rational conclusion that school shootings are going to happen, and there is nothing anyone can do to prevent that. Two, these events end one of two ways. The shooter accomplishes everything he wants to do and flees, surrenders, or commits suicide. Or someone with the means to stop him puts an end to it - kills or severely inures the shooter. Since letting them have their way is bad, results in maximum injury and death, stopping them is the only viable option. That means an armed presence in our schools and an active defense. These facts and simple logic are not what the liberals want to hear, but they are inescapable. Pretending gun control is in any way a solution is crass political posturing to advance an agenda, not protect our kids.
If we can't even stop a young reputedly “loony” loner from killing our children, how the h*ll do we expect to stop terrorists?
Terrorists have shown over and over, that soft targets like children are one of their favorite victim groups. I'd say it is past time for the schools to be guarded by at least security personnel.
Meanwhile, I think Congress should do with out all their security until the children are covered. Especially a Congress with such low approval ratings. Our children are more important, and deserve the best safety and security available.
We don’t even have to go as far as armed guards. Try to get into a school in New York City. They have unarmed guards and metal detectors. It works.
Stop the nuts at the perimeter. No business at a school no entry. No ID, no entry. Separate the offices from the actual classrooms with a physical barrier like a steel door that only school officials have access to. Better yet have two entrances, one for a guard or secretary and one to get into the offices.
This is the best solution, imho. Don’t let em even get close.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.