Posted on 02/03/2013 6:25:08 AM PST by Kaslin
On a December day last year, a disturbed 20-year-old murdered his mother. He then drove to an elementary school where he killed 20 young children and six adults, reportedly using several firearms.
Something has to be done to stop this sort of massacre from happening again. If that is possible.
Or, according to some, something has to be done whether such prevention is possible or not.
So immediately politicians who had long supported gun control laws argued that the Newtown atrocity proved the need for those laws. Despite government studies showing that a past assault weapons ban had no impact on gun-related deaths, numerous politicians called for a new assault weapons ban, tighter controls and reporting requirements, and the like.
The president got involved, and repackaged this agenda under cover of his deep and abiding empathy for the loss at Newtown, describing that day as the worst day of his presidency, the saddest day.
The days he himself ordered drone strikes on allied countries, without a declaration of war, killing innocents — including hundreds of children — apparently didnt have a similar effect.
Oddly, nothing in the new gun control proposals advanced by the president or those in Congress would have deterred the massacre in Newtown.
While the federal government seeks to take away rights, the local government in Newtown has decided to add protection:
Late Thursday the Newtown Board of Education voted to request the presence of two kinds of guards inside the towns elementary schools. The vote, for now, only represents a request — it still needs to clear budget and logistical boundaries since the guards would come from the town's police resources as opposed to the school board itself. But the plan would put two eyes and ears — one armed, one unarmed — at each Newtown school, reports Bronxville Patch's Davis Dunavin. The guards, officially called school resource officers (SROs), were already a fixture at all Newtown schools in the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, but until this vote they were budgeted only to be a presence at middle and high Schools. . . .
This may serve as a worthy blow against gun-grabbing hysteria. Instead of lashing out at the usual suspects (the infamous category of guns called assault weapons, despite the fact that these weapons account for a small and declining percentage of murders in this country), Newtowns move to put armed professionals in schools to protect children puts common sense back into our concerns for our children.
It is a major blow against the gun-free zones utopianism. Putting up a sign to say something is unlawful doesnt stop criminals. But it does put the kibosh on good guys with guns protecting folks (including children) against criminals. The gun-free zones notion is a mere pious hope, a wish, a dream. With a kick against the cause it allegedly supports.
Newtowns vote reverses that revered trend.
And its about time.
The vote also takes a metaphorical slap at all those who have made the NRA their whipping boy. It was the NRA, you will remember, that came out after the massacre and advised putting armed police protection in all schools, arguing that, The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. (I had made the somewhat less expensive suggestion that the gun-free zone idea be repudiated, and trained teachers and administrators be allowed to carry weapons to school.)
This Good Guys with Guns meme received a lot of ridicule.
Now, despite their loudly expressed loathing for the NRA, the advocates of further gun control legislation were quick to claim that they had no intention (or even the merest hankering!) to take away any guns now legally in the possession of law-abiding citizens. But the chief sponsor of the new federal legislation, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), has long been on record wanting to make Mr. and Mrs. America turn over their guns to the government.
Meanwhile, these same politicians, along with their adoring media lapdogs, began attacking the National Rifle Association as somehow the responsible party to the Newtown shooting and all other gun crimes (as if weapons defended by the Second Amendment and an organization supporting the Second Amendment were more to be feared than the trigger-pulling murderers).
Funny thing is, politicians are themselves guarded, daily (sometimes nightly and routinely), by women and men (presumably good men) with guns. And no one, I mean no one in politics, would consider disarming their own guardians. So gun control is very selective indeed.
The Newtown education board, by siding with the NRAs solution as the only near-term viable policy, does not address every issue regarding guns and control in America. But by repudiating the wishful thinking utopianism of Gun Free Zones and by emphasizing the addition of protection rather than the subtraction of the same, the Newtown vote hits a bulls eye. [further reading]
Armed guards at a former movie set, who would have thought
I loved it when that one gal who was testifying said “It’s to save all of us (the non-politicians) from all of you” and she waves towards all those fat old blowhards on the Senate
Yeah. What sort of nonsense it that all about?
If they are planning to pay two guards, why would they want one unarmed? Is this some sort of PC sop to the Liberals?
Two armed guards is some defense in depth. One armed guard and one not armed is NO defense in depth. All your eggs are in one basket. What protection can the unarmed one provide against armed intruders?
Perhaps there is more to the “unarmed guard” idea that isn’t in the article?
I wouldnt want to be the unarmed guard
Why is this a surprise. They’ll do anything to add to the public payroll, except the sensible thing of letting staff in there have a handgun.
It will be one armed guard, then 2 — one armed and one not, then 4 unarmed guards, then an unarmed guard in every classroom with an aide and a classroom psychologist. It never ends.
The best security for our children or any of us is no gun free zones. School employees should be allowed to carry concealed. Anyone, parents,workmen etc. that have business in a school should be allowed to carry. Many schools have a policeman, deputy or a security guard, they should be in casual dress and concealed carry. I know there would be discussions regarding license and gun safety courses. Anyone who can legally purchase a firearm should be allowed to carry.
What about if a School employee goes on a shooting rampage?
The employee wouldn’t be the only one there armed and there would be a much quicker response on site as opposed to waiting for police or a swat team. If our citizens had no firearms and some individual were to go on a machete rampage in a school how many could he kill or injure before he was overpowered or the police arrived? At this time being in a gun free zone leaves the children helpless to any kind of attack. If an officer, deputy or guard is assigned to a school they should be incognito and firearm concealed, otherwise your only defense is likely to be the first target.
We have thousands of trained military personnel coming home from another failed war.
They will balloon the unemployed ranks.
Why not use them immediately as school guards?
They are already trained. They already know how to ID a problem & deal with it. Give them a useful transition into being a citizen again.
I am talking about individual jobs-—NOT OBAMA’S personal army!!!
When it hits close to home, and you understand the realities of it, common sense is likely to be a bit more prevalent.
It wouldn't matter a whit,
if said employee was legally or illegally armed.
“The days he himself ordered drone strikes on allied countries, without a declaration of war, killing innocents including hundreds of children apparently didnt have a similar effect.”
That’s pretty rich considering the aftereffects of Dubya’s idiotic nation building scheme in Iraq on the country’s Christian population. I guess this schmuck only cares about civilian collateral damage when its Muslims being hurt by a President with a “D” next to his name.
“It was the NRA, you will remember, that came out after the massacre and advised putting armed police protection in all schools, arguing that, The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. (I had made the somewhat less expensive suggestion that the gun-free zone idea be repudiated, and trained teachers and administrators be allowed to carry weapons to school.)”
BZZT. False. The NRA called for “armed volunteers.” A blatantly idiotic plan which no school in their right mind would encourage. Hmmm...let’s see: fully trained and properly supervised police officers or Bubba the out of shape unemployed borderline alcoholic and his friends?
We need to come up with some kind of pin for all gun owners to wear. And when we see each other give a “Guns Up” (see Texas Tech) salute.
We need to come up with some kind of pin for all gun owners to wear. And when we see each other give a “Guns Up” (see Texas Tech) salute.
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.