However, it turns out that I, and many others here, were wrong about Obama's daughters' school employing armed guard. We should be willing to humbly admit that we were wrong on this issue, and try not to make mistakes of this nature in the future.
Jury is still out for me. I never consider the Washington Post a good source for accurate info.
Given that the source is the long-discredited Washington Post, is their assertion on this mattter really the truth?
I would go with this saying “trust but verified”, knowing this is from the Washington Post.
I’m not a fan of the armed guards idea for all schools but the simple fact is that the secret service protects those girls and are very much armed even if the school isn’t.
>>We should be willing to humbly admit that we were wrong on this issue, and try not to make mistakes of this nature in the future.
OMG...we are our own worst enemy. We find ourselves in a bar fight and we’re shouting “fight fair” as we get beat to death with bar stools and beer bottles. Read “Rules for Radicals” and realize that WE are the radicals now.
But they are readily available should the need arise.
I looked up jobs that were open at the time this came out - they do have licensed special police officers, and they have to be licensed to carry guns....
Why would the school need to hire armed guards when the secret service is armed and at the school.
Notice that they are careful not to say that there are no armed personnel, just that the school itself doesn’t emply any armed guards. All the armed guards are employed by the federal government.
These “Journalists” are such A-holes!
I think I saw another version that said that SOME of the guards are ex-police, and may carry arms. I, too, wish that we could have a news source on this that we could trust.
I presume from the name of the school that it was originally founded by Quakers, and may still have some of that element in it. Quakers have a history of refusing all violence, including self defense.
It still appears to have Quaker connections, although I can’t vouch for their position today on such matters. They did apparently bend the basic Quaker rules sufficiently far to take Obama’s kids, knowing that if they did the school would be surrounded by armed Secret Service agents:
May I suggest the possibility that, when the daughters of the President are attending a school, the security is actually managed and dictated by the Secret Service and all armed personnel are ONLY Secret Service. IMHO - When the Secret Service is guarding a principal and the only other person in the room or area is a local cop or security guard, that cop or guard is then considered, by default, the greatest threat.
So they keep them in their cars? I'd parse every word on this one.
Nevertheless, let's assume it's true. They've just advertised that they're a big fat target on any day that 0bama's offspring aren't there.
Now Sidwell will be crawling with mass murderers.
Do the secret service assigned to protect the 2 children carry firearms?
Washington Post, yeah right.
Speak for yourself.
“In fact, it has no armed guards.”