Best
206 Comments
Post
  • #1
    !
    Single out and control one entrance into the school, put cameras an metal detectors, and post two trained armed guards with M4's and side arms at the controlled enterance and a comunications guard in security room monitoring cameras (also armed the same way for back up).
  • #20
    !
    @PoliticalSpice That is a real solution. It's call crowed flow control. Other exits can be locked from outside allowing for emergency exiting while triggering an alarm. The idea would be every one funnels through a check point with metal detectors to make sure no one is armed. The gaurds make sure no one armed gets in and the entrance isn't breached or attacked. It's a better solution than stripping away at peoples second amendment rights.
  • #26
    !
    @AlexMIA I'm familiar with the concept, I just think that if you're going to create a soceity of people acclimated to being searched and living in a police state, the second amendment might as well go too.

    Tjose who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.
  • #34
    !
    @PoliticalSpice Not saying searched just metal detected. We get policed like that already, doesn't mean you have to give up your second amendment rights. F that, take my sympathy and solutions this way or don't take it at all. But leave my rights alone as I'm sure you'd want yours.
  • #37
    !
    @AlexMIA I'm all for the second amendment, but not as a person who lives in ab irban area it has little effect on me. And here is the point, folks that favor police state solutions, immigration checks by police, searches when entering public buildings, requiring govt picture id to vote, exapanding the rights of police, etc. could care less when the rights of us that do not want those things are infringed upon, but ypu scream bloody murder when rights you care about are infringed upon. My attitude is no one should be subject to voter id checks, questioned about immigration status, compelled to go someplace and then compelled upon entering to have themselves searched in any manner, or have their second amendment rights violated; but if the rights I care about are getting violated, why on earth would I care if your guns are taken from you, they have already taken away my rights, why not yours too?
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    Well his political career is over because that is the first common sense suggestion I have heard from a congressman on this issue. Damn, someone finally figured out unarmed people don't have a chance.
  • #124
    !
    I agree. And I'm surprised that after reading all of these posts that there hasn't been one single mention of the parent who was responsible for allowing the child to have access to a gun. If a parent left a sharp knife on the coffee table with a toddler in the house the parent would be prosecuted for neglect.
  • #61
    !
    I bet if we outlawed all guns of any type and caliber the President would still have armed security around him and his children, and why, because he knows bad people would still have guns.
    So as long as we know that there will always be bad guys, and bad guys will always have guns, then it seems logical to me that good guys should have guns and we should protect our children with them.
    I have always been of the mind set that criminals with guns are bullies, and like bullies they look for the easiest target to impose their will. The best protection is to have no weakness, at least not one as obvious as putting our defenseless children in a building 6-8 hours a day, 180 days a year.
    Times have changed folks. There are animals among us, and like most animals they hunt the weakest and most defenseless among us. At least allow us to meet their action with equal reaction.
    And, no, there are not enough police to stop all the bad people. Like what happened at that school, the time to save lives was within seconds of learning of the threat. People died trying to take a bullet for a child, bet they would have rather risked their lives by taking the threat out and trying to save multiple lives.
  • #30
    !
    Those of you who talk about one open entrance and armed guards and camera monitors, you forget that there are other ways to get into a school if you want. Where, you ask? Shooting out the windows. I won't go into recess for elementary students and how to get in and out of the school for that. Many of you think that schools are made of money and can just put in all the camera equipment and give up the room for a separate monitoring station, and pay for one or more armed guards (with guns showing)> This would upset students. I know this, as I am a school administrator for a small public school. I was raised with fire arms and know how to use them, so I would have no problem being armed and being able to protect the school and the students. The other aspect of this problem, is that the media gives to much attention to the shooters and makes them imortal. This coverage breeds copycats. The media will cry First Amendment if you try to tell them to stop the practice of glorifying the shooter(s). If you look at it, the media is more responsible for all the gun violence, because they are the ones who glorify it. One more thing, the peole who do the shootings are basically cowards, they don't want anyone to stop them until they have taken advantage of unarmed victims. Armed people stop them, they kill themselves before they have the chance to take many or any lives.

    What happens when someone bpombs a school, are we going to outlaw the sale of fertilizer and bleach? Are we going to outlaw the sales of cars, are we going to create no parking zones within six (6) blocks of a school? We need to concentrate on dealing the people who do these things, not the tools.
  • #57
    !
    My thought (on some of your ideas) also! Prisons are designed to keep people in AND out. Schools are not. Think of what a prison looks like....and that's what a school would have to look like! For most schools, 1 or 2 CCW's walking around are not enough (as a school administrator, you know many campuses are very big). What's the answer....it will not be just one answer or the same for every school....
  • #21
    !
    I think it is possible to have armed guards at schools and not make it prison like. I have worked in buildings with armed guards and they were friendly and made you aware they were there for your safety.
  • #12
    !
    It appears that the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 already does not prohibit the carry and discharge of firearms within a school zone:

    (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
    (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
    (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity.

    So why is it necessary to repeal this law in order to allow schools to arm school employees or hire armed guards? Is it necessary for the safety of school kids or is it just a way for a new Congressman to make a name for himself?
  • #24
    !
    You hit the nail on the head. All this guy is trying to do is curry favor with the NRA. He reminds me of the student who brings an apple for the teacher on the first day of class.
  • #52
    !
    You need to read the way the law is written again. The Gun Free School Zone Act allows the carry of concealed weapons by individuals and allows for the discharge of a firearm. The problem is that the language used basically allows on duty law enforcement or on duty contracted security to discharge a firearm in the course of their duty. It allows the school to have a shooting program for the students and have them discharge a firearm while participating in the program. What is does not allow is for an individual whether a teacher, a students parent, an off duty officer or off duty contracted security guard to discharge a firearm. This means that if a parent or even an off duty officer discharges their weapon to prevent a mass killing they are in violation of the act even though they are acting appropriately.
  • #60
    !
    @nomocrap I agree that the wording is convoluted, but my interpretation of it remains as stated in my original post. An individual (such as a parent) who is not under contract and is not legally allowed to carry a gun onto school grounds could be prosecuted for shooting in a school zone, even to protect students, under this law. I do not see any clause that removes discretion for that prosecution from local authorities, though.
  • #99
    !
    @Dan_Tien
    I would have to say that if a person isn't legally allowed to carry a gun, they have no business going anywhere with a gun, school or otherwise. TN is trying to pass a law that allows teachers to go armed if they want to and will provide the training to those that do. My problem with that is, what if the teacher is having a bad day and has a gun.
  • #100
    !
    @Warrior_Judge I am of the opinion that if armed protection is placed in schools, it should be police officers, not teachers. I have stated as much in an earlier thread. Others strongly disagree.
  • R Load more replies

  • #18
    !
    It doesn't matter if there drug free, gun free, psychos are gonna break laws. Think it's a good idea that someone that is well trained should carry. Hire these returning home military vets as undercover guards like a trustee. That would be good use of tax dollars spent.
  • #201
    !
    If these signs encourage criminals into schools then why aren't we statistically not in the media(the media picks and chooses you can't figure out how big a problem is by how often you see it in the media) seeing more violent crime in schools than other places. Statistically schools are safer than home or on the way home.
    http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/gun_violence/sect01...
    School gun violence is less than one in a million. Shall we assign an armed guard for every child to follow them home everyday? Shall we let the armed guard go into the home with the child?
    So, NO gun violence in schools isn't because of these signs, if it was you'd expect schools to be less safe than places that don't have the signs.
    People who go on shooting sprees in schools typically plan to die at the end, so they're not going to care if other people are armed. They won't care about a stupid sign either. Whether the signs are up or not is irrelevant. They should get rid of the signs just to save money from not having to buy signs.
    But that doesn't mean we should get rid of the zones. You don't need a sign for the commonsense assumption that guns aren't allowed in schools.
  • #195
    !
    The MSM hides the fact that blacks make up12% of the population but do half of the nation’s murders. If lowered to the same as white rates, the national per capita murder rate would drop by 40% and save a whole lot of black livesthey hid that we have 88 guns per 100 people, but 25 nations have higher murder rates. Honduras has only 6.6 guns per 100 people and have the highest murder rates in the worldThe Swiss have an “assault rifle” and ammo in every house, but they have one of the lowest murder rates in the worldthey hid the fact that our cities with the most gun control have the most gun violence.They hide the fact that our murder rates are intrinsically tied to our welfare populationThey hide the fact that more people were killed with knives last year, than with riflesThey hide the fact that every communist/socialist dictator in history has seen that guns were taken from citizens, but then they murdered millions of their own people (Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Castro…)They hid that Obama want to take guns, and that he declared his run for the senate seat in the house of a known terrorist that blew up bombs in our subways, and called for a communsit revolution that would murder millions of American capitalists (Bill Ayers).They hide the legit and real statements our founding fathers made about every citizen being the “militia” ,and that we own guns not for hunting and protection from burglars, but to stop a tyrannical government.
  • #191
    !
    If your house is on fire do you use gasoline to put it out?

    We have a gun problem in America. So, to solve that problem we want to add more guns? I fail to see, outside of creating a Wild West environment, how such a measure could be beneficial. Let's teach our children that violence begets violence and that to be safe they will always have to be under the protection of a gun or guard.
  • #188
    !
    The concept of a Gun Free zone means that they want law abiding people to not carry their guns in those areas. The reason we do not want them in those areas is because if some criminal or idiot did come into the zone with a gun and start threatening people then we don't want imbeciles that carry guns whipping out their gun and doing what these people do 99% of the time which is shoot innocent people or themselves and then when threatened by the criminal, they give over their gun to him which gives him more weapons. NRA members think that if they had a gun then they would be able to stop most crimes around them. What we find is clear but sadly the official data is not available because the NRA has consistently had their stooges in congress make it illegal for the ATF to release complete data on gun use in the United States. Why would they do that? Because if gun owners knew what carrying a gun actually does then they would all put their guns into a gun safe in their homes, find Wayne LaPierre and beat the man to death with their bare hands. Civilians have no business carrying concealed weapons in public, for every 5 a month that the NRA publishes of "heroes" using their guns to stop crime there are 3000 that resulted in an innocent person getting shot and the idiot carrying the gun going to jail for missing the criminal and hitting a 3 year old playing in a sandbox.
  • #171
    !
    The government running the school system has been a horrible concept from its inception, so allowing the government to protect my child while at school doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies.
  • #155
    !
    School employees should be encouraged to become proficient with guns and then allowed to carry concealed guns to school. Our current laws are incredibly stupid in that they promise safety to the one in a million who chooses to go to a gun free zone and murder with impunity.

    Too bad the press ignores all the cases where a legal gun holder stops crimes and saves lives.

    It would be much better if the citizenry were usually armed.
  • #154
    !
    Tone down the rhetoric and it still is rational. Most of the laws regarding 'gun free zones' should be rescinded, as they are purely an emotional response and do not actually accomplish anything useful.
  • R Load more comments...
Post