NRA wants armed guards in schools

page: 30
22
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by PrincessTofu
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I know it was one of the local farm workers, and no, there was no weapon at the scene.


You don't have to have a weapon to kill someone. Criminals have done some pretty horrific things with their bare hands. He could have taken a knife from the house, or strangled someone. The point is, you don't know what his intent was.




posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I hope you never have to shoot someone, also. I don't want shooting to be a first resort and I will be thinking positive thoughts about you and your family.

I wish the best for you. and everyone.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   
I'm not agree with NRA.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Just tell me, how does having armed guards in your schools differ in any way from the Orwellian nightmare you all fear when considering stricter gun-laws?



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 05:34 AM
link   
What happens when the armed guards go postal after getting annoyed by the kids they're supposed to be looking after?
Seems like LaPierre blamed everyone but the NRA.




Oh, and here's a question...

Q: How many members of the NRA does it take to change a light-bulb?










A: More guns.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by PrincessTofu
 


Well, I hope I don't, either! Hope you never have a need for a gun, that you don't have. I don't want to see anyone placed in such a situation, armed or not. Hope you can find some peace from the childhood stresses, too. Two, so close together, can't be easy to deal with. Good, civil debate, in any case. Take care!



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vidpci
There is an answer, but Americans refuse to listen to it. This answer was spelled out in the constitution. We live in a society that fears guns, but the intention of the second amendment was for we the people to literally be a standing army within our borders. This is why the Japanese turned back after Pearl Harbor - "a rifle behind every blade of grass". And this is why it has been and always will be impossible to invade America. The problem is, the people have been "really brainwashed into thinking about guns in a vastly different way". Need I spell it out more? The only way America falls is from within.

To your question, the point is, our society has been taught to literally give away their birth right. The teachers in this school should have been armed not because it was part of their job or training, but because, in the America our founders envisioned, they would have known that guns are a tool of protection. Creating "safe zones" where guns are restricted does absolutely nothing but create victims.

Every American should want to learn how to use a gun... because who else is going to protect you but yourself?


I agree with most of this. I only browsed this thread due to me being semi-irritated from recent profit generating events "taking place" in midst of all of this.

Scenario: Take guns away from everyone except say..swat and military. Borders are "Secure" > we get invaded > we start losing territory from areas of invasions > Americas will cry "we can't defend ourselves because we don't have guns in every house.

It's pretty shameful that cause of this recent incident although very very tragic, causes Americans to go to the extreme.

Always gotta have a catalyst, something..someone to blame. If another tragic event takes place which an unstable American Citizen commits a terrible crime using bow and arrows/katana/machete/make shift explosive involves elderly, children, infants...I'm sure there will be outcry for "removal of said objects! no- one is allowed to have it!"

Yet we have alcohol. Kills people every year, month, week, and every damn day even...kids and people of all ages become victims, but alcohol is still here "we" aren't even really mad at it. But ohhh Alcohol isn't a weapon, it isn't able to injure people as guns do. Fact is. it's still dangerous and it kills, it infects, it injures...it can be used as a weapon...explosive as well.

but whatever i'm over it.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


the NRA is right....

www.reuters.com

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, chief executive of the National Rifle Association, noting that banks and airports are patrolled by armed guards, while schools typically are not


LaPierre is not saying 'good guy with gun' meaning the general public.... he is saying 'good guy with gun' in the way that trained guards are gun toting good guys...
plenty of non relevent posts in this thread dealing with the public toting guns.... sheeze



also lets get the school campus area secure or gated ...with a squad of TSA security personnel to frisk anyone buzzing on to the campus during hours when students/children are present,

homeland security was created for a reason after 911... but DHS is not doing its job to any degree of competence
a job to keep terrorists at bay and unable to wreak destruction/terror on the Homeland public.


now, ferreting out mentally deranged perps is a difficult task... making it easy for a potential mass murderer to commit theur criminal action is not so hard.
to wit: this possible motive for what Adam Lanza did to his moms friends & cherished kindergardeners in an act of defiance & rage at his mom for trying to institutionalize him in a psych ward

see: www.huffingtonpost.com...

there is a video along with the text on the page
edit on 22-12-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-12-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


actually i did work in a gun range so i know the laws, my point being is how many massacres has america had compaired to australia? our last was in the 1980's, port arthur massacre, when was americas last? oh, last week. and i dont see how the swiss mandatory gun law helps.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by MindFever
Just tell me, how does having armed guards in your schools differ in any way from the Orwellian nightmare you all fear when considering stricter gun-laws?

I like where your going with this...If they make it a law then its another law on Gun control..
If they just leave our personal individual rights to eat what we want,own a gun or not,carry a gun or not.
there will be more guns in the schools.
Hey they tell you have to wear a seat belt saves lives...another individual right.
Your on the right track.
yes to your answer.

"Merry Christmas" sorry if it offends someone when i say "Merry Christmas" ive been in stores where you can get fired for saying "Merry Christmas".another Individual right.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinabean

Originally posted by Vidpci
There is an answer, but Americans refuse to listen to it. This answer was spelled out in the constitution. We live in a society that fears guns, but the intention of the second amendment was for we the people to literally be a standing army within our borders. This is why the Japanese turned back after Pearl Harbor - "a rifle behind every blade of grass". And this is why it has been and always will be impossible to invade America. The problem is, the people have been "really brainwashed into thinking about guns in a vastly different way". Need I spell it out more? The only way America falls is from within.

To your question, the point is, our society has been taught to literally give away their birth right. The teachers in this school should have been armed not because it was part of their job or training, but because, in the America our founders envisioned, they would have known that guns are a tool of protection. Creating "safe zones" where guns are restricted does absolutely nothing but create victims.

Every American should want to learn how to use a gun... because who else is going to protect you but yourself?


I agree with most of this. I only browsed this thread due to me being semi-irritated from recent profit generating events "taking place" in midst of all of this.

Scenario: Take guns away from everyone except say..swat and military. Borders are "Secure" > we get invaded > we start losing territory from areas of invasions > Americas will cry "we can't defend ourselves because we don't have guns in every house.

It's pretty shameful that cause of this recent incident although very very tragic, causes Americans to go to the extreme.

Always gotta have a catalyst, something..someone to blame. If another tragic event takes place which an unstable American Citizen commits a terrible crime using bow and arrows/katana/machete/make shift explosive involves elderly, children, infants...I'm sure there will be outcry for "removal of said objects! no- one is allowed to have it!"

Yet we have alcohol. Kills people every year, month, week, and every damn day even...kids and people of all ages become victims, but alcohol is still here "we" aren't even really mad at it. But ohhh Alcohol isn't a weapon, it isn't able to injure people as guns do. Fact is. it's still dangerous and it kills, it infects, it injures...it can be used as a weapon...explosive as well.

but whatever i'm over it.



Your a idoit. If your country invaded then Im sure your govermnet would arm you like the UK did in world war two and form you into effective organised militias!

UK has never had a armed citzenry and guess what we havent been succefully invaded since 1066 AD.

Use comman sense in this day and age a man with a gun wont beat a Apache helecopter or a organised regular army. Unless you are in a orgnaised irregular millitia. Even in Afghanstan its not one man with a gun there organsied irregular guerrila cells. This isnt red dawn, get some brain cells.
edit on 22-12-2012 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Haven't we had enough preventive laws and regulation of our rights? I think we have.
Help others defend their natural human rights, even when none of yours are at risk.
It's just a matter of time before government turns its focus on you.
It's then you'll need others to return the favor and support the rights that you hold dear.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by MindFever
Just tell me, how does having armed guards in your schools differ in any way from the Orwellian nightmare you all fear when considering stricter gun-laws?


It doesn't, but people feel the need to beg for safety and the freedom from fear. It was one of the pillars of FDR's presidency. Unfortunately liberty is not safe, nor is it always calm and peaceful.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Our public schools are just another example of the misuse of the term "public." Are they owned by the public, like a publicly held corporation? No, they're paid for by the public, but controlled by the government. The government even passes laws that require children to attend school, and tax the property of you and your neighbors to pay for schools that children are required to attend (even if you have no children).

What is public policy in this regard? It's establishment of government schools disguised as a "public school system."

Are these "public" schools open to the public like a sidewalk?
No, just try walking across the school grounds or using the ball field during school hours. Can you carry a deadly weapon for self defense (or defense of your child) on school property? No, but a government employee like a police officer can.
In fact, most states that allowed concealed carry of deadly weapons (for legal purposes) specifically exclude such means of self defense in school buildings and on school grounds.
Are these special rules for public places? No, they're special rules for government controlled spaces like our government schools.

So, our "public" schools really aren't public at all. They're government schools operated by government employees, using government approved teaching materials, and controlled by government officials.
We dont need anymore Gun Laws..
We need to ask for our individual rights back not what the NRA or Obama or any preacher wants.



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
And what happens when the "Good Guy" with the gun is the first to go? Ridiculous Stupidity


Plus are these Armed Guards?... Omnipresent?


Gun Crazed Madness ... No better than a junky on crack

edit on 22-12-2012 by DreamerOracle because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Most of these types of killings are by people who lose the plot go crazy have easy access to guns at home pick a target school,office, cinema etc.

Now lets go with the NRA suggestion and have armed guards, what if MR Armed Guard goes crazy



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Bad idea.
The last thing parent would want is MORE guns around their children.

Where does it even stop?

Armed guards in the libraries.
Armed guards on the playgrounds.
Armed guards at the toy stores.
Armed guards at the prom.
Armed guards at graduation.
Armed guards on field trips.

Very paranoid and dystopian response that helps foster a belief that we should all feel unsafe in just about anything and everything we do. I can't imagine the level of anxiety our children would grow up with.

- Lee



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
What if the security guard had a bad day and a student over reacts and the security guard pops a bullet in his head?

What if the security guard is on drugs or looses his mind?

Why not arm them with guns that use rubber bullets, arm them with pepper spray, and stun guns? It's a whole lot more safer and trustworthy than a gun with real clips
edit on 22-12-2012 by Kuroodo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by lee anoma
 



That kinda sounds like a mini version of Martial Law and or Police State



posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Thirty pages and no one mentioned that there was armed security at Columbine. That worked well, didn't it.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join