School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards, page 1

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 32 times

Topic started on 25-12-2012 @ 12:14 AM by Asktheanimals

But you know, it's not just the school the Obama's daughters attend that has armed guards - many Congressmen, business leaders and just rich people send the kids to these schools because they're safe. Do you not see the hypocrisy that their kids are more valuable than yours? Don't let anyone tell you that armed guards cannot keep a school safe. They don't even have to be openly armed and look like stormtroopers.
We're all entitled to safe schools, if it takes armed guards to keep their kids safe ours are worth it just as much.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak. If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point. The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, perio

www.breitbart.com...

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:17 AM by Hawking

People with money send their kids to private schools with more resources. Our politicians have a lot of money

I thought demanding the same for the poor that the rich have was supposed to be socialism

Are we supposed to pay higher taxes for poor kids to be protected in school but not for them to have healthcare? Guess we'll just protect them from guns and not disease

edit on 25-12-2012 by Hawking because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:24 AM by Thurisaz

reply to post by Asktheanimals

some of the private schools in AU have armed security already. The one in Melbourne that my Son used to attend had boom gates, intercom etc, I was like, yep that is the school I want him to go to.

Sometimes I think people value money more than life cos armed security protects banks etc and people don't have a problem with it. If I go shopping, there is always security guards around the shopping centres.

stuff the money, look after the kids...and it should not be a matter of who can afford it, yanno like private wealthy schools get better security...that is BS... children's safety should apply in all schools, whether public or private!

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:26 AM by sonnny1

Typical.

Those in Control, wanting more gun control, have private armies protecting them, and their families.

"I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry." ~ Obama

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations." `Obama

I wonder if these "Guards" carry openly?

S&F

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:29 AM by goou111

reply to post by Asktheanimals

well his kids kinda have to be protected to the fullest.. if i was potus there would be 50 armed guards there

edit on 25-12-2012 by goou111 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:36 AM by hawkiye

This is all a red herring. We don't need armed guards in schools we need freedom and to get rid of the communists who have taken over the government. I used to go to school with a rifle in the window of my truck there were no school shootings in those days. Many schools had shooting teams and boxing teams too... The communist nanny state propaganda has ruined this great nation!

All this argument is BS freedom is always the answer not restrictions and regulations! Freedom to self defense and self determination!

edit on 25-12-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 12:58 AM by Timing

Which I'm sure was a deciding factor in them choosing that school.

I'm not sure about the rest of you all, but if I had kids I'd feel they are just as important as the presidents kids and deserve the same amount protection, with all things needing to be "fair" and "equal" and for the children and all that feel good stuff.

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:02 AM by bknapple32

I went to one of those schools. Called Landon in Bethesda MD. The reason there are armed guards is because children of politicians and what not are kidnapper targets. The people of influence can be in quite a pickle if someone kidnapped their kid at school. Its really a national security issue.

Not a class issue, a national security issue

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:10 AM by DarKPenguiN

We have Liaison officers at our public schools (and yes, they are armed). Personally its a good idea and all schools should have this.

I am not too keen on Private Security though and think every public School should have at least 1 liaison officer. I think this is where things are heading everywhere and its sad but necessary.

-When I went to school we didnt have need of anything like this- Even "fights" were never brutal and never ended in "criminal" charges- That is my problem with Private Security, they will call the Police for everything and potentially tie your child up in Court over something minor. Liasion officers (at least in my city) do their best to avoid actual arrests and actually get to know the kids and often earn their trust by not being so totalitarian.

-Its still sad. if we had anything like this at my school I would have had a criminal record a mile long just for smoking cigarettes lol... Its a changed world .

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:11 AM by sconner755

reply to post by bknapple32

So then it stands to reason that anybody who has a job that could affect national security, like a computer programmer for the Air Force, should have their children protected by armed guards too.

But then the children of garbage collectors shouldn't need armed guards to protect their kids. Some kids are worth protecting, some aren't.

I bet every parent thinks their own kids are worth protecting though.

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:11 AM by Timing

reply to post by bknapple32

But as we have seen play out in the national media time and time again, children have been chosen as targets for senseless violence.

Are you trying to argue the fact that a politicians kids life is more important than Joe Six Packs and Suzy Homemaker's kids down the street?

Beyond that how many politicians kids have been victims of kidnapping plots while attending school with these security measures in place?

So that level of security works. Shouldn't all kids feel just as safe at their school?

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:13 AM by DarKPenguiN

Originally posted by sconner755
reply to post by bknapple32

So then it stands to reason that anybody who has a job that could affect national security, like a computer programmer for the Air Force, should have their children protected by armed guards too.

But then the children of garbage collectors shouldn't need armed guards to protect their kids. Some kids are worth protecting, some aren't.

I bet every parent thinks their own kids are worth protecting though.

I cannot understand how you fail to see the difference. There is one and it has nothing to do with "worth" of the individual but the potential catastrophe to the nation. Any president and their families need security 24/7 as they are often not well liked lol and have access to all the dark secrets-

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:14 AM by bknapple32

Originally posted by sconner755
reply to post by bknapple32

So then it stands to reason that anybody who has a job that could affect national security, like a computer programmer for the Air Force, should have their children protected by armed guards too.

But then the children of garbage collectors shouldn't need armed guards to protect their kids. Some kids are worth protecting, some aren't.

I bet every parent thinks their own kids are worth protecting though.

Of course every kid is worth protecting. Im not saying otherwise. But even those examples you gave.. arent public figures....

Thats the difference on the national security issue

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:15 AM by bknapple32

Originally posted by Timing
reply to post by bknapple32

But as we have seen play out in the national media time and time again, children have been chosen as targets for senseless violence.

Are you trying to argue the fact that a politicians kids life is more important than Joe Six Packs and Suzy Homemaker's kids down the street?

Beyond that how many politicians kids have been victims of kidnapping plots while attending school with these security measures in place?

So that level of security works. Shouldn't all kids feel just as safe at their school?

Jeeze, some of you people jump to too many conclusions.. I NEVER SAID THAT. see my above post for the obvious point im making

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:20 AM by sonnny1

Originally posted by bknapple32

Not a class issue, a national security issue

I thought ALL children in America warrant the same kind of Protection?

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:22 AM by Timing

reply to post by bknapple32

I get what your saying about National Security, but at the same time without checking the statistics and just assuming, the success rate of having armed guards in schools protects and prevents kidnappings and other events that could be a threat to national security is high enough for politicians and the like for them to keep paying for their children to attend those schools.

The point I'm trying to make is, the policy works. So what is the big deal about having an armed resource officer in every school?

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:22 AM by bknapple32

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by bknapple32

Not a class issue, a national security issue

I thought ALL children in America warrant the same kind of Protection?

Oh sonny, see my above post.... Im not saying they dont. But public figures whose kids being kidnapped ARE national security issues. Hence the extra security. Thats all im saying .Im explaining the status quo

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:24 AM by sonnny1

Originally posted by bknapple32

Jeeze, some of you people jump to too many conclusions.. I NEVER SAID THAT. see my above post for the obvious point im making

The point is "we the people" don't have the same "protection" given to our children, all the while these people that "serve" the American public hypocritically try and take those same rights away from us. Would you agree?

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:24 AM by bknapple32

Originally posted by Timing
reply to post by bknapple32

I get what your saying about National Security, but at the same time without checking the statistics and just assuming, the success rate of having armed guards in schools protects and prevents kidnappings and other events that could be a threat to national security is high enough for politicians and the like for them to keep paying for their children to attend those schools.

The point I'm trying to make is, the policy works. So what is the big deal about having an armed resource officer in every school?

Well one thing clear, they arent sending them there because of security guards. They are sending them there because those schools are feeder schools to top level universities. They are college prep schools. The level of education there is higher than your average public school. Class size is like 10 students to 1 teacher. There's jsut more money invested in the school itself. Hence the budgets for armed gaurds

reply posted on 25-12-2012 @ 01:25 AM by svmpua

Nobody gives a s*** if its a national security issue.

Obama is not only one who deserves special attention.What on earth makes you think that our children are less important than his? THis is your country.You are paying the taxes .Therefore you are the one who should be treated equally. What makes you people think that your children are safe anyway. Is 1 guard per school too hard for him .

Barack 'Hussein' Obama is even more dangerous and evil than Bush IMHO.

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^