Things that should be implemented, and points to clear up the gun debate.

1. There is a difference between the uniformed armed security in inner-city schools and what actually needs to be done. A BIG one.

The armed security that needs to be implemented has to meet these requirements if we actually care about our kids.

1. Full psychiatric exams at regular intervals, and people around them actually CARING how they feel about their health (physical and mental) and personal life. These things can severely affect someones preparedness. Special treatment MUST be given here, I don't care what the stupid over worked American mind-set has to say about it.

2. Bare minimum 100 rounds 3 times a week at the range. They are around our children. I do not care about the cost. These are more important than air marshals.

3. A DECENT, but NOT overpayed, salary. Starting at a BARE MINIMUM of 50,000 (my opinion so what, I know the funds could be made available if the truly wealthy wished it to be so) a year and that is seriously low balling it. We do not want them in it for the money, but we do not want a lack of money to cause them to have personal problems that affect their judgment. Remember, they are both armed security and faculty for reasons in point 5. Not necessarily teachers, but faculty that performs some VERY easy task.

4. We must make sure they have a CARING attitude. This is important, because we want people who are very protective of children. These are the people we want that will not shoot without a extremely clear shot around kids and also will kill the shooter or die trying.

5. No one, even the regular teachers, can know who they are. They must blend in, and have a job that everyone recognizes as being legit. A job that takes no large amount of focus. Hall monitors maybe IDK about what the best job would be. Not teacher though. Most importantly, they must be in PLAIN CLOTHES and not a single student especially can know they are armed. They can know people are armed in the school fine but not which ones.

6. Their weapons must remain on their HIP at ALL times throughout the day, with a safe holster.

Bed time, maybe more later. Just thought this might clear it up.

The key thing is - you are talking about a TON of money for each school to get 5 of these guys and meet these requirements.

EDIT:
Something else to think about - it would stimulate the economy. Seriously. It is a win win. You would have a ton of job creation, not just the guards either. The psychiatric exams would generate a ton of jobs. These jobs would be putting back into the economy. Plus a group to regulate them... you get the point. There would be TONS of jobs generated. In the end it is win win. Short term there's a financial sacrifice.

Thoughts on how to accomplish this?

reply to post by NarrowGate


I'm %110 for it but... Not enough Americans can qualify to fill your criteria. We can't even get a full government t of people to care how do you suppose we find 100,000+ of these dream guards.

reply to post by marbles87


what criteria?

what are you talking about?

People who aren't crazy, care about kids, and are willing to dedicate to their protection? I know I qualify.

Can an American person explain to me where the funding for this extra security is going to come from when all that the political establishment is talking about is cuts to public spending, and objections to raising taxes?

reply to post by hotel1


Oh give me a freaking break. It is all a scheme. This would literally be a drop of water in the ocean compared to our debt and our spending.

This would literally cost a couple of jet fighters to implement across the nation. We build a couple a year that don't get used.

What about all the kickbacks politicians get?

Man I could make a list a page long of easy places to get the money. Like I already said. The money is the problem. There are those who could fund it without much cost to them - heck I would give up everything I own to implement it. To them, maybe 25% of what they own and that's just the bottom part of the 1%. No i can't back that up but come on you get the point.


The point is guess what - we are the fish they are the sharks. They don't really care when we get ate - heck that's how they live.... isn't that common knowledge yet? Earn it or die.

reply to post by NarrowGate

Way too many rules, too many regulations and way over thought.

The solution is simple.

End victim disarmament zones.

reply to post by gladtobehere


That is the mentality that will see this fail.

Sorry, you take shortcuts you cost lives. Need proof? Open a history book.

All you need is for 1 truly wealthy family to give up a large portion of that wealth, and our schools are safe for many years to come.

GL with That.

reply to post by marbles87


Someone could pass all those criteria and then be the person to shoot up the school. Think about this you would think that at least our cops would be trained to Atleast some of your requirements but the reality is most cops would fail your tests. You can't prove someone is sane or not. It's only after that person dies or snaps do you ever really get to know what they are capable of doing.

The end point is no matter what tests and training you give people statistics will always show there is a bad apple somewhere just waiting to screw things up.

reply to post by marbles87


People don't CARE that are around them every day. Overworked society does not understand this.

It is all - do your job your lazy blah blah. When someone loses an arm at a factory because people got negligent from this near slavery whats the deal? His fault for not...what sleeping enough in his 60 hour week? Yes I know someone that something *similar* to that happened to but it does happen like that sometimes.

So when people don't CARE about people's well being that work with them in high stress and armed environments hey guess what - it raises the chances of something going down.

The main part is people that they report to have to actually CARE.

This criteria is NOT all that hard to implement. NO not at all.

Originally posted by NarrowGate
reply to post by hotel1

 

Oh give me a freaking break. It is all a scheme. This would literally be a drop of water in the ocean compared to our debt and our spending.

This would literally cost a couple of jet fighters to implement across the nation. We build a couple a year that don't get used.

What about all the kickbacks politicians get?

Man I could make a list a page long of easy places to get the money. Like I already said. The money is the problem. There are those who could fund it without much cost to them - heck I would give up everything I own to implement it. To them, maybe 25% of what they own and that's just the bottom part of the 1%. No i can't back that up but come on you get the point.


The point is guess what - we are the fish they are the sharks. They don't really care when we get ate - heck that's how they live....

isn't that common knowledge yet? Earn it or die.

edit on 29-12-2012 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)

Implementation as you rightly point out is the initial cost, the ongoing expense would be the equivalent to the creation of an entire new federal government department.

reply to post by hotel1


The new organization would generate more jobs which would put back into the economy. Not to mention the endless other jobs that would be created to support such a program.

edit: not to mention, I already said where we could get the startup money. That money would last YEARS. like maybe a decade. A couple billion would probably be all. That is nothing compared to what we owe and what we spend every year.
Also, who said federal? The states could run it with federal money win win again!

Originally posted by NarrowGate
5. No one, even the regular teachers, can know who they are. They must blend in, and have a job that everyone recognizes as being legit. A job that takes no large amount of focus. Hall monitors maybe IDK about what the best job would be. Not teacher though. Most importantly, they must be in PLAIN CLOTHES and not a single student especially can know they are armed. They can know people are armed in the school fine but not which ones.

6. Their weapons must remain on their HIP at ALL times throughout the day, with a safe holster.EDIT:
Something else to think about - it would stimulate the economy. Seriously. It is a win win. You would have a ton of job creation, not just the guards either. The psychiatric exams would generate a ton of jobs. These jobs would be putting back into the economy. Plus a group to regulate them... you get the point. There would be TONS of jobs generated. In the end it is win win. Short term there's a financial sacrifice.

So they are carrying the gun on their hip at ALL times and no one will ever find out who they are? Maybe you need to rethink this.

EDIT:
Something else to think about - it would stimulate the economy. Seriously. It is a win win. You would have a ton of job creation, not just the guards either. The psychiatric exams would generate a ton of jobs. These jobs would be putting back into the economy.

If you think public jobs paid for by taxes stimulates the economy you are wrong. It would do the opposite. Increased taxes means less spending money, which means a weaker economy.

You really need to rethink this.

Just so we are clear, I am 100% in favor of armed guards. You just created a thread as if you had all the answers and were "in the know" on what needs to be done, and you clearly do not.

We already have something like this, Its called a Police Force!

Who exactly do you see as having oversight of this group?
Local Government?
State Government?
The Federal Government?
Just in case you missed something, None of these governing bodies are doing a very good job of anything!

Your idea is a knee-jerk response to a tragedy but completely unnecessary.

Our current level of technology could easily do this job without the need of psychological testing, More government intervention, or creating a new "force" of armed government agents in our schools!

Does the TSA ring any bells?

Originally posted by redbarron626
We already have something like this, Its called a Police Force!

Who exactly do you see as having oversight of this group?
Local Government?
State Government?
The Federal Government?
Just in case you missed something, None of these governing bodies are doing a very good job of anything!

Your idea is a knee-jerk response to a tragedy but completely unnecessary.

Our current level of technology could easily do this job without the need of psychological testing, More government intervention, or creating a new "force" of armed government agents in our schools!

Does the TSA ring any bells?

Is that why Obama's children go to a school with armed guards? Because it's not needed? Are you suggesting we station police in every school? If not, what is the response time for the police? How many children die before they get there? How many after?

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

Are you suggesting we station police in every school?

Absolutely! We already have police in 50% of the public schools nationwide it would take very little to implement every public school! The last thing we need is another government agency to do what our police departments are already set up to do.

Assigning police officers to schools

reply to post by redbarron626


Why do we need a government agency when they can simply hire a guard? No one is talking about creating new agencies.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


Why do we need a guard when we have the Police? Again, since you cannot read, who will have oversight? The schools? Think before you just slap out an answer!

JMHO take a few teachers from each school that are pyhsically and mentally fit for the job and give them the proper firearms training to handle these types of situation in the school.Teacher are there all day anyways so they could get a pay raise for there extra responsability rather then hiring dedicated armed security guards.I dont know about open carry though.Maybe a secure lock box to store the gun that the trained teachers have easy access to in case of emergency.Plus im pretty sure that teacher already have been subjected to extensive backgroud checks to become a teacher in the first place.

reply to post by marbles87


Not true. At least not entirely. The majority of the recent shootings were committed by people who were known to be suffering from a variety of mental illnesses, had received or were under treatment, and propensity for violence had been documented. Sure, there is always the possibility that an otherwise 'normal' individual suddenly suffers a psychotic break and 'snaps' but I'll bet you'd have no luck finding such a case.

Ridiculous and too costly school districts would not be able to afford it. Allow staff that wish to be armed and with a training course and problem solved. Criminals will chose "gun free zones" every time over randomly armed staff. This whole debate is nothing but political theater. Its a proven fact that armed society has dramatically lower crimes rates as LA and NY have some of the most restrictive gun laws yet highest crime rates when places like Vermont and Idaho have few or no gun laws and extremely low crime rates as with all counties that have allowed concealed carry crime rates dropped dramatically. Common sense has fled as the political theater ramps up the anti-gun ferver and these facts are ignored...