Quantcast

Friday, July 25, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 59 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

NRA calls for armed guards in every school

By Nedra Pickler and Philip Elliot

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 10:52 a.m. HST, Dec 21, 2012


WASHINGTON » Guns and police officers in all American schools are what's needed to stop the next killer "waiting in the wings," the National Rifle Association declared today, taking a no-retreat stance in the face of growing calls for gun control after the Connecticut shootings that claimed the lives of 26 children and school staff.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, the group's chief executive officer.

Some members of Congress who had long scoffed at gun-control proposals have begun to suggest some concessions could be made, and a fierce debate over legislation seems likely next month. President Barack Obama has demanded "real action, right now."

The nation's largest gun-rights lobby broke its weeklong silence on the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School with a defiant presentation. The event was billed as a news conference, but NRA leaders took no questions. Twice, they were interrupted by banner-waving protesters, who were removed by security.

Some had predicted that after the slaughter of a score of elementary-school children by a man using a semi-automatic rifle, the group might soften its stance, at least slightly. Instead, LaPierre delivered a 25-minute tirade against the notion that another gun law would stop killings in a culture where children are exposed daily to violence in video games, movies and music videos. He argued that guns are the solution, not the problem.

"Before Congress reconvenes, before we engage in any lengthy debate over legislation, regulation or anything else; as soon as our kids return to school after the holiday break, we need to have every single school in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work," LaPierre said. "And by that I mean armed security."

He said Congress should immediately appropriate funds to post an armed police officer in every school. Meanwhile, he said the NRA would develop a school emergency response program that would include volunteers from the group's 4.3 million members to help guard children.

His armed-officers idea was immediately lambasted by gun control advocates, and not even the NRA's point man on the effort seemed willing to go so far. Former Republican Rep. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, whom LaPierre named national director of the program, said in an interview that decisions about armed guards in schools should be made by local districts.

"I think everyone recognizes that an armed presence in schools is sometimes appropriate," Hutchinson said. "That is one option. I would never want to have a mandatory requirement for every school district to have that."

He also noted that some states would have to change their laws to allow armed guards at schools.

Hutchinson said he'll offer a plan in January that will consider other measures such as biometric entry points, patrols and consideration of school layouts to protect security.

LaPierre argued that guards need to be in place quickly because "the next Adam Lanza," the suspected shooter in Newtown, Conn., is already planning an attack on another school.

"How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame from a national media machine that rewards them with wall-to-wall attention and a sense of identity that they crave, while provoking others to try to make their mark?" LaPierre asked. "A dozen more killers, a hundred more? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation's refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?"

While there is a federally maintained database of the mentally ill — people so declared by their states — a 1997 Supreme Court ruling that states can't be required to contribute information has left significant gaps. In any case, creation of a mandatory national database probably would have had little impact on the ability of suspected shooters in four mass shootings since 2011 to get and use powerful weapons. The other people accused either stole the weapons used in the attacks or had not been ruled by courts to be "mentally defective" before the shootings.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the NRA is blaming everyone but itself for a national gun crisis and is offering "a paranoid, dystopian vision of a more dangerous and violent America where everyone is armed and no place is safe."

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., called the NRA's response "both ludicrous and insulting" and pointed out that armed personnel at Columbine High School and Fort Hood could not stop mass shootings. The liberal group CREDO, which organized an anti-NRA protest on Capitol Hill, called LaPierre's speech "bizarre and quite frankly paranoid."

"This must be a wake-up call even to the NRA's own members that the NRA's Washington lobbyists need to stand down and let Congress pass sensible gun control laws now," CREDO political director Becky Bond said in a statement.

The NRA's proposal would be unworkable given the huge numbers of officers needed, said the president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Craig Steckler.

He pointed to budget cuts and hiring freezes and noted that in his hometown of Fremont, Calif., it would take half the city's police force to post one officer at each of the city's 43 schools.

The Department of Education has counted 98,817 public schools in the United States and an additional 33,366 private schools.

Gun rights advocates on Capitol Hill had no immediate comment. They will have to walk a tough road between pressure from the powerful NRA, backed by an army of passionate supporters, and outrage over the Sandy Hook deaths that has already swayed some in Congress to adjust their public views.

A CNN/ORC poll taken this week found 52 percent of Americans favor major restrictions on guns or making all guns illegal. Forty-six percent of people questioned said government and society can take action to prevent future gun violence, up 13 percentage points from two years ago in the wake of the shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that killed six and wounded then Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

Since the Connecticut slayings, President Obama has demanded action against U.S. gun violence and has called on the NRA to join the effort. Moving quickly after several congressional gun-rights supporters said they would consider new legislation to control firearms, the president said this week he wants proposals that he can take to Congress next month.

Obama has already asked Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would stop people from purchasing firearms from private sellers without background checks. Obama also has indicated he wants Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity firearms magazines.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said former President Bill Clinton called her with an offer to help get an assault weapons ban reinstated. Clinton signed such a ban into law in 1994, but it expired after 10 years.

Feinstein said she's not opposed to having armed guards at schools, but she called the NRA proposal a distraction from what she said was the real problem: "easy access to these killing machines" that are far "more powerful and lethal" than the guns that were banned under the old law.

Associated Press writers Andrew DeMillo in Little Rock, Ark., and Alicia A. Caldwell in Washington contributed to this report.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 59 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(59)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Kaluu wrote:
No big argument about proliferation of violent media content for children because I don't really know. BUT I do question that as reason for apolitical mass murder. When I was one keiki, we read tons of comics about the heroics of shooting people, we went to Mickey Mouse Club every Saturday morning to watch the good guys shoot the bad guys, the older boys going off to war were huge heroes in our eyes, and we ran all over the neighborhood constantly, playing, "Bang! You make!" No, it's not consumption of tales about gun heroics that has changed, I strongly suspect. I wish a think tank of extremely bright and learned professionals would work on figuring out what's going on. There seems to be a terror component, since killing children is so extremely shocking, and it seems obvious that rage is also involved. It's also conceivable that sociopathy and perverted thrill killing might be a factor. But why the upsurge?
on December 21,2012 | 07:33AM
hokumakakilo wrote:
Prior to the 1970s we had more guns, more access to guns, and no mass murder sprees like we have today. There was only the TCU tower shooting where the guy was mentally ill. What changed? The courts decided the mentally ill have the right to refuse treatment and in the 1960s all the institutions kicked the mental patients out the door. Now we have a massive problem with mentally ill street people, and more and more crazed violence, which includes the shooting sprees. All the suspects that did these shootings have "mental issues." Don't blame guns, video games, movies. Blame the ACLU who refuse to let us mandate treatment for the mentally ill, and refuse to allow us to have a database kept of mental patients so the existing gun laws can work!
on December 21,2012 | 08:18AM
punawaione wrote:
its UT austin and not TCU, get your facts straight.
on December 21,2012 | 10:43AM
DABLACK wrote:
The government has data of gun sales/registers but none on individuals with mental issues ??
on December 21,2012 | 07:45AM
entrkn wrote:
4.3 million nra members trying to dictate to 300 million citizens?... sometimes it seems that the tail wags the dog but in this case it is that part between the dog and his tail that is trying to do all the wagging.
on December 21,2012 | 07:48AM
allie wrote:
Will NRA pay for the extra security for every school in America. What a ridiculous group.
on December 21,2012 | 09:27AM
kainalu wrote:
They came up with the brilliant idea, so they should fund the program. Make the gun manufacturer, the gun retailer, and the gun buyer fund the "armed cops in every school" program. So what if a pistol costs as much as a SUV - right? And don't stop at schools, armed cops at every Post Office, shopping mall, movie theater - wherever SENSELESS gun-violence is perpetrated. Of course, that will essentially turn us into a police state - but that's not part of this argument, is it?
on December 21,2012 | 10:35AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 07:52AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
For people like tiki who whine about "tax" and unions, who gonna pay all these armed guards? Not the NRA. Don't universities on the mainland have arm guards? Did they stop Virginia massacre? No.we need to look at the opposite side of this vicious spectrum. And that's taking guns out of the equation.
on December 21,2012 | 08:04AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 08:16AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
What a laught. Timothy McVey was a retired soldier. You have PSTD rampid in the ranks. Then there's liability problems. They better off volunteering unarmed.
on December 21,2012 | 02:07PM
sjean wrote:
Yes, and no soldiers or first responders ever suffer from PTSD. genius.
on December 21,2012 | 06:22PM
Ronin006 wrote:
Ok, tiki888, you support armed guards at schools 100%. That may give you and like minded people a sense of security for our children, so explain how it would work. Consider that Hawaii school campuses are large, school buildings have many entrances and many schools have two floors. How many armed guards do you think will be needed per school? Guards cannot be everywhere at the same time, so where you position them to protect kids? I suppose schools can be completed surrounded with ten-feet high chain-link fences topped with barbed wire with one entrance only with metal detectors monitored by armed guards through which everyone must pass, but that would not stop someone intent on getting in to do kids harm. All they would need is a bolt cutter to cut through the fence behind the school and out of sight of the armed guards. Yes, armed guards can protect school kids, but you would need almost as many guards as faculty members to do it. From where will the money come to do it? The push for armed guards at schools is a knee-jerk reaction to a horrible incident. The idea needs to be rethought.
on December 21,2012 | 09:57AM
hawaiikone wrote:
And your solution?
on December 21,2012 | 08:48PM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 07:53AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
What next, churches? Nurseries? Pre-school? These republicans cry and whine about the socialist government becoming a "police " state, now they try to expedite the process. Lol.
on December 21,2012 | 08:08AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 08:18AM
control wrote:
convenient myth...keep repeating it over and over and over
on December 21,2012 | 08:42AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
What happens when you put arm guards in badass schools? Yes the guards will be using the old "Stand Your Ground" excuse. More children will be shot by the guards. Who will regulate the guards. Homeland Security? Bigger government?huh? All the good stuff the right complain about. Let's see, no money for busing, oh yeah, let's use that monies for guards. No money for teachers, supplies, maybe we can use that money. Let's see, I got it! Use the military!
on December 21,2012 | 08:15AM
hawaiikone wrote:
Why do you insist on extremes to make an argument? Simply not allowing any weapons in school doesn't lead to guards shooting down kids without a hall pass. So far I've never read about any wild TSA guards blowing away unruly travelers. You suggest getting rid of guns, which to follow the logic would prevent a mass murder. First, if you could eliminate guns, which is a pipe dream, what about explosives, vehicles, knives, bats, fists, poisons, and a myriad of other methods left available? Evil is what it is, and left uncheckable, will continue to do it's thing. Cost? You put gas, grumbling about the cost yet without hesitation, because it's a necessity. I submit our children are more valuable than gasoline.
on December 21,2012 | 09:15AM
control wrote:
So, who is going to foot the bill for this? The NRA? Protecting our kids? I don't think so - just their chronies out to make money off of american tax payers. And how safe would a school as large as McKinley be with just one officer? Homeland security has spent billions of tax payer dollars after 9/11. Are we really any safer than before? No, just hasseling travelers at every turn and big bucks to home land security contractors.
on December 21,2012 | 08:41AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 08:46AM
WEATHER wrote:
And outlaw assault weapons.
on December 21,2012 | 09:03AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 10:55AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Never was a .223 semi automatic assault rifle when the amendment was crafted. Just single shot muzzle load. Hey we can go for that!
on December 21,2012 | 02:11PM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 03:40PM
sjean wrote:
I didn't know W was a commie. Typical red scare, only you are 50 years late. Remember, all guns used in every recent mass murder were initially bought through legal means.
on December 21,2012 | 06:26PM
hawaiikone wrote:
"Remember, all guns used in every recent mass murder were initially bought through legal means.". So?
on December 21,2012 | 07:11PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Boss, the citizen was armed the same way any foreign soldier was, for a reason. Parity in firepower. Your musket stuff is silly. But silly seems to be the order of the day.
on December 21,2012 | 07:09PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Yes, so arm our soldiers with parity. Oh wait they do have assault rifles, that they turn in everyday while based here in America.
on December 21,2012 | 08:23PM
hawaiikone wrote:
What has the armament of our soldiers have to do with the subject at hand? My comment was in response to your implication regarding our founders.
on December 21,2012 | 09:04PM
honopic wrote:
Typical NRA reaction to another gun tragedy. Advocate for more guns, not fewer. The NRA does not represent gun owners, hunters or sportsmen. The NRA represents gun manufacturers and suppliers. If they had their way, instead of 9 guns for every 10 Americans, they would have 20. There's a reason they disappeared from view after the Sandy Hook massacre. They were trying desperately to come up with the right spin before responding. This is the best they could come up with -- armed guards at every school? What sense does that make, when they are the ones putting the guns in the hands of the shooters? What purpose will that serve? Only one -- to sell even more guns!
on December 21,2012 | 09:07AM
bpet wrote:
I guess it is true . . .there really is no cure for stupid . . . what a great challenge for someone who wants to go out in a blaze of glory, . . I am not a citizen of the United States, but it is my understanding that the Second Amendment does not state . . ."the right to bear arms for any indiscriminate reason", but the . . ."right to bear arms against the government if . . ." Am I mistaken?
on December 21,2012 | 09:23AM
honopic wrote:
Why was my post removed? Because I told the truth that the NRA represents gun manufacturers and suppliers, not hunters or sportsmen? It was added, then removed within a space of a hal-hour. Why the censorship, Star-Advertiser?
on December 21,2012 | 09:55AM
honopic wrote:
That's what I thought would happen. "Sent for approval" equals CENSORSHIP.
on December 21,2012 | 09:56AM
daniwitz13 wrote:
When a group that is for guns want a solution that involves more guns, one should think twice about it. The cost for one would be prohibitive. The City would NOT have the manpower for it and a huge waste and loss of manpower to stand around waiting for something to happen. This is NOT a solution but an aggregation to the problem. I see two choices for this position. To take the job standing around doing NOTHING for months on end and taking the job with a bull's eye printed on my back. How hard would it be to sit in one's car,aim a rifle at the standing guard and shoot him first, then everyone else after that. My solution is to have a designated shooter (with a rifle) one of the administration, in school or any establishment unknown to most (except a few) to take action and take out the killer. He would have the advantage knowing where the killer is but unknown by the killer. With his rifle, take out the killer. A rifle does NOT have to be paid year in and year out and only used when needed. Pity.
on December 21,2012 | 10:11AM
livinginhawaii wrote:
This is a good idea. One of Hawaii's private schools already has armed guards - their security is supplemented by part time sheriffs and HPD. There are many in both departments who would prefer this type of work over guarding nightclubs and road construction.
on December 21,2012 | 11:01AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Livinghawaii, you going pay for the HPD, sheriff? Let's see, 2 guards, $30. An hour, 8 hrs a day, 120 schools.......that only comes out to $36,000 a day, $720,000 a month, 7 million a year. Oh that's just for Hawaii.
on December 21,2012 | 02:16PM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Your numbers are way off - please learn how to multiply before posting your mistakes. Are you not embarrassed? Its also clear that you failed to take into account the DOE's existing budgeted amount for security, the cost for psychological testing existing security personnel, the cost of employing retirees at lower wages, or the cost of non OT employment - you also do not know the starting hourly wage of HPD and Sherriff personnel.
on December 21,2012 | 03:14PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Livinginfantasy, let's see, national news reported 7 billion a year! I know the hourly special duty rate is $30. The DOE existing security budget? Lol....nada close to 7 mil. Why would a retiree take a lower wage?? I say tax bullets and guns, yearly.
on December 21,2012 | 08:28PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Didn't know our kids had a price you're not willing to pay.
on December 21,2012 | 07:14PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Don't go there hawaiikone, you and the other republicans are the first to bit@h about " my taxes".
on December 21,2012 | 08:30PM
serious wrote:
Let's sit back and think about this for a moment! Obamacare is right for the masses, but the Federal legislatures and families have their own health care plan, Social Security is righ for the masses but the Federal legislators have their own retirement system, the President, his whole family has secret service protection as does all the ex-presidents and their families, the VP, the Speaker, the Senior Senator all have the same protection--ALL OF THE ABOVE PAID BY --the masses!!!! Isn't there something wrong with this picture? So why not have some sort of security protection in our schools? Paid for by the masses--that's taxpayers!! The 53% that pay!!!
on December 21,2012 | 11:17AM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 11:35AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
And you own a gun?? Can't control a software but you own a lethal killing device?
on December 21,2012 | 08:33PM
UhhDuhh wrote:
Guard all schools huh? Should we have one guard per 30 students or two? Can they guarantee the armed guards will not snap themselves? What if an assailant kills the guards before school opens- do we have backup guards? Do we blame the guards for being killed or should the guards have other guards protecting them? Who will guard the school when the guard goes on lunch break or takes a nap in the utility room? Do the guards need assault rifles or should they have bazookas to counter any assault rifles used against them? Is it NRA or TALIBAN? So many questions. C'mon, its not about the children- its about money and control for the NRA. Protecting all of our schools with armed guards = more gun sales = more profits for the gun manufacturers = more financial support for the NRA = more lobby money for their "chosen" politicians=more power for the NRA. A crazy person with an assault rifle is a mass murderer but a crazy person without an assault rifle is just...........crazy.
on December 21,2012 | 11:34AM
Bothrops wrote:
132,000 schools in U.S. (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84). School days typically can run 6AM to 8 PM so two officers needed at least per position (assume no vacation or sickness), so about 250,000 school guards needed 461,000 sworn officers in the U.S.. About half of local police departments employ fewer than 10 sworn personnel. Overall, local police operating costs for fiscal year 2007 were $116,500 per sworn officer (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=71) That's about $29 billion dollars to protect all our schools, at a time when we are cutting school budgets for actual education (the reason the kids are in schools). So volunteers? Being a peace officer (cop) requires training. Just being a "retired military, police and train security personnel . . . still certified to carry a weapon" doesn't qualify you to make split second life and death decisions in an environment swarming with six year olds. Confronting an intruder armed and dressed like Rambo, it's pretty easy, but are you going to shoot every young man with a budge in his fatigues? Really? Or you going to let them past and see what happens? What happens is that there are 1,116, 967 licensed attorneys in the US (8.4 per school). You and the school district will need more than guns to protect you if you guess wrong. And you will, because you don't receive continuing professional training (and even then lots of cops make mistakes). The NRA suggestion is simply fatuous flatulence. America has a problem with school shootings, we need to solve the problem. The NRA needs to lead, follow or get out of the way.
on December 21,2012 | 12:22PM
loquaciousone wrote:
I once had a NRA membership but I cancelled it when I realize that I was standing shoulder to shoulder with too many lunatics. The NRA stands for NO REASON AT ALL. Now they want to have running gun battles at schools with little kids caught in the middle.
on December 21,2012 | 12:33PM
zoomzoom65 wrote:
giddy up, cowboys. How stupid can NRA be? Stupid is as stupid does. Yes, lets have more guns all over the place and have a shoot out.
on December 21,2012 | 01:22PM
RichardCory wrote:
Seriously, it's like this is Twilight Zone episode.
on December 21,2012 | 02:56PM
coldtoo wrote:
dumb ban assault weapons max of 5 shots per gun
on December 21,2012 | 01:45PM
hawaiikone wrote:
So you want to ban all six shooters too. It just gets stupider and stupider.
on December 21,2012 | 07:16PM
alohacharlie wrote:
How can we un-elect those congresspersons who vote against gun control? Do the congresspersons who support and/or belong to the NRA and vote against any gun control, take any contributions from the NRA? How about someone researching that and then publicizing the list so those of us who so chose can vote them out of office.
on December 21,2012 | 03:13PM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 03:40PM
ethann81 wrote:
Just shut up and go clean ur guns,dumb howlee.
on December 21,2012 | 07:06PM
tiki886 wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on December 21,2012 | 10:19PM
ethann81 wrote:
racist England or Jewish origin? Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black. You silly child.
on December 21,2012 | 11:09PM
Changalang wrote:
I wonder if the parents of the slaughtered children wish that the principal that rushed the gunman empty handed and perished was range qualified as a pistol marksman and packing as part of her job description?
on December 21,2012 | 05:07PM
Changalang wrote:
Wonder if the principal's mourning surviving family wishes she has armed at the time as well.
on December 21,2012 | 05:10PM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
May I remind you all that The Crazy Train will have very little security. Maybe the equivalent of 5 hours per day, one person per station. I'd worry about that if I were you.
on December 21,2012 | 05:09PM
Changalang wrote:
Everyone on the Train won't have any money for robbers to steal from anyway. The only real deterrent to property crime is not having anything to steal in the first place. See how thorough the planning is? Efficiency at its best.
on December 21,2012 | 06:12PM
rfosfcpa wrote:
It's ridiculous the NRA seeking more widespread use of assault weapons to, possibly, start mini-wars in schools attended by our children. Instead of advocating effective control of assault weapons, the NRA wants assault weapons in schools? The NRA is showing a single-mindedness that can only hurt true sportsman hunters. Where's the sport in hunting animals with rapid fire weapons, the should be good only for warfare?
on December 21,2012 | 06:23PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Several well trained concealed carry administrators combined with handgun wearing security would be all that's needed. Israel does it that way, with a result of zero gun violence in their schools. No unrealistic talk of banning guns, no long debates about laws that would only be obeyed by legal owners, just simple effective action. The result, no dead kids in school. Our priorities are screwed up when the biggest argument on this forum revolves around the cost of protecting our children laced with comments about gunfights in the hallways. Even crazies aren't going to schools anymore when they realize what's waiting for them.
on December 21,2012 | 07:32PM
ethann81 wrote:
Concealed carry will never be allowed in Hawaii so just forget it. Hehe, only the cops get to carry concealed, the NRA has no weight here. Just the way we like it.
on December 21,2012 | 07:43PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Maintaining a belief that it could never happen here is naive, yet I pray we're fortunate and never experience a mass murder. Evil is what it is, and it doesn't seem like it's getting better.
on December 21,2012 | 09:14PM
Changalang wrote:
He is right about conceal/carry in Hawaii. Never going to happen. Politically impossible in Hawaii and unnecessary for self defense. There is very little firearms crime in Hawaii because law enforcement policies work here. Different being on an island than a big City infiltrated with multitudes of armed gang/street thugs.
on December 21,2012 | 10:50PM
Changalang wrote:
State Deputy Sheriffs are also law enforcement. Ever been on Wilder Avenue in school hours. Cowardly homicidal maniacs will pick softer targets for their fifteen minutes of gory fame. The guy who shot up the movie theaters cased three theaters, and chose the one with a ban for his crime. That "Call Of Duty" gamer that killed all those innocents in CT shot himself dead with hundreds of rounds secondary to prompt first responder sirens in the distance. The profile markers of this type of cowardly criminal illustrates that they are afraid to engage armed defenders. If anything, the lone wolf whack jobs need to be located and neutralized like any other foreign terrorist would. This latest guy was a clear danger to society and killed his mother when he found out she was going to have him committed for mental health evaluation. He tried to buy a gun in CT himself; but the existing laws of that state blocked his purchase. There is a workable solution here that should focus on public safety, not political agendas.
on December 21,2012 | 10:46PM
Mike174 wrote:
I don't want an armed police state.
on December 21,2012 | 07:44PM
Changalang wrote:
Would you want to hit center mass, or p!ss yourself hiding under a desk trying not to pray that a crazed killer shoots someone else or runs out of ammo? Just curious. Prey hides. Equal force confrontation victory goes to the better trained.
on December 21,2012 | 10:54PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News