NRA calls for armed police officers in all U.S. schools

[DuffMan]

I'm glad I'm not Joe Biden. I couldn't imagine the level of frustration and aggravation that comes with trying to have rational conversations with the idiots that are the NRA.

[nickerjones]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

I like the parents of victims on the news are paid actors. I have seen some convincing pictures but who knows what's going on.

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

source?

Originally Posted by valo403

Probably the dozens upon dozens of people directly involved. As with any conspiracy theory it falls apart as soon as you consider the number of people who have to be involved.

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

not true, look at 911

google... I have seen tons of pics on facebook which is why I didn't followup ... Everything on the internet is true right?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

google... I have seen tons of pics on facebook which is why I didn't followup ... Everything on the internet is true right?

I hope you know it's BS, right?

[nickerjones]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I hope you know it's BS, right?

should have probably used green text when i said it looks pretty convincing...

[nickerjones]

With all the people who hate the NRA ... I am surprised no one has posted this.
"In a 35-second video released this week, the gun-rights group calls Obama an "elitist hypocrite" for saying he's "skeptical" about the NRA's call for armed guards in schools when his own daughters receive armed Secret Service protection. "Are the president's kids more important than yours?"

The video is in the article.

http://theweek.com/article/index/238...cathing-new-ad

[CaptainCrunch]

I actually saw that ad and was fairly horrified by the imagery of it.

[HPLovecraft]

Attacking the Prez's kids. Oh, it's on now.



"Protect your kids from zombie kids now!"

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

With all the people who hate the NRA ... I am surprised no one has posted this.
"In a 35-second video released this week, the gun-rights group calls Obama an "elitist hypocrite" for saying he's "skeptical" about the NRA's call for armed guards in schools when his own daughters receive armed Secret Service protection. "Are the president's kids more important than yours?"

The video is in the article.

http://theweek.com/article/index/238...cathing-new-ad

I see what they're trying to do, but it's just such a ridiculous argument. Obviously children of the most powerful man in the United States of America are at risk on a completely different level than any other children. And I'm pretty sure just about every President with school-age children had them protected in the same manner.

[CaptainCrunch]

Really interesting departure column from Cracked.com

http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-trut...s-video-games/

[KootenayFlamesFan]

The NRA really went over the line with that ad. It felt like the election all over again with the attack ads.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Attacking the Prez's kids. Oh, it's on now.



"Protect your kids from zombie kids now!"

That's not the proper question to be asking. They should instead be asking Have you been to the Stampede yet?

Far more appropriate.

[Azure]

So I see that Obama is in favor of more armed guards at schools.

Cool.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Azure

So I see that Obama is in favor of more armed guards at schools.

Cool.

When did he say that?

[Plett25]

Originally Posted by Azure

So I see that Obama is in favor of more armed guards at schools.

Cool.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HOOT

When did he say that?

It looks like the President agrees, but he's using a different term for them: school resource officers.

The term, according to the official White House plan, describes "specially trained police officers." Obama has called for 1,000 of them to protect schools and provide a deterrent against crime.

The officers will be voluntary for schools to have, but Obama indicates that "some schools will want trained and armed police, others may prefer increased counseling services. Either way, each district should be able to choose what is best to protect its own students."

http://www.businessinsider.com/presi...#ixzz2IBYZyjAN

The SRO was what the guy at Columbine was called.

[HOOT]

That's a bit different than armed guards, no?

[Azure]

Well the NRA called for armed police.

Obama is calling for 'specially trained police officers.'

At the end of the day both will be armed guards. Isn't that what we all said was a bad idea due to costs measures and inability to properly protect? Or is it different now that Obama has suggested it?

The 'armed guard' stationed at Columbine was a SRO as well and he couldn't do a thing about the shooting.

I agree with more police involvement in schools, such as awareness campaigns, establishing relationships with students and the educational impact, but I disagree with a full time 'armed guard.'

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Azure

http://www.businessinsider.com/presi...#ixzz2IBYZyjAN

The SRO was what the guy at Columbine was called.

In a CBC article on this it mentions this but adds that Obama plans to allow schools to use federal grant money to hire "school resource officers" to improve safety if they wish.

I still think armed guards in schools is mostly just a waste of money though, as you've touched on:

- Schools are big and full of long corridors and many different rooms of many different sizes. A guard can't be everywhere at once.
- If the guard is visibly carrying a weapon then a shooter probably knows where not to go. If they are carrying a concealed weapon then IF the shooting starts close enough that the guard can react, a video posted earlier in this thread shows what can likely happen. Guard may be an excellent shot on a range or in training but who knows how they'll react when the panic ensues and they might get shot themselves. They might also end up a target themselves right off the bat. Or by the time they are able to react a lot of the shooting may have already taken place.
- If the shooting starts and the guard is too far away to immediately react, is the expectation that they're going to seek out and confront the shooter? I don't even think the police do that until they know exactly what they're dealing with. Further, again I would imagine most of the shooting would have already taken place by the time the guard would be able to find and confront the shooter, if that is the expectation place upon them.

I'll admit the level of training the guards receive (or have previously received) will factor into all of this as well. However, more training = more money and we can see the funding for these guards will come out of federal grants, meaning it's probably eating away at some other portion of the schools budget (like schooling related matters....). It just seems like a lot of things would have to go "right" in order for an armed guard to even be in the right place to react to a shooting and then react in a fast and efficient enough manner to stop or greatly reduce the shooting before it takes place. From what I can see a lot of these shooters are attacking familiar territory with little to no regard for their own life as well which complicates things even further.

Bottom line is, IMO, this would seem like nothing more than a placebo to make people feel safer. Maybe Obama is just trying to compromise a bit with the NRA though by somewhat implementing their big idea on reducing school shootings.

[Azure]

It is impossible for everyone except a superhero in a movie to protect and defend a school with hundreds of students and dozens of different rooms.

The impact will possibly be felt in other ways. Could be positive in ways we don't know yet.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Azure

At the end of the day both will be armed guards. Isn't that what we all said was a bad idea due to costs measures and inability to properly protect? Or is it different now that Obama has suggested it?

Ahhh what? Has nothing to do with what Obama said or didn't say. But when I think of SRO I don't think armed guard. I was just looking for clarification on what you said. I wasn't giving Obama a pat on the back for this great idea.

I still think it's a stupid idea regardless of what you call them because of the many reasons FATW pointed out plus many, many more.