NRA calls for armed police officer in every school

Bloody morons.

NRA shooting from the hips again! I ain't paying additional property taxes to fund for guards at schools. If NRA is so concerned, maybe the membership would provide this service free of charge.

More should be focused on the mentally ill. Assault weapons, why does the public need them? Self defense or sport weapons in the hands of trained users ok.

4million NRA should not control 300million. Get some backbone..../ look out though they may have assault weapons.

Why not transfer schools to penitentiaries? Walls, Armed guards and they can see where a live of crine leads to. Then NRA will probably like this Idea

This NRA idea translates to one of seven police officers in USA will be taken away and used for the protection of public schools in USA. Keep it mind that this figure is not including private schools, public buildings, churches, theaters.

It also translates that we are losing one of seven officers from public places. Can we afford to do that? NRA is just out of their mind. Simply stupid.

The NRA just produces more cowards made brave and tough by guns.

LiveInTokyoDec. 25, 2012 - 09:37AM JST A side effect of this idea would just put more bullets in the air every time someone went on rampage. I dont care how, "well trained", anyone is, its a proven fact that not every bullet will hit the target. With more bullets flying around we`ll just end up with more and more people getting killed or injured. This is one of the worst ideas ever.

A good point. I raised this in another thread, but NYPD police officers (i.e. "expert" gun users who carry firearms for a living) only hit their target 34% of the time. When someone is firing back this drops to 18%. In other words if these security guards are certified to the same level as police officers (which is unlikely) then if they fire off 10 rounds against an attacker 2 of those rounds will hit the target and the remaining 8 rounds will go ... elsewhere. Probably into someone's kid or a teacher given how many people there are in a small area in schools.

Bloody awful idea.

A side effect of this idea would just put more bullets in the air every time someone went on rampage. I dont care how, "well trained", anyone is, its a proven fact that not every bullet will hit the target. With more bullets flying around we`ll just end up with more and more people getting killed or injured. This is one of the worst ideas ever.

http://www.naturalnews.com/038404_massacres_gun_owners_defense.html (shootings stopped by gun owners)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/12/oregon-mall-shooting_n_2285243.html (a very recent one at a mall and almost the same date as Connecticut shooting) -of course something like this is not going to get private Federal Reserve paid media attention when the Obama agenda now is to strip 2nd Amendment rights.

NRA terrorist solution for gun deaths, more guns. Very consistent if somewhat stupid. But facts do not get in the way of the NRA.

Sure! As long as the NRA pays for the costs!

But doesn't Israel have mandatory military enrollment? So they have had lots of training. I always say you can't compare the USA to Japan/Canada/Switzerland/anywhere. It's a unique problem for the US. Instead of saying what Israel does is there anyone here who has lived in Israel and can tell us their side? Did Israel do this because they had a bunch of crazies with AR15s shooting up the schools. Even if anyone compares US with other countries we need to hear more than it "works"

Israel proved over 50 years ago that arming school staff works and their problem makes ours look miniscule.

Israel also does a FAR better job of screening out citizens who should not have weapons. The screening and inspection process are the things that they do that we do not.

No, that number is a lie. Each of those sources are slanted. Another person was "citing" 1.5 million examples per year. At least be consistent with the false information (so, which is it????). About 1% of the population has HIV and I have known people to die of AIDS and so have my friends. And you say about the same percentage for that gun statistic and I have NOT ONCE known of any instance or have heard from any of my friends, etc.

You believe in the NRA 100%. That makes you a cult follower. And the NRA is a cult. Of course they make good points. But if you don't even question anything they say and agree with them no matter what then it's your cult.

I'm from the USA and in all my years (many of them) I personally don't know ANY instances of this happening (EVERY YEAR???!!!). Also, I don't know anyone who has said they know a person this has happened to.

Plenty more on just like it on you tube where this came from, but this one happens to be one that really struck home with me. Good on this 69 year old Air Force Vet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTuBsB_Q6oY

What doesn't make the news... and what CrazyJoe and NYC Samurai may like to read: http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx

Firearms in the hands of the law abiding are estimated to deter or stop crime over 2.5 million times a year in the USA, but we don't hear of it when it happens.

Because it's not true. It's cherry-picked info. I'm from the USA and in all my years (many of them) I personally don't know ANY instances of this happening (EVERY YEAR???!!!). Also, I don't know anyone who has said they know a person this has happened to. On another board someone was saying this was an FBI stat...OK, I'll believe it when they show it to actually be from the FBI's website.

Does Wayne LaPierre assume that nobody has traveled beyond the borders of the US? Kids around the world, not just the US are exposed to movies, video games and TV that are full of violence and the glorification of assault with deadly weapons.

How about movies full of nice fluffy kitties. Do they promote peace? I've always said the NRA is a shill for gun sales. And they don't even follow the 2nd amendment.

Banning high capacity magazines and "assault style" weapons will do nothing to solve the problem. Just spike demand for these items as is already happening.

What is the next step? If people (plural) are attacking me with AR15s I need the Milkor M32 MGL which will kick the hell out of the AR15 (even with more than one attacker) and save my day.

"Assult style" weapons are just cosmetic,

Is the Milkor M32 MGL "just cosmetic"?

We can't control the lone psycopath and probably never will be able to.. not being in control is something we can't accept.

And those "lone psycopaths" often have AR15s which is why I need my Milkor M32 MGL.

The NRA has the best solution, armed security and security doors.. not full proof, but much better than hijacking a trajedy to push forward a liberal agenda that will do nothing to stop the lone psyco.

How about all those millions and millions of windows on all the schools. They all need to be made bullet proof (like the White House). America's fiscal cliff is coming. How can it be afforded? Would it be more cost effective to have a volunteer PTA member parked on the roof with a M107 .50 caliber long range rifle? Because bullet proof glass is very expensive and volunteers work for free (but the rifle costs almost ten thousand dollars- still much cheaper than the bullet-proof windows). It just takes some training and should be OK. This will stop the lone psycho.

Does Wayne LaPierre assume that nobody has traveled beyond the borders of the US? Kids around the world, not just the US are exposed to movies, video games and TV that are full of violence and the glorification of assault with deadly weapons. Yet these kids, who should be equally desensitized to violence, don't walk in to schools and shoot the place up. Is it because there are few if any personal firearms in, say, Canada or Japan? Seems like a reasonable conclusion to me.

Jerome: "If you enter a "Gun Free" zone, town, or country, you are taking a risk."

Only the paranoid would think so, and it's guns that have made you paranoid. You feel like without a gun you are not safe, because the person next to you might have one. The solution to that is not getting more guns, it's getting rid of them, and getting help for those who think they actually need the things.

Wayne LaPierre's speech is so full of holes, hypocrisy, and contradictions that it's unbelievable anyone could take the NRA seriously. Worse is that they want to backtrack of moves they opposed in the past.

Quick question for the gun-nutters who think this is a valid solution: why didn't the armed guard in the Columbine massacre prevent the massacre from happening if armed guards are the solution?

Oops!

The NRA is about 80% right. Problem with the security guards is cost, about $75-100K, over-headed, per year. Here in Utah and a couple of other states, "campus carry" is legal. This has been reaffirmed by our Attorney General on several occasions and it is working. If you enter a "Gun Free" zone, town, or country, you are taking a risk. Israel proved over 50 years ago that arming school staff works and their problem makes ours look miniscule.

Yabits, unfortunately we don't have crystal balls or we could have stopped this guy.

A crystal ball is not needed. Only basic standards. Once it was determined that the son was seriously mentally disturbed, a review and inspection of the home weapons situation was called for.

We can no more blame guns for this incident than blaming the car he drove that enabled him to get to the school.

Keep talking. The sheer insanity of your statement is "crystal" clear.

We cannot deny that guns in the hands of lawabiding citizens have saved thousands of innocent lives each year either by deterent or actual useage. The simle knowledge of weakness is inviting.

And yet America has way more gun-related violence than any other countries in the world Heyooooooooooooo.

Yabits, unfortunately we don't have crystal balls or we could have stopped this guy. It was totally untelegraphed from the info we currently have. Yes, he was a loner and had social skill issues, but was estimated to be a genius by many who knew him.

We can no more blame guns for this incident than blaming the car he drove that enabled him to get to the school. You're barking up the wrong tree. This is what the mainstream media doesn't want you to read: http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx

We cannot deny that guns in the hands of lawabiding citizens have saved thousands of innocent lives each year either by deterent or actual useage. The simle knowledge of weakness is inviting.

Sorry, did you actually want to start addressing the mental health aspects in this case, or did you want to continue to rant about guns and their availability in the US?

The "mental health aspect" of this and many cases is that plenty of people around the person could tell there was a mental health problem and yet still permitted him access to guns. Lanza's delusions where nowhere as serious as those who pretended that everything was hunky-dory with all those weapons accessible to him.

Treating Lanza's condition is one thing. But completely securing all the guns from his immediate vicinity was the more important step. Far less costly and more practical than a full-scale "addressing" of the "mental health aspects."

What doesn't make the news... and what CrazyJoe and NYC Samurai may like to read: http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx

Firearms in the hands of the law abiding are estimated to deter or stop crime over 2.5 million times a year in the USA, but we don't hear of it when it happens.

@realdoll

Thank you for verifying my observation

I see emotional posts by a bunch of expats who probably never had a life where they did anything. Just went to school and came to Japan and got married.. getting their opinions from what they read rather than what they experienced in life. Meaningless rhetoric by the peanut gallery.

If the anti gunners get their way by slowly chipping away at the second ammendment, they will continue till they have totally disarmed the american public. I fully oppose any of their tactics.

The most popular deer hunting rifles are the Winchester M 70 and Remington M 700, both were used in Vietnam as sniper rifles and are capable of hitting a paper plate sized target at 1000 yards... since these are war sniper rifles, will the anti gun zealots make a case to ban them next? They are slow cycling manually operated bolt action rifles, extremely accurate and reliable... the same action as the rifle that was by LH Oswald.

In over 10 years of being on this website I've never seen such a useless string of yingyang comments. CrazyJoe has posted the only realistic view. Simple and concise.

I would rather much read the story of a dead scumbag in the hallway because a school administrator was able to pull out a lawfully owned firearm and use their training to defend themselves and the children rather than read the story we've read about the funerals for those children.

Banning high capacity magazines and "assault style" weapons will do nothing to solve the problem. Just spike demand for these items as is already happening.

Armor piercing ammo is easily made. Many shooters make their own bullets and reload their own ammo. High capacity magazines are just bent sheet metal and a spring.. all easily made. "Assult style" weapons are just cosmetic, they are semi auto (not fully automatic) guns and many sporting arms that have a more traditional style are just as capable semi auto's, extention magazines can be made by anyone with the will to do so. Bans are worthless. Everyone is sidetracked on this issue. We can't control the lone psycopath and probably never will be able to.. not being in control is something we can't accept. The NRA has the best solution, armed security and security doors.. not full proof, but much better than hijacking a trajedy to push forward a liberal agenda that will do nothing to stop the lone psyco.

What needs to be done first is to neutralize the power of the NRA and their spokesman Insane Wayne.

"Santa could help with the tests for goodness or badness, I suppose"

Har! But good guys don't really need guns to stop bad guys with guns. Take Chuck Norris for example.

Farmboy - Har! But what we really need is a ban on all guns and knives, scissors and baseball bats.

Such a great idea indeed! So to stop gun crime we have armed gunmen on patrol?...Hmm maybe a severe tightening of gun control or indeed guns being outlawed altogether would be better. it's simple, if you don't have a gun you can't shoot anyone!

Wanted to expand on something from my last post in regards to the Troops to Teachers program.

Not only is this program in place and could be tweaked to also add another outstanding dimension to protect our schools. I'd would also like to see signs posted at every school that had a veteran now teaching the young ones at the entrance. "This Facility is Protected by Former U.S Military Members" or words to that effect...........It won't stop all the crazies but I can say pretty confidently that it is going that its going to cause some serious rethink by someone before they would act out their insanity..

Dumbest thing I've ever read. Ok, so not only teachers have to fulfill their academic profession of being teachers, but they'd also have to be cops as well? And they're going to be getting paid more for this? Ok, fantasy over.

Hold on just for a moment. The Government has a program its been promoting for years now in the Department of Education for Veterans leaving the service called "Troops-to Teachers".

The Troops to Teachers program provides funds to recruit, prepare, and support former members of the military services as teachers in high-poverty schools. Successful program candidates obtain certification or licensing as elementary school teachers, secondary school teachers, or vocational or technical teachers and become highly qualified teachers.

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/troops/index.html

This idea of arming teachers doesn't have to include all teachers only those that would feel comfortable with being armed. Also with this program already funded and in place it would seem pretty logical that this would be an almost perfect match to promote a concealed carry option for teachers as an already competent pool of teachers who would have no problem with it. Heck, being a veteran myself I'd hazard to guess you would have no shortage of prior service members that are now teachers more than happy to conceal carry to protect their charges, just as they did when they where serving us overseas. The Troops to Teachers program is targeted for high-poverty schools but that can be easily tweaked to include all schools This is already funded, already in place and it makes sense.

This is the type of conversations we should be having, and the solutions we should looking hard at. Not the liberal media narrative "guns bad" drivel, that just boils down to promoting a gun ban agenda dressed up as news with grandstanding and demonizing folks who happen to support the second amendment and the NRA advocacy that represents them. The NRA is no different than Planned Parenthood with their advocacy for abortion rights which is another contentious issue, the difference being the media actually likes them and supports that right so they get good press.

This is a critically important question -- one that I have yet to see the pro-gun forces address.

Sorry, did you actually want to start addressing the mental health aspects in this case, or did you want to continue to rant about guns and their availability in the US?

How about that there are actually pre-violence indicators? We can actually try to stop violence from occurring in the first place.

This is a critically important question -- one that I have yet to see the pro-gun forces address.

A good read. Good education for some posters here..

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control

Armed Teachers

No. Hear me out. The single best way to respond to a mass shooter is with an immediate, violent response. The vast majority of the time, as soon as a mass shooter meets serious resistance, it bursts their fantasy world bubble. Then they kill themselves or surrender. This has happened over and over again.

Dumbest thing I've ever read. Ok, so not only teachers have to fulfill their academic profession of being teachers, but they'd also have to be cops as well? And they're going to be getting paid more for this? Ok, fantasy over.

Don’t make it mandatory.

Ok, so his answer is "don't make it mandatory". So if none of the teachers carry a gun, then this wouldn't work. Great. This guy is a genius. Good God... I'm starting to think that every gun nuts are total numbnuts like this guy...

How about that violent people are actually predictable? How about that there are actually pre-violence indicators? We can actually try to stop violence from occurring in the first place.

@johnnybravo:

A good read. Good education for some posters here..

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

Thanks for the link. Interesting post by a person quite familiar with the issues involved. Reading some of the comments I learned that Connecticut already has very strict gun control laws. This is a difficult issue and not as simplistic as people make it out to be. Too many comments here are flippant and do not address the reality of the situation.

@megosaa:

the only way to stop it is to remove them all completely...

There are millions of guns in America and the US Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms (though it doesn't specify which types of guns). Disarming the American public is not realistic. Even an arch-Liberal like Obama would suggest such a ridiculous idea.

Does anyone has any realistic ideas? Removing all guns is not a possibility. At least placing an armed guard in all schools is a reasonable short-term solution to a long-term problem.

A good read. Good education for some posters here..

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

Apparently armed guards at public schools are already in use at 1/3 of public schools as of the 09-10 school year. Yet this shooting happened at one of the unguarded schools, in one of the states with the strictest gun control laws. Coincidence?

“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.

the only way to stop it is to remove them all completely...

I know, I'm using hyperbole to call out the hypocrisy of the NRA as well as upset the logic behind high power guns.

OK.....

That's the penalty after the fact. The question is how many other people have their guns in a place where anyone, including an 11-year old, can get to them? How can we really expect to keep guns out of the wrong hands when situations like kids finding guns is all too common?

Agreed but in a lot of laws that is true for them as well. For example lets say you did a daily check of home owners to make sure they kept their guns in a place away from children and lets say you find one violating that, that is still a penalty after the fact that the person did that.

The only thing I can say is that gun deaths from homicide to suicide to accidental discharge is going down. Any attempt to prevent it from happening is going to be caused by penalties after the fact and then setting an example out of those offenders to intimidate those that don't want to comply to do so.

Could someone tell me who elected the NRA to run the country? I know they "donate" lots to politicians, but so do a lot of other lobbies, and we don't always bow and scrape to them. Why do we care so much what they want, think, or do?

Herve Nmn L'Eisa: Criminally intent individuals completely disregard any law. Gangstas don't legally obtain their guns(often siphoned from buy-back programs)

Often siphoned from buy-back programs? Your nose is growing....

Noliving: If the 11 year old was going around threatening people with the gun then the owner of the firearm should be charged with 2nd degree felony assault.

That's the penalty after the fact. The question is how many other people have their guns in a place where anyone, including an 11-year old, can get to them? How can we really expect to keep guns out of the wrong hands when situations like kids finding guns is all too common?

as_the_crow_flies: @donkusai "everyone has a bad day sometimes"

That really cracked me up. So every time "someone has a bad day", a few dozen people will die, but well, the benefits to the community outweigh that, to be sure.

Not at all. The point I was making was that many of these mass killers don't have criminal or psychological records. Background checks would come up clear. Often they are law abiding citizens until something pushes them over the edge (the "bad day"). Easy access to guns gives these people far more options to do serious damage. When looking at guns in the community, you have to do a cost/benefit analysis. You can never remove the risk of mass killings, but easy access to weapons increases the opportunities for these things to happen. We need to seriously look at what we think is important in life, reducing the opportunity of mass killings happening, or having easy access to weapons. Society has to nut this issue out before any progress can be made.

You can't buy the military/armor piercing ammo for the FN Five-Seven.

I know, I'm using hyperbole to call out the hypocrisy of the NRA as well as upset the logic behind high power guns.

It's a good start, but what about the 11-year old kid who brought a gun to school? It points to the problem of access. How do you propose we keep guns out of the wrong hands when we're sometimes dealing with people who meticulously plan a massacre? With so many guns around do you think we have a reasonable chance of making sure that one person doesn't get his hands on one?

In cases such as that the owner of the firearm should be charged with negligent storage of a gun, in my state of Minnesota it is illegal to keep a firearm within reach of a child and if you do you are prosecuted. If the 11 year old was going around threatening people with the gun then the owner of the firearm should be charged with 2nd degree felony assault. That comes with a 7 year prison sentence and 14k fine. If there is damage such as someone is injured then it is up to 10 years in prison and 20k fine with the possibility of loss of voting rights and gun ownership rights.

The solution is controls on guns through background checks.

You want to truly solve this problem? Have stricter gun control & stricter gun policies like Japan & some other countries do. That way, they'll be less gun deaths!

But will it lower the overall violent crime rate including homicide?

Why do we need FN 5.7 military type ammo that can pierce body armor?

You can't buy the military/armor piercing ammo for the FN Five-Seven.

But why do I need a GAU-8 Avenger? It's legal to buy one. But why?

How many of those gattling guns are available in the US to buy? Probably close to zero, manufacturing for civilian market ended in may of 1986, and the ones that do exist cost at least quarter of a million dollars to buy if not more plus you have to get the sheriff to sign off on it.

Seriously, it's time to start thinking about ways to take away the guns. That's the only way you rule out possession by both 'good' and 'bad' parties (and keep in mind, a person is never a criminal until they commit a crime, so saying a criminal having guns will commit a crime is moot in most cases). Suggesting more guns be put into circulation because so many already existing is like trying to stop bleeding by shooting the bullet hole.

I didn't peg you as one to get hot under the collar if his "Man Card" were revoked, Sail.

lol. So apparently having the right to own a gun, is a "Man Card". Now thats funny!

I'd like to see the state of Connecticut pass a test law whereby all weapons are to be kept at Armories or Police Stations. Any person found in possession of a weapon would face stiff penalties. Once the law is passed Police would have the freedom to inspect any home there at any reasonable time once a year. If after 10 years the law makes no difference then take it off of the books. If it makes Connecticut a safer place then keep it. We need to at least try.

So what you would prefer, is a police state, where the cops have the right to enter and search your home, pretty much any time, if they are in the mood. Oh, got my yearly search over with... Man, I've heard some dumb ideas but wow. Might I suggest moving to Russia? Oh wait, their murder rate is actually much higher then it is in the US. Hmm, how about Cuba? Er, wait, nevermind, worse there too.

My mother and Sister both own guns. The reason for it is simple. My mom is by herself, and my sister has several young kids at home, husband is frequently away from the house on business. They both feel safer having them, and to be frank, I'm much happier that they are as well.

Absolutely ridiculous....put guns in schools....next it will be guns in offices/banks/supermarkets etc...and the Police? Well, you are just taking them away from other duties.

Can some of the American readers enlighten me on how firearms are supposed to be stored? Is it different from state to state or is there a national guideline? In Australia you must store your ammunition and firearm separately in an approved safe. It is not failsafe but at least it prevents the wrong type of person getting access to it....bear in mind only pistols/rifles/shotguns are able to be licenced here not semi-autos and military grade weapons like the US.

I'd like to see the state of Connecticut pass a test law whereby all weapons are to be kept at Armories or Police Stations. Any person found in possession of a weapon would face stiff penalties. Once the law is passed Police would have the freedom to inspect any home there at any reasonable time once a year. If after 10 years the law makes no difference then take it off of the books. If it makes Connecticut a safer place then keep it. We need to at least try.

Freedom to bear arms? What about my freedom not to bear arms? Sounds like NRA is forcing people to have guns? Question for NRA, how many kids, no wait let's include all people were murder by guns in Japan compared to the US in the last decade? Like to see the head of the NRA attend each and every funeral of those poor babies and teachers. An armed police can not cover ever corner of a school at ever moment. Lets get real and get control of guns in the states before more incident babies die.

The guys that are good business are Richard Ramirez "The Night Stalker" that terrorized Southern California for months, Richard Allen Davis who snatched that beautiful child Polly Klaas out of her bedroom during a slumber party, Ted Bundy and the list goes on and on.

Which gun is good for these people?

That guy isn't good for business. The manufacturers need the other guy, the one who fears he may not be all the man he could be."

Madverts,

That's just absurd. The guys that are good business are Richard Ramirez "The Night Stalker" that terrorized Southern California for months, Richard Allen Davis who snatched that beautiful child Polly Klaas out of her bedroom during a slumber party, Ted Bundy and the list goes on and on. If you think somebody that is concerned about his junk size is the one that gun manufactures have to appeal to and that actually compares to this free 11 o'clock news "advertising" that they have already, there is just no other word for it other than absurd.

Realdoll,

Do you think I'm a liberal?

Like my PhD liberal boss found out during the Rodney King riots.. the police don't come when you call 911 because everyone is calling 911

Yes, that's why we need weaponry such as the GAU-8 Avenger, the Milkor M32 MGL, or the GIAT Wasp 58. The 2nd amendment guarantees this. You are saying in case you are trapped and cornered by scores of bad black people who have their own deadly weapons you need effective disruption to protect yourself.

Pipe bombs are easily made and can be thrown into school rooms... they are easily made. You can't ban things and feel safe as things can be made. Napalm is nothing but diesel fule and powder laundry soap. Dynamite is easily made

You are saying these all should be legal for self-protection. I might choose this for self protection. Fight dynamite with dynamite. That's the NRA's idea. If I choose dynamite for protection is it OK?

You didn't answer my questions. Why does the NRA support weapons such as the GAU-8 Avenger, the Milkor M32 MGL, or the GIAT Wasp 58? Aren't they a bit overkill? Unless the RD riots.

Nishikat, Like my PhD liberal boss found out during the Rodney King riots.. the police don't come when you call 911 because everyone is calling 911. Also, during natural disasters that could make people riot, the police do not come to the rescue. You have to fend for yourself with a few reliable firarms for protecting your family and possessions, maybe a generator and spare food, gas, first aid kit etc. But, if you don't want one that is your choice.

nishikat.. read my post. Them guns are all about cosmetics. Semiauto hunting rifles with traditional styling are probably more reliable and accurate but have wooden stocks which are not collapsable and shorter magazines which could be extened if someone had the will to make his own extension.

The GAU-8 Avenger is not cosmetic. The Milkor M32 MGL is also not cosmetic. They are both very deadly. You hit someone with one of those you won't even be able to tell what gender the victim was. Why do we need weaponry like this for the general public?

"Read it, can't believe you would even consider posting this tripe. "

Yep, definitely hit a nerve here...

I didn't peg you as one to get hot under the collar if his "Man Card" were revoked, Sail.

"That "responsible gun owner" politicians talk about, the one who reverentially passes down to his son the bolt-action rifle his father gave him? That guy isn't good for business. The manufacturers need the other guy, the one who fears he may not be all the man he could be."

And therein lies the evil cancer of bribery, sorry, "lobbying" groups such as the NRA.

NRA is now also blaming movies and video games as the one of the causes for this as "halo" has become irresistible instead of John Wayne movies. I guess the NRA and this author have common ground after all.

Has movies such as MARRY POPPINS made the world a more peaceful place? If TVs play less SCARFACE and more PEEWEE HERMAN can we expect more world peace? If all these Jihadists in Afghanistan would simply watch more Sesame Street would they stop splashing acid on the faces of girls who want to go to school?

security doors

How about the windows? They can be broken easily? Should all the windows in all schools be "White House" grade?

Good opinion piece for ya, I know, from the fascist evil liberal mainstream media trying to steal your guns:

Read it, can't believe you would even consider posting this tripe. Your opinion piece author makes this absurd claim for males growing up in the fifties and sixties:

For the post-war American male, an office job and a house in the suburbs offered few opportunities to prove one's manhood, so tales of two-fisted cowboys wielding six-guns became irresistible.

Good grief, like I said earlier in my post the NRA is now also blaming movies and video games as the one of the causes for this as "halo" has become irresistible instead of John Wayne movies. I guess the NRA and this author have common ground after all.

The NRA has the best solution

Do you agree with the NRA 100%

doesn't it just entice people to speed?

If they do it they get tickets and can eventually get their license suspended. Speeding fines are very stiff these days.

The NRA has the best solution, armed security and security doors

But why do I need a GAU-8 Avenger? It's legal to buy one. But why?

Sail,

Good opinion piece for ya, I know, from the fascist evil liberal mainstream media trying to steal your guns:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/20/opinion/waldman-guns-manhood/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7

Heh, check out the "Man Card" section of Bushmaster's website. Yup, them there people that supplied the very tools for Adam Lanza to shoot 6 year old kids eleven times in the freaking face but one week ago.

Yes, yes, lets just put away rapes, home invasions, domestic violence, gang violence, turf-wars, burglaries, carjackings and anybody who just happens to live within 5 miles of a State prison with the possibility of ex-convicts running loose as not any of the reasons somebody might actually want to own a gun. It's really just boils down to simple penis-envy after all.

I used to live next to a jail. It was a very safe place. I never said anything about guns. I was implying SUPER guns or SUPER ammo like FN 5.7 military type. Why is all this Terminator type arsenal needed?

"It's really just boils down to simple penis-envy after all."

Penis envy?

I think you should re-read my post since I do not mention such a thing. Penis-envy is understandably an affectation suffered by women. Just about every single spree killer with a gun has been a white male.

"Why do we need FN 5.7 military type ammo that can pierce body armor?"

The 2nd Ammendment to our constitution has nothing to do with hunting, and everything to do with individual rights and supression of govt powers.

Armor piercing ammo is easily made. Many shooters make their own bullets and reload their own ammo. High capacity magazines are just bent sheet metal and a spring.. all easily made. "Assult style" weapons are just cosmetic, they are semi auto (not fully automatic) guns and many sporting arms that have a more traditional style are just as capable semi auto's, extention magazines can be made by anyone with the will to do so. Bans are worthless. Why not ban cars that go over 55 mph.. doesn't it just entice people to speed? How about the car that enabled that psycopath to get to the school, didn't the cars availability enable him to kill them kids? Everyone is sidetracked on this issue. We can't control the lone psycopath and probably never will be able to.. not being in control is something we can't accept. The NRA has the best solution, armed security and security doors.. not full proof, but much better than hijacking a trajedy to push forward a liberal agenda that will do nothing to stop the lone psyco.

At this point, I can only suggest the obsession with gun ownership stems from psychological conditions like penile inertia, or perhaps even the dreaded "acute micro-penis".

Yes, yes, lets just put away rapes, home invasions, domestic violence, gang violence, turf-wars, burglaries, carjackings and anybody who just happens to live within 5 miles of a State prison with the possibility of ex-convicts running loose as not any of the reasons somebody might actually want to own a gun. It's really just boils down to simple penis-envy after all.

"Why do we need FN 5.7 military type ammo that can pierce body armor?"

At this point, I can only suggest the obsession with gun ownership stems from psychological conditions like penile inertia, or perhaps even the dreaded "acute micro-penis". Medical pro's would call this "self-medication", where the sufferer realizes he has a worrying issue, yet tries to administer treatment on his/her own.

Oh dear.

Such problems can be fettled with modern medical science as most of us are well aware, but let's agree it's easier to just go out and buy a gun.The BIGGER, the better.

realdoll,

"I'm a lifetime NRA member and just donated another $100 to the organization. They're right on the mark."

Showing off is the fool's idea of glory

What we really need is a teacher in every gun shop.

I'm a lifetime NRA member and just donated another $100 to the organization. They're right on the mark.

Why do we need FN 5.7 military type ammo that can pierce body armor?

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,”

May as well read

"The only thing that stops a good guy (with or without a gun) is a bad guy with a gun."

The NRA are immature fools, unable to recognise the damage that their influence has had on American society.

I'm a lifetime NRA member and just donated another $100 to the organization. They're right on the mark.

The NRA would love more guns out there, just as a car racing club would like more racing on the streets, smokers who would like to be able to smoke anywhere, and wall street bankers would like more money.

What did we learn?

Are they proposing a tax on guns and ammunition to help fund this costly proposal?

As an interim proposal, some protection in or very nearby schools might be appropriate in the circumstances. At least while the process of disarming the general population is debated, decided upon and implemented. It will take decades, quite a few committed US presidents and a fair bit of social engineering to get the current madness under control. But I daresay the NRA didn't have interim support for disarmament on their minds when they came up with the idea.

Screw the NRA. It has no credibility. As measured by either popular opinion or empirical evidence.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/20/1172170/-Daily-Kos-PPP-Poll-NRA-and-GOP-grossly-out-of-step-with-America-including-Republicans

Columbine had an armed guard. Fort Hood had plenty of armed guards. Virginia Tech has it's own police dept.

And 126 buildings spread over 2,600 acres.

So tell me, how how do you stop a massacre without posting armed guards outside of every building, outside every classroom?

The NRA in unhinged. American DO NOT agree with them.

It is time.

The NRA are a cult. They are also a shill for gun manufacturers. Their purpose has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.

I guess the NRA wants a police state setup for all schools in America. Picture schools with armed guards patroling the corridors and surrounding areas, barred windows, metal detectors at all entrances and exits, surveillance cameras everywhere, and periodic mental and background checks made on all students and teachers (as well as the armed guards protecting them). I shudder to think of what a school might become if they follow what the NRA is preaching. For me, I could do without the "right to bear arms". I would much rather have to right to live a peaceful life. Why should the American people have to sacrifice so many other freedoms in order to keep such an outdated right in the first place?

There are some really bad places and some real bad folk out there who, if you give them half a chance they will rip off your head and have your guts for breakfast,

Yes, that's why they feed them hamburgers, some idiots can't be trusted with a knife for the meat. So please, take the guns very very far away from them.

If you see a drug dealer on the street say $5,000 reward to first citizen to shoot the drug dealer dead!!

Sasuga NRA.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,”

I've not known him, but it's likely that shooter never was a bad guy a second in his life. He was C.R.A.Z.Y. Burnt a fuse in his head, saw 3 guns in the entrance near his sneakers, oh good idea, Pan ! Pan ! Ooops I shot Mum. If they had played golf, he'd have tried to beat her with a golf club, that's not so efficient.

armed police officer in every school

Super ! And the cop guarding a school all day with a gun can become crazy someday too, and kill 80 in a few minutes. Just because he can do it, the most efficient guns in hands, better trained than a civilian. Pan ! Pan ! Pan ! Like this Robert Bales, heroic soldier defending the US of A, turned crazy in Afghanistan. Pan ! Pan ! Pan ! Because he could do it, a soldier always ready. The more guys "always ready" , the more deaths you have. Stats even prove that cops turn crazy more frequently than the average, due to the stress of dealing with weapons in their job.

Make new federal laws, somebody breaks into your home or business ok, you can blow their scummy heads off!! Let all homeowners not only mandatory armed but mandatory gun shooting training asap!! Time to take back the streets!!!!!!!!

I would rather much read the story of a dead scumbag in the hallway because a school administrator was able to pull out a lawfully owned firearm and use their training to defend themselves and the children rather than read the story we've read about the funerals for those children.

Zichi, my guess you ain't never lived in America?? There are some really bad places and some real bad folk out there who, if you give them half a chance they will rip off your head and have your guts for breakfast, that being said, it should become more like Israel, arm the good people of the USA and sorry but make sure to DISARM all of the gangs, drug dealers etc... and also make the death penalty mandatory for all of these scums aslo the death penalty to any guns and ammo store that knowingly sell to criminals, ASAP!!!

I think the NRA should pay $$$ for all schools, stadiums, shopping centers etc... to not only have armed guards but hell be ready with professional sharp shooters! How many Iraq war veterans can not find a decent job now??? Well Mr.Obama can put say at least 100,000 sharp shooters on the ground in not only every school in the USA but also make sure to make it a US federal crime to sell these high powered weapons etc...over state lines and ban all sales over the Internet and also ban all imports and exports of ANY kind of guns, rifles, machine guns, ammo etc... By penalty of DEATH!!! IMHO

The NRA boo birds' are in agreement on this issue. For them, doing nothing is a better option.

RR

why not just arm all the students ? ( sarcasm)

If you are talking about abolishing guns then I think every American would be for that as long as the US military/police would abolish guns also.

LOL. My country (the U.S.) & the NRA has gone down the deep end more sooner than I thought.

You want to truly solve this problem? Have stricter gun control & stricter gun policies like Japan & some other countries do. That way, they'll be less gun deaths!

Well one thing you could do is make it so that the person purchasing the firearm they also do a background check and mental health check on those that live in the same place of residence as the person buying the gun. If anyone living there with the person wishing to purchase the gun is prohibited from buying the gun the person wishing to purchase the gun will be denied until they relocate.

@noliving - look at the stats, the US is the ONLY mordern country with a problem as big as this. Other countries have strict gun laws and low fatalities and low numbers of incidents as a result. The solution is not controls on guns, it is abolishing guns. Look what was achieved as a result of the buy back program after the masacre in Tasmania, look what happens in other countries. Just get rid of the guns and stop pretending you are protecting yourself. Trained soldiers believe civilians owning guns is daft.

NRA, it is time to get real -seriously!

Moral people respect the lives and property of others and behave accordingly in general which puts them at a great disadvantage when faced with an amoral criminal.

Most innocent people who die by firearms in the United States are not killed by "gangstas" or those with a "complete lack" of morals. Like the two recent church-related incidents in PA, many are killed in twos and threes by someone without a criminal history who has made a decision to take the law into their own hands. I believe that is a mentality that is fostered in some people by the mere fact of them obtaining lethal firepower -- that is, the right of life or death over others, and the power to mete out justice.

Criminally intent individuals completely disregard any law. Gangstas don't legally obtain their guns(often siphoned from buy-back programs) and commit whatever crime with no remorse due to lack of morals and lack of respect for others. Human vermin. Moral people respect the lives and property of others and behave accordingly in general which puts them at a great disadvantage when faced with an amoral criminal. You can't reason with a criminal intent on injuring or killing.

Let politicians go without armed protection before leaving children unprotected.

Go back to the whole purpose your organization exists in the first place, protecting the right for a private law-abiding citizen to own arms and not have it be confiscated or taken away by the state.

Therein lies a major part of the problem. The NRA ought to be equally zealous to ensure every process is put in place for proper authorities to investigate and screen every gun owner to ensure that guns are maintained responsibly and, if not, that they are confiscated or moved to a safer storage location.

Good Lord, is this Wayne LaPierre serious? Armed police in EVERY school? Why stop at schools? How about malls, theaters and any other place where there is a large gathering of targets for deranged killers? How many police at each school? If a nut job is hell bent on storming a school, one cop is not going to stop him and will be the first one killed.

After 9-11, we significantly upped the security at airports and on airplanes, including arming pilots and placing armed marshals on aircraft. Why can't our children have at least the same protection?

Let us not keep ourselves willfully ignorant here. Relatively few pilots among the 100,000-plus eligible have volunteered for the ability to arm themselves in the cockpit. Why?

Last year, the TSA granted itself the power to revoke a pilot’s ATP if it deems him to be a security threat. Pilots who volunteer for training to carry guns must complete a very detailed, 13-page application and submit to a three-hour written psychological exam probing into the most private workings of any person: his thoughts, feelings, opinions and emotions. Pilots who pass this government-sponsored psychological strip-search are then ordered to report to a government psychologist for a one-on-one “interview.”

I have to believe the screening procedures to qualify as a federal air marshal are equally rigorous. This only makes sense when potentially hundreds of innocent lives are at stake.

But recent events in Pennsylvania -- where an elementary school teacher took his gun and killed two people at a local church, and a more-recent church-related shooting that is still being investigated -- suggest that far too many people are being given the OK to obtain lethal firepower, who don't have the mentality to bear the responsibilities involved. It is as simple as that. It has nothing to do with violent video games, movies or the lack of a mental health database, and everything to do with someone being recognized as "scary" or a "loner" (both obviously anti-social) by others before they go on their rampage.

If I'm at the airport and I see someone who is not acting right, it's my duty as a citizen to call that person out to the attention of the proper authorities and allow them to investigate that person more carefully. If there were a process by which the authorities would rigorously investigate those brought to their attention by neighbors, barbers, teachers, etc. -- leading to the determination of the possession and possible removal of lethal firepower in the household, many of these incidents would be prevented.

@Noliving My comments on assault weapons and large capacity magazines were based primarily on the possible damage that could be inflicted if said implement fell into the wrong hands.

The U.S. drastically needs legislation to stop the sale of assault weapons

Now see I just don't see how banning them is going to really reduce gun crime. Rifles in the US make up less than 350 homicides in the US each year. There are over 8,000 gun homicides. How is banning semi-automatic rifles really going to improve day to day safety. I mean twice as many people die each day from fists in the US than are killed by rifles.

The U.S. drastically needs legislation to stop the sale of assault weapons, as well as large capacity magazines. That said, something must be done to protect our children. I have two children in elementary school and I would welcome some form of armed deterrent. Schools are simply no longer safe havens void from targeting. They are easily breeched, soft targets for any lunatic that wants to have his 15 minutes of fame. Like it or not, as Noliving has pointed out, the only way to stop one of these nut jobs is to meet them with equal force. After 9-11, we significantly upped the security at airports and on airplanes, including arming pilots and placing armed marshals on aircraft. Why can't our children have at least the same protection?

Sailwind: you have really changed and I thought you would have been one to enforce a tyranny.

Infomation is the key here and there was a shooter in the woods that was taken in by the local police. I don't like the ideal of the TSA groping everyone down either and I feel it is a real turn-off for anyone wanting to visit the USA. =We are entering a dangerous time and I strongly feel more "shootings" like this will take place in order to try to take away the Second Amendment.

=keep up the fight. Fighting!! -Second Amendment. I would also like these "wars" to end <BaDSeY<

The NRA must have been taking lessons from the Republican party when it comes to how to really screw up getting your message across and making a good case message so crappy that your turning off people that might be inclined to support you.

Note to the NRA: Nobody wants to see our public schools start down the road to the full TSA treatment. Drop the uniform armed guards and police rhetoric as the overall approach and leave it to local communities and states to decide how best to use provide security. Offer full support for these types of actions but do not act like your organization is taking the lead on this it is not your place. Unless you think a grateful country will somehow in the future is going to just thank the NRA for now having their 6 year old patted down at school by a latex gloved man.

Go back to the whole purpose your organization exists in the first place, protecting the right for a private law-abiding citizen to own arms and not have it be confiscated or taken away by the state. Stay on that point, do not expand it or go anywhere else. The Media is not your friend and will not be fair, anything straying off the point that protecting the right for law abiding citizens to legally own and carry is an exercise in futility.

They should be promoting this instead. That the response of the NRA would be to work on repealing the gun free zone laws as nothing more than magnet attractions for these types of atrocities to occur in. That repealing the zones would have less impact on Americans going about their daily lives and would promote an immediate deterrent effect. That the deterrent effect would be in allowing those with CCW permits to carry on schools and anywhere else currently banned. Advertise loudly on the entrances of these facilities "Only Legally Permitted Weapons Are Allowed On The Premises" Even if no one at the schools carried or anywhere else, the potential that some teachers are carrying or a staff member or the cashier at the mall was carrying is going to give someone, even those hellbent of creating as much carnage as possible pause on his target selection.

This will not eliminate this from happening, nothing will and that includes even the strictest gun bans, It will however lessen the chances of it occurring and it does not challenge or change the constitutional rights that the Supreme Court has already upheld in the U.S. that NRA is the only reason the NRA exists in the first place.

Instead, the NRA went out today and advocated more or less a bigger nanny police state, blamed it on video games and wants to just throw more money at the problem. They almost actually sounded like liberals. Time for the NRA to get a new President if this is what they are offering for a solution.

Armed security? there aren't enough teachers and they aren't paid well enough. yet there is a need to pay some overweight police reject money to sit on his ass at the door with gun?, this would give any would be shooter the first victim. A week of silence from the NRA to come out with this dystopian lunacy?

NRA - Not Really Astute.

To sum up: Guns are so deeply entrenched and pervasive in American culture, that it is all but impossible to put the genie back it the bottle. So much so that this is the solution? Now that is sad. The USA really is up poo creek in this aspect of life. I like America and Americans in general, I have lived there, but this is one thing I really don't get about America.

To take a line from a peom by Adrian Mitchell about quaker Norman Morrison who self-immolated outside the pentagon to protest the Vietnam War. ....

"in the multi-colored multi-minded United beautiful States of terrible America"

rmed security would easily be provided by trained teachers or other school employees,

That's hilarious! My elementary school teacher was a little old lady in her 60's. I doubt if she could have even picked up an assault rifle, better less fire one!

As for the argument about stricter background checks on gun owners: The guns used in the Newtown slaughter were owned by and registered to the killer's mother, who was his first victim!

I am sorry but, every pro-gun argument is flawed. There is only one solid answer. NO GUNS AT ALL!

If you ask most Americans why they need a gun there answer will nearly always be, for protection from another person with a gun. It is the same logic as: Which came first? The chicken or the egg?

Anyway the solution is at hand (@edbardoe) All you need to do is arm the teachers, and they can quickly take out a student who's having a bad day, before he/she gives his classmates a bad day. Simple, and a true, patriotic, American solution!

And what if it's the teacher who has a bad day?

I know! Let's arm the students then!

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,”

And the only people who actually believe this are complete morons. Had the mother not been allowed to purchase and own these guns, the massacre would not have happened. If the bad guys have no access to the guns (and don't deny most are stolen or borrowed from legal gun owners) you would have the US on scale with other nations in terms of gun killings instead of 200 times higher than the next highest developed country. But none of us truly believed the NRA was actually going to do something to reduce the number of guns and gun crimes. Instead they are pushing for MORE gun sales and for laws to be changed to allow more guns in a place where they should never be.

Well one thing you could do is make it so that the person purchasing the firearm they also do a background check and mental health check on those that live in the same place of residence as the person buying the gun. If anyone living there with the person wishing to purchase the gun is prohibited from buying the gun the person wishing to purchase the gun will be denied until they relocate.

It's a good start, but what about the 11-year old kid who brought a gun to school? It points to the problem of access. How do you propose we keep guns out of the wrong hands when we're sometimes dealing with people who meticulously plan a massacre? With so many guns around do you think we have a reasonable chance of making sure that one person doesn't get his hands on one?

so where does everyone who thinks this is such a great idea, think the money going to come from to pay for and arm Mr. Super Contra at the schoolyard doorstep?

You could always cut the military the budget to pay for the police officers to be stationed in the schools. But of course that will never happen.

Like Cleo says, people don't need guns. There are many, many countries in the world that prove that life without guns isn't just do-able.....it's normal! It's that simple. People can't be trusted with guns, therefore, they shouldn't be able to get them. If nobody else has them, you don't need one either. You'll be a happier, far less paranoid group of folk without them, I can assure you.

I understand that logic but we are not living in a world were guns do not exist. All I'm asking is if someone is shooting what is the best way to incapacitate them?

There is a Harvard School of Public Health review that shows that guns make you less safe. It is more likely the gun you have will kill or injure you or your family than protect them. More guns = more deaths across all incomes. More guns = make you feel less safe, more suicides, more injury and death of children.

It is most likely it will kill you or injure you and the reason for that is because the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides. Does that Harvard School of Public Health review include self defense of a weapon to be just simply brandishing or displaying the gun to the person is a threat to you or your family? Does it include those in which the victim fires but misses the threat? Or does it only include those that shoot and wound or kill their attacker?

The Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy shows that adding guns doesn't increase nor decrease crime, it also shows that gun ownership rates don't mean that there will be more deaths.

So gun ownership rate is not really tied at all to homicide rates as much as people believe it does.

And now to me its clear the NRA needs to be labeled as a terrorist oganization, it keeps nasty weaponns in mass circulation, makes kids & parents FEARFUL of going to SCHOOL!

NRA now is officially a terrorist organization!

I grew up with rifles at home, I shot them, my brother hunts some BUT we had & HAVE common sense, thankfully I wasnt born in the US, damn scary!

To those sensible members of the NRA you need to speak with actions, YOU need to quit this terrible terrible organization, they are an embarassment to the free world & the US! Do whats right, QUIT, agree to reasonable safe gun laws, turn in your silly military type weapons & no longer buy said mass killing machines, the BULLETS are in your court!

So NRA types what are you going to do!?!?! How about doing something RIGHT for a change is sorely needed!

Lapierre,

Congrats you are now the dumest man on the planet! JUST OMFG!

@donkusai

everyone has a bad day sometimes

That really cracked me up. So every time "someone has a bad day", a few dozen people will die, but well, the benefits to the community outweigh that, to be sure.

Anyway the solution is at hand (@edbardoe) All you need to do is arm the teachers, and they can quickly take out a student who's having a bad day, before he/she gives his classmates a bad day. Simple, and a true, patriotic, American solution!

The ft Hood shooter was not killed and he only had a hand gun; no body armor, no AR-15, nothing but one hand gun on a military base. He also did not shoot civilians. Yes he was stopped but not by the first person to shoot at him.

Have armed security at every school, who going to pay for that. Go that route and the schools will eventually look like concentration camps. Also remember the Empire State building shootings, all the people wounded were shot by or ricochets bullets fired by police not the shooter.

There is a Harvard School of Public Health review that shows that guns make you less safe. It is more likely the gun you have will kill or injure you or your family than protect them. More guns = more deaths across all incomes. More guns = make you feel less safe, more suicides, more injury and death of children.

Remember the Halloween shooting of a Japanese student in Baton Rouge in 1992. Just going to a party, wrong house, shot dead.

No problem with the money- the NRA will supply all the costs.

Noliving

Well do you have a better solution on how to incapacitate a person with a gun going around shooting people?

I kind of parodied this logic in a previous thread when I said this:

I actually suggest a machine gun nest at the school gate. That'll do it. Maybe a Howitzer as well, set up somewhere on the school oval next to the mortar team that really should be there too. Actually, probably a Patriot missile installation on each campus will be wise. Because, you know, you can never have too many guns. For defense of course.

Because you are already embarking on a ride down a slippery slope you can't get off.

Like Cleo says, people don't need guns. There are many, many countries in the world that prove that life without guns isn't just do-able.....it's normal! It's that simple. People can't be trusted with guns, therefore, they shouldn't be able to get them. If nobody else has them, you don't need one either. You'll be a happier, far less paranoid group of folk without them, I can assure you.

So what happens if the guy decides to shoot up a movie theater?

we need to have every single movie theater in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work,” LaPierre said. “And by that I mean armed security.”

What happens if they decide to take out a church?

we need to have every single church in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work,” LaPierre said. “And by that I mean armed security.”

And a park?

we need to have every single park in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work,” LaPierre said. “And by that I mean armed security.”

A hospital?

we need to have every single hospital in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work,” LaPierre said. “And by that I mean armed security.”

The line outside the Apple Store?

we need to have every single line outside of the Apple Store in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work,” LaPierre said. “And by that I mean armed security.”

the NRAs point is wherever a shooting spray will happen, that place/ worker or what must have guns to protect themselves ...every institution in the US guns is flooding more than sandy

Even if we stop nutters from getting guns, which we should, that won't solve mass-shootings like this one, where the gun was stolen from his Mom.

Shows the nuttiness of his Mom.

I digress though. Armed guards have no place at a school. What kind of message does that send to our children? What they really need is less guns and more non invasive security at schools along with better mental health care.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun

That is the dumbest statement ever uttered by lips.

Armed security would easily be provided by trained teachers or other school employees, not necessarily a regular police officer. The assault rifle ban was in effect for ten years, there were the usual few school assaults in those years. The ban on assault rifle sales is still in effect in Connecticut. If this legislation would really stop this problem, most would support it. It will not, and its supporters know it will not, they just are anti-gun and usually anti-american (a group which includes Obama)

Putting an armed guard in schools is a reasonable response to concerns about the safety of school children. Obama has armed guards protecting him due to the exact same concern for his safety. Most Americans would think it insane not to provide armed protection for the president. Makes sense to protect children too. If the response to this tragedy is to make minor changes to gun laws and not address the millions of guns already in the hands of the public and not address our violent culture and problems with mental health then it's just a waste of time. Moral indignation is not in itself a solution.

Unless American's want to amend their Constitution to ban guns and systematically go house to house and take guns away from every citizen then providing armed guards in the schools is the only realistic measure to provide protection from a deranged killer like the guy in Connecticut. The reason why the Secret Service and law enforcement personnel carry weapons is to defend the defenseless. In the long run, a change in culture that promotes violence and making it easier to institutionalize dangerous people are also needed.

How does another assault weapons ban that does not require the confiscation of those hundreds of thousands already in public hands do anything to solve this problem? It doesn't.

Stupid me. I had really expected that the NRA would HAVE to "do something meaningful". My whole adult life has been spent teaching others the art of communicating. Teaching English. I did so for 20 yeatrs in Japan. I am at a loss for adjectives to describe the range of emotions that the people of Newtown must be feeling. And the NRA's answer is that "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun". Totally dumbfounding. Haunting, disturbing, . . I need a thesaurus.

Well okay, here's the thing. Even if we stop nutters from getting guns, which we should, that won't solve mass-shootings like this one, where the gun was stolen from his Mom.

Well one thing you could do is make it so that the person purchasing the firearm they also do a background check and mental health check on those that live in the same place of residence as the person buying the gun. If anyone living there with the person wishing to purchase the gun is prohibited from buying the gun the person wishing to purchase the gun will be denied until they relocate.

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.

This only works consistently on TV and in fiction. In real life the "good guys" don't always in. In Arizona to old men (unarmed) stopped Gilford's assailant when he stopped to reload.

In Japan I can live peacefully as a good guy without a gun. The only time I am a good guy with a gun is at amusement park shooting galleries. I always get the stuff animal after ascertaining how the sights have been jimmied (after one shot).

Wayne LaPierre just shot himself and the NRA in the foot. In countries(like Japan) that have gun control laws that work 99% of the time there is no need for armed cops at schools. The very suggestion that police might be necessary at schools shows there is a real and ongoing public gun violence crisis in the US.

Just this morning there was a report of 4 people being killed in an apparent drive-by shooting in rural Pennsylvania. One victim was a woman putting up Christmas decorations at her church. So should we now have armed cops at churches? How about bulletproof Christmas decorations? How about decorators armed with Glocks and Bushmasters? How about a machine gun nest in the steeple?

Do the benefits of guns outweigh the cost to the community in events like this? That's really what it all comes down to. Yes, we need to make things safer by making it harder for crazy people to get guns, but everyone has a bad day sometimes - so better checks may have a slight effect on these types of events, but will not make a big overall difference.

I disagree with that, background checks are very effective when they are thoroughly done on people, I would add that the background check though would also need to include a background check on those that live in the same residence of the buyer.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,”

And there is the lunacy in the logic! - The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is not giving the bad guy access to a gun in the first place!

Don't let the nutter get a gun in the first place?

That is not an answer to the question. The question was based off of the scenario that someone has a firearm and is shooting people, how do you incapacitate them?

The desire to own a gun in the first place should be clear enough evidence of mental instability. Anyone who wants a gun, isn't fit to have one.

What peer reviewed psychology study do you have to prove that statement?

Of course, he said exactly what we knew the NRA would say. No surprise whatsoever. Amazing how common sense don't apply to them at all

Well do you have a better solution on how to incapacitate a person with a gun going around shooting people?

Don't let the nutter get a gun in the first place?

you only have to put down whether or not you have been court ordered for a psychiatric evaluation

The desire to own a gun in the first place should be clear enough evidence of mental instability. Anyone who wants a gun, isn't fit to have one.

The NRA should rename itself the NMRA - National Manufacturers and Retailers of Arms - because that is who their main constituency is. Fact is, it is precisely the slightly deranged demography that makes up the core of its sales. The last thing they'd want is to keep weapons out of the hands of crazy people.

Easy access to these type of weapons, unfortunately, goes hand in hand with these type of tragic events. Guns are designed to damage targets, whether at a shooting range, when hunting animals, or when used against people. That is just what they do. If we want easy access to these sorts of things, then we also must accept the consequence that they will sometimes be used the wrong way. We don't call for a ban on cars because of high road tolls because we accept the consequences of cars being freely available. It's a national decision to do so. The benefits of cars greatly outweigh the cost.

Do the benefits of guns outweigh the cost to the community in events like this? That's really what it all comes down to. Yes, we need to make things safer by making it harder for crazy people to get guns, but everyone has a bad day sometimes - so better checks may have a slight effect on these types of events, but will not make a big overall difference.

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.”

Bloomberg is spot on. And the callousness of a segment of the NLA is unbelievable.

Keep in mind that the Clinton (1994) assault weapons ban did nothing to curb gun violence. It was higher when the ban was in effect vs now. Criminals don't care about gun laws. It only hurts the law abiding citizen only....

If you put armed personnel in schools, they more than likely will be the first taken out.

Possibility but considering the police officers at my high school when I attended walked around the halls and not a set path it would be kind of difficult to catch the officer unaware.

This is actually a form of insanity. These people have lost it. If this is considered part of a rational debate in the US, then it truly is a nation with cancer.

Well do you have a better solution on how to incapacitate a person with a gun going around shooting people?

Strict gun control is the answer imo.

Part of the problem is getting states to change some of their privacy laws. For example in my state when you go to get a permit to carry a gun you only have to put down whether or not you have been court ordered for a psychiatric evaluation or an evaluation for chemical dependency. If you did the evaluations voluntarily not only do you not have to disclose it on the form but law enforcement does not have access to such records.

Wayne Lapierre has erased any doubt that the NRA represents the lunatic fringe.

A rather inconvenient truth that bites the NRA's argument in the behind. I don't know why I expected a bit better from the NRA. Guess they're just not capable of it.

Actually armed personnel at ford hood did stop mass the shooting. In fact the mass shooting would have been worse if he was not shot dead. I don't recall their ever being an armed personnel in the columbine school at the time the shooting started. I do recall the cops arriving on the scene and then waiting 38 minutes before they entered the school, the good news is that police have learned from such incidents and now they just charge into the school.

I have to admit I was disappointed by the NRA, I was expecting more such as on closing mental health check loopholes and and requiring private sellers to do background checks. While at the same time getting the federal government to use its funds that it sends to states with a string attached that says you have to send in the mental health records to be added to NICS to get the funding. Exactly like how MADD got federal funding for road construction and maintenance to the states be tied to them raising the drinking age to 21.

Children going to school in bullet proof vests and surrounded by armed guards sounds like a "wonderful school life."

Schools in the US, more specifically the high schools, not all of them, have had an armed police officer in the schools for nearly a decade. It was a $900 million dollar program that was ended just recently within the past year or two. The goal behind it was more about getting a positive relationship going on between law enforcement and teenagers rather than security. Quite frankly when I was in high school no one even blinked when they saw the armed police officer. You just regarded him or her as another faculty member not to mention the fact that you seem them armed all the time in public.

How about this Wayne... leave the guns to owners who are trained professionals or to people who use them strictly for sport or recreation only.

Isn't that what he was saying? Use police officers to guard the school?

Until the police officer has a bad day / forgets to take his meds and shoots up the whole school. Then they will be calling for 2 armed police officers in every school...

Well seeing as police officers have been in US high schools for nearly a decade it has yet to happen.....

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,”

This is actually a form of insanity. These people have lost it.

If this is considered part of a rational debate in the US, then it truly is a nation with cancer.

Complete and utter arrogance. Apparenty the NRA's logic goes somehing like this -- "Since we have forced the chicken-sh*t guys in Congress to bow to our will over the past decade or so, and totally subvert the Second Amendment, and let the U.S. become an armed camp, including assault rifles and multiple-clip magazines, you now need to go even further and put armed guards in all schools, since we must logically assume now that crazies have weapons." When will the tail stop wagging the dog? 4.0 milion members should not force the remaining nearly 300 million Americans live in fear because we are back in the Wild West, where guns ruled over common sense/civility. Congress -- put on your BIG BOY PANTS and push these clowns into irrelevance, where they belong.

If you put armed personnel in schools, they more than likely will be the first taken out. But I do agree that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. So maybe some of the staffers at various places do need too get trained and allow them to carry and conceal. The sad fact is the attackers don't put any value on human life, not even their own. At the point they arm themselves and try to carry out their twisted thoughts they are no longer humans in my opinion, they are a threat that is needs to be stopped. Only the law abiding ones are the victims in this. Why not put weapons in their hands? As far as banning assault weapons and such, all I know is law or no law if these creeps want to shoot up a school or a mall they will find a way to get one. It won't stop them from trying. We need to STOP them from DOING.

Stupid.

Until the police officer has a bad day / forgets to take his meds and shoots up the whole school. Then they will be calling for 2 armed police officers in every school...

Rep Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, 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.

A rather inconvenient truth that bites the NRA's argument in the behind.

I don't know why I expected a bit better from the NRA. Guess they're just not capable of it.

Sure. Why stop there? Go ahead and put the whole country under Martial law (sarcasm).

This just proves how dumb the NRA are. The way of preventing guns entering schools isn't to put one in there.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, said Wayne LaPierre

How about this Wayne... leave the guns to owners who are trained professionals or to people who use them strictly for sport or recreation only. All of which must have regular phsyc tests to deem if their mental health is fit enough to possess such a deadly weapon. Strict gun control is the answer imo.