NRA calls for armed police officer in every school

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Your making this too easy.

*You're.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The security at Logan airport in Boston was handled by a private security firm on September 11th 2001 and look how that turned out.

I'm sure there will be hoards of nutbags with guns scouting all the schools to see what one has the weakest security. The ones without guns will probably have 3 massacres a week.

Do bank robbers go for the difficult banks or the easy ones? If you were a criminal and you were planning a home invasion would you go for the house that you know is armed or would you look for an easier target? I don't see too many criminals trying to knock off police stations.

It's pretty much a no brainer imo. Either you want protection or you don't. If you don't and a crime is committed against you or a loved one then don't complain about it. It's your choice.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

*You're.

He put that obvious error in there just to make you feel better. That's how nice a guy he is.

[PMartin37 161]

[quote name=' timestamp='1356109804' post='5883793]

Good point. They're building huge American-style malls in India these days. I went to India earlier this year and the interiors look like anything you'd find here (but newer and nicer) with one difference - security. Every car is searched before allowed into the underground parking garage. Every bag you have is searched before you are allowed in. And the large department stores won't even let you enter with any bags - they must be checked in with security.

What I found a little amusing was that the female security guards were more intimidating than the male ones. The men were all no more than 100-110 pounds. The women were huge. And mean. You could see the evil in their eyes

Funny, I made some very similar remarks to a friend earlier this week about that. I went to India earlier this year also and went through security at the mall and I thought to myself that was kind of sad for society to come to that. (is that freedom really?) If the NRA has anything to say about it, that would be OUR America. The solution is simply and ALWAYS will be more security, at taxpayer expense to us, but a profit for themselves. If you think about it, it's genius (but only IF the mass public will buy that load of b.s.)

[scotinmass 588]

Do bank robbers go for the difficult banks or the easy ones? If you were a criminal and you were planning a home invasion would you go for the house that you know is armed or would you look for an easier target? I don't see too many criminals trying to knock off police stations.

It's pretty much a no brainer imo. Either you want protection or you don't. If you don't and a crime is committed against you or a loved one then don't complain about it. It's your choice.

Bank robbers are generally rational if misguided people and they don't want to get caught.

People who commit mass murder of innocent people generally do it because they are completely fcuked up in the head and don't give a ####### whether they get caught or not. They usually do it because they have some kind of agenda that only makes sense to them and they pick a particular school or other location because it fits in to their agenda.

And we already have armed protection from the police and the forces. That's enough for me.

Edited December 21, 2012 by scotinmass

[sly_wolf 199]

Do bank robbers go for the difficult banks or the easy ones? If you were a criminal and you were planning a home invasion would you go for the house that you know is armed or would you look for an easier target? I don't see too many criminals trying to knock off police stations.

It's pretty much a no brainer imo. Either you want protection or you don't. If you don't and a crime is committed against you or a loved one then don't complain about it. It's your choice.

The motivation is not the same. There is crazy and there is the master criminal. When you are crazy it dont really matter and logic no longer applies.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Bank robbers are generally rational if misguided people and they don't want to get caught.

People who commit mass murder of innocent people generally do it because they are completely fcuked up in the head and don't give a ####### whether they get caught or not. They usually do it because they have some kind of agenda that only makes sense to them and they pick a particular school or other location because it fits in to their agenda.

There's some planning that goes into these mass shootings. I'm guessing the shooter wants to kill as many targets as possible. No armed security means easier kills which usually means more kills. More kills mean more press. I'm not saying that goes for all these whack jobs

I'm assuming that most parents want to protect their child. If not then why put kids in seat belts when their in the car? What makes protecting your child at school a bad thing, yet protecting them in an automobile a good thing?

It comes down to what you want. You either want protection or you don't. Maybe they should have options for parents. The ones who don't want armed security should have their own school, and for the ones who do want an armed security guard on hand should have theirs.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[sly_wolf 199]

There's some planning that goes into these mass shootings. I'm guessing the shooter wants to kill as many targets as possible. No armed security means easier kills which usually means more kills. More kills mean more press. I'm not saying that goes for all these whack jobs

I'm assuming that most parents want to protect their child. If not then why put kids in seat belts when their in the car? What makes protecting your child at school a bad thing, yet protecting them in an automobile a good thing?

It comes down to what you want. You either want protection or you don't. Maybe they should have options for parents. The ones who don't want armed security should have their own school, and for the ones who do want an armed security guard on hand should have theirs.

You know how someone crazy plans and thinks?

[scotinmass 588]

I'm assuming that most parents want to protect their child. If not then why put kids in seat belts when their in the car? What makes protecting your child at school a bad thing, yet protecting them in an automobile a good thing?

A seat belt and child's car seat are designed to save lives.

A gun is designed to kill.

Can you see the difference?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

You know how someone crazy plans and thinks?

Read up on the Colorado theater shooter seeing how it's obvious you haven't.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

A seat belt and child's car seat are designed to save lives.

A gun is designed to kill.

Can you see the difference?

You either want to protect your child or you don't. Survival is normal human nature. People should have choices. For the parents who do not want an armed security guard or police officer at their childs school they should be able to choose schools that don't have such. Same for the parents who do want one at their childs school. They should be able to choose a school that has such protection. Choice is good.

[scotinmass 588]

You either want to protect your child or you don't. Survival is normal human nature. People should have choices. For the parents who do not want an armed security guard or police officer at their childs school they should be able to choose schools that don't have such. Same for the parents who do want one at their childs school. They should be able to choose a school that has such protection. Choice is good.

Most of us who actually have children don't think that exposing them to guns every second of every day is protecting them.

[SMOKE 1,426]

so, do any of the anti-gun people in here have a plan to rid the US of guns?

yah thats gonna work. the police can't get illegal weapons off the streets. getting legal one from people is going to so much simplier. the government can't round up 15-20 million illegal aliens because its too time consuming & costly. removing 300 million guns will be a cake walk.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Most of us who actually have children don't think that exposing them to guns every second of every day is protecting them.

Really Scott or is that just your opinion? Many schools up here have an armed staff on hand with a high powered semi automatic rifle during spring and fall time in order to protect the children from bear attacks. Do you really think those parents do not want their children protected? How else would you propose those parents protect their children from becoming lunch or do you think they should be fair game for the bear?

Edited December 21, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[scotinmass 588]

Really Scott or is that just your opinion? Many schools up here have an armed staff on hand with a high powered semi automatic rifle during spring and fall time in order to protect the children from bear attacks. Do you really think those parents do not want their children protected? How else would you propose those parents protect their children from becoming lunch?

Real America is very different from your frozen wilderness.

We don't get many bears in these here parts.