Armed Guards

[Luddly Neddite]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

 

[Oldguy]

Question for the Nutter's: How is REQUIRING armed guards NOT an exercise in gun legislation or gun control, even if a positive example? How is that not government intrusion into our 2nd amendment rights?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Yep.

And, they seem incapable of understanding that while they're yammering about keeping rights, they're actually throwing rights away.

 

[Si modo]

Yep.

And, they seem incapable of understanding that while they're yammering about keeping rights, they're actually throwing rights away.

Well, when the fed makes it easy for the bad guys to hurt us, I'm thinking the fed should stop doing that, especially when the Bill of Rights says they should not do that.

Just an idea especially when this sort of shit has dramatically increased with more "control" laws.

 

[tjvh]

Liberals want you understand that guns are the primary cause... Mental illness is not. Guns are scary, so they should be banned. They only push their anti gun nonsense when there is a tragedy, because when there is no tragedy to back up their assault on your Second Amendment Rights, they lose their argument every time. They are a tyrannical bunch who use the deaths of children to push their anti Freedom agendas, which in itself makes them truly despicable people. Gun control isn't about controlling guns... It's about controlling people.

 

[FireFly]

Another "Do as I say, not as I do." Libtard!

The Weekly Standard is reporting that despite his criticism of the NRA school proposal, Meet The Press - David Gregory’s own kids go to a high-security school with armed guards on the premises: "The Gregory children go to school with the children of President Barack Obama, according to the Washington Post. That school is the co-ed Quaker school Sidwell Friends. According to a scan of the school’s online faculty-staff directory, Sidwell has a security department made up of at least 11 people. Many of those are police officers, who are presumably armed. Moreover, with the Obama kids in attendance, there is a secret service presence at the institution, as well."

 

[Oldguy]

the Bill of Rights says they should not do that.

The Bill of Rights says the bad guys should not hurt us? Coupla question:

1. Where?

2. How is "hurt us" defined?

 

[Si modo]

the Bill of Rights says they should not do that.

The Bill of Rights says the bad guys should not hurt us? Coupla question:

1. Where?

2. How is "hurt us" defined?

I'm not sure I should even respond to such a retarded edit and question, except to say that it's a retarded edit and question based on a retarded edit.

Merry Christmas, idiot.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Question for the Nutter's: How is REQUIRING armed guards NOT an exercise in gun legislation or gun control, even if a positive example? How is that not government intrusion into our 2nd amendment rights?

Gun nuts and rw's are not against government control. Just mention marriage equality or abortion and they're ready to vote for laws that would control the most intimate and private lives of OTHER Americans.

Even though there is no evidence that guns in our schools would stop mass murders, and even though there IS evidence that guns in schools would NOT stop mass murder, its not at all surprising that they now want laws to force us all to live in fear of even more shootings than we already have.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Liberals want you understand that guns are the primary cause... Mental illness is not. Guns are scary, so they should be banned. They only push their anti gun nonsense when there is a tragedy, because when there is no tragedy to back up their assault on your Second Amendment Rights, they lose their argument every time. They are a tyrannical bunch who use the deaths of children to push their anti Freedom agendas, which in itself makes them truly despicable people. Gun control isn't about controlling guns... It's about controlling people.

PROOF please.

The FACT is, just as guns have not stopped mass shootings in the schools where they already are, there is no evidence that banning the ultimate goal of those who do not want the mentally ill, criminals, terrorists, illegals to be able to easily buy guns.

The question is, WHY do the gun nuts/rw's want to arm the mentally ill, criminals, terrorists and illegals? WHY do the gun nuts/rw's always run away from THAT question?

 

[kwc57]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

So for the record, you are in favor of letting unprotected school children and teachers die while they wait for the police to arrive. Duly noted asshole. Go play in traffic.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

Which is exactly what he was supposed to do.

An armed citizen is armed for his self-defense only, not to defend others and try to be a ‘hero.’

And although armed guards may be a factor in preventing gun violence, they can not be the only factor.

 

[kwc57]

Question for the Nutter's: How is REQUIRING armed guards NOT an exercise in gun legislation or gun control, even if a positive example? How is that not government intrusion into our 2nd amendment rights?

Gun nuts and rw's are not against government control. Just mention marriage equality or abortion and they're ready to vote for laws that would control the most intimate and private lives of OTHER Americans.

Even though there is no evidence that guns in our schools would stop mass murders, and even though there IS evidence that guns in schools would NOT stop mass murder, its not at all surprising that they now want laws to force us all to live in fear of even more shootings than we already have.

You and you're lover can blow each other to your heart's content. You don't have to be married to have sex.

 

[Moonglow]

Liberals want you understand that guns are the primary cause... Mental illness is not. Guns are scary, so they should be banned. They only push their anti gun nonsense when there is a tragedy, because when there is no tragedy to back up their assault on your Second Amendment Rights, they lose their argument every time. They are a tyrannical bunch who use the deaths of children to push their anti Freedom agendas, which in itself makes them truly despicable people. Gun control isn't about controlling guns... It's about controlling people.

Then why do the repubs not allow automatic machine guns?

 

[Moonglow]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

Which is exactly what he was supposed to do.

An armed citizen is armed for his self-defense only, not to defend others and try to be a ‘hero.’

And although armed guards may be a factor in preventing gun violence, they can not be the only factor.

True, you must have courage to die in the effort to help others to live.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

"We all know" that the armed Sheriff's Deputy on duty at Columbine that day exchanged gunfire with Eric Harris, the Sheriff's Deputy called for backup, and the motorcycle cop who responded joined the Sheriff's Deputy in exchanging gunfire with both Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, then they both began evacuating students as the SWAT team arrived.

"We all know" that Virginia Tech, like most large universities, is like a city within a city, and the "armed police on duty" were at the University police station when the shooting started. The police were not inside the building where the shootings took place, and it took the police over 8 minutes to respond to the initial 911 call.

"We all know" that the military police at military installations are virtually the ONLY military that are armed and on-duty 24/7/365. The mass murderer at Ft. Hood was an Army officer, and the military police at Ft. Hood responded to the shootings not unlike any other civilian police department would.

The only thing worse than your "research" is your dishonesty, "Luddly". Here are some FACTS for you:

Most multiple-victim shootings occur in “gun-free zones” — even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut starting gunning down shoppers a few weeks ago.

1. At the recent Portland mall shooting, concealed-carry-holder Nick Meli hadn’t noticed that the mall was a gun-free zone. He pointed his (otherwise legal) gun at the shooter as he paused to reload, and the next shot was the attempted mass murderer killing himself. (Meli aimed, but didn’t shoot, because there were bystanders behind the shooter.)

2. Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.

3. Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead "innocents": Two.

4. Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead "innocents": Three.

5. Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates — as well as the “trained campus supervisor”; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead "innocents": Two.

6. Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, the student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman’s head, ending the murder spree. Total dead "innocents": Two.

7. Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead "innocents": One.

There are a few examples for you, "Luddly". So how does that shoe leather taste?

 

[Big Black Dog]

Come on luddly.neddite. It's Christmas. Stop being a complete dope and go have some egg nog and STFU. You're really going overboard lately with you "anti-gun" bullshit.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Liberals want you understand that guns are the primary cause... Mental illness is not. Guns are scary, so they should be banned. They only push their anti gun nonsense when there is a tragedy, because when there is no tragedy to back up their assault on your Second Amendment Rights, they lose their argument every time. They are a tyrannical bunch who use the deaths of children to push their anti Freedom agendas, which in itself makes them truly despicable people. Gun control isn't about controlling guns... It's about controlling people.

Then why do the repubs not allow automatic machine guns?

Ignorance is bliss, eh "Moonglow"?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We all know that Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy on duty at the time of shooting. Virginia Tech had armed police on duty. Ft Hood had dozens of guards and MPs not to mention the trained military who were shot.

We also know that there was an armed civilian at the Tucson shooting who stayed inside the Walgreen's store until the unarmed people wrestled the gun away from Loughner. He later said he almost came out but then his story changed several more times. It was the unarmed people, including an elderly lady, who held Loughner until the police arrived.

In almost all shootings, its the police who stop the shooter or the shooter kills himself. In searching, I've found only one case of a civilian and one case of an off duty police officer taking down a shooter. There are also occasional cases of people disarming home invaders but, since this is not a second amendment issue, those stories have nothing at all to do with the question of armed police at schools.

Since having armed guards has never helped before, why do gun nuts believe that will change?

Do gun nuts want armed guards at other places as well? Churches? Restaurants? There have been shootings at both so should there be armed guards there as well?

Something else we know is that the guard at Columbine traded fire with the shooters, actually saving some students, and was willing to go back in and save more, but the SWAT team implemented the active shooter policy and refused to let him.

As for the campus cops at Virginia Tech, they are cops, and were busy writing parking tickets, not patrolling the hallways. They couldn't be where they were needed because cops can never be everywhere.

Just a quick question, since you just admitted cops can't stop crimes, why do you insist the answer to crime is more cops? Please, keep telling me more guns in the hands of the good guys is not the answer.

As for Tucson, if Louder had not been disarmed by other people who did not wait for the police he would have been able to shoot him. I remember a few reporters making an issue that he almost shot the wrong man, even though he didn't. Now you are trying to tell me he was in the drugstore the whole time.

Would you like a list of shootings that were actually prevented by armed guards?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Question for the Nutter's: How is REQUIRING armed guards NOT an exercise in gun legislation or gun control, even if a positive example? How is that not government intrusion into our 2nd amendment rights?

I am feeling generous today, so I am willing to give you a chance how to be proven stupid beyond measure. All you have to do is not respond to this post in an attempt to defend that stupid beyond measure question.

Merry Christmas.