Guns are already banned in schools. That's why they're targeted.

[JimBowie1958]

Ah, got it.

You don't actually want to discuss the idea of putting guards in schools, you just want to rant about "progressives hating children!"

Her primary suggestion has been suggesting teachers be allowed to carry, Ein-fucking-stein.

The only reason that libtards are so pissed about this is that it wasnt black kids that were killed; if it were they wouldnt bother so much.

 

[AmyNation]

No, she specifically suggested armed guards.

Teachers carrying guns, would last until the 1st time a student gets shot then the multimillion dollar lawsuit the state has to pay out would quickly put an end to that.

 

[HUGGY]

"
Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools.
I spoke with Lott after the Newtown shooting, and he confirmed that nothing has changed to alter his findings. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.
“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”
Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”
The Facts about Mass Shootings - John Fund - National Review Online#

You have the hubris to claim to know why Sandy Hook Elementary was "targeted"? You keep showing newer and more deep insanity. Is there nothing you are not the last word in?

 

[JimBowie1958]

"
Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools.
I spoke with Lott after the Newtown shooting, and he confirmed that nothing has changed to alter his findings. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.
“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”
Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”
The Facts about Mass Shootings - John Fund - National Review Online#

But libtards just KNOW that if they double-dog ban them it will be different this time.

/sarc

 

[Wry Catcher]

School resource officers (armed police officers) teamed with Juvneile Probation Officers has been implemented in some districts. The cost is born by the city and the country (or in some states the city and the state). No conservative would support a Congress ordering all schools to do so ("it's not in the Constitution") and the Tea Party in Congress would not fund such a program unless such was revenue neutral; if that was possible few school districts, few police depts, few probation agencies would allow the Federal Government to impose a cookie cutter school safety plan.

So let volunteer faculty carry concealed and you dont have to spend jackshit, dumbass.

School Disricts do not want staff armed. It comes down to liability. First of all in doing what you suggest entire policies & procedures need to be written, for example who purchases the firearm, what type of firearm, same for type ofammunition; who supervises the volunteer, does the volunteer need to be evaluated by a shink, who trains the volunteer, how often does the volunteer need to qualify at the range, who is the range master, etc. etc.); and, a use of force policy must be written; next MOU's with local law enforcement and other first responders need to be hammered out and as I know all of this is usually done at the LT level in a Police Agency.

There is more to the issue than a simple permit to carry, even a jackass knows that.

 

[asterism]

No, what I'm doing is looking at your idea beyond a fantasy message board.

It will cost upwards of 7 billion dollars a year, to have 2 armed guards in each public school.

You make a valid point. Some schools would require more and other schools would need less. Your figure is a good starting point - $70K per year per school. I think that's something that could be funded locally.

 

[asterism]

School resource officers (armed police officers) teamed with Juvneile Probation Officers has been implemented in some districts. The cost is born by the city and the country (or in some states the city and the state). No conservative would support a Congress ordering all schools to do so ("it's not in the Constitution") and the Tea Party in Congress would not fund such a program unless such was revenue neutral; if that was possible few school districts, few police depts, few probation agencies would allow the Federal Government to impose a cookie cutter school safety plan.

And yet there is a cop in our High School and the campaign used here to fund it through property taxes passed overwhelmingly by voters in both parties.

That busts your bullshit quip.

No shootings at our school either.

 

[auditor0007]

Just go ahead and say you don't want us to protect children. Everybody knows that's what this is all about. Progressives actually want children to die...which is why they continue to fight for measures that will ensure they die.

Even when I agree with something you say, you blow it by saying something really stupid. See, you just did it again.

 

[JimBowie1958]

School resource officers (armed police officers) teamed with Juvneile Probation Officers has been implemented in some districts. The cost is born by the city and the country (or in some states the city and the state). No conservative would support a Congress ordering all schools to do so ("it's not in the Constitution") and the Tea Party in Congress would not fund such a program unless such was revenue neutral; if that was possible few school districts, few police depts, few probation agencies would allow the Federal Government to impose a cookie cutter school safety plan.

So let volunteer faculty carry concealed and you dont have to spend jackshit, dumbass.

School Disricts do not want staff armed. It comes down to liability. First of all in doing what you suggest entire policies & procedures need to be written, for example who purchases the firearm, what type of firearm, same for type ofammunition; who supervises the volunteer, does the volunteer need to be evaluated by a shink, who trains the volunteer, how often does the volunteer need to qualify at the range, who is the range master, etc. etc.); and, a use of force policy must be written; next MOU's with local law enforcement and other first responders need to be hammered out and as I know all of this is usually done at the LT level in a Police Agency.

There is more to the issue than a simple permit to carry, even a jackass knows that.

Then modify the laws with 'Good Samaritan' exceptions for teachers who protect students, Einstein.

Shit, you liberals (with all due respect) seem to think the opinion of a lawyer is the final say. Fuck that; work around it or push to change the damned laws.

And if you are a Democrat, I will not apologize for calling you a jack ass as that is your parties mascot, aint it?

 

[koshergrl]

Just go ahead and say you don't want us to protect children. Everybody knows that's what this is all about. Progressives actually want children to die...which is why they continue to fight for measures that will ensure they die.

Even when I agree with something you say, you blow it by saying something really stupid. See, you just did it again.

See, just because you don't like it doesn't make it stupid, or any less factual.

When progressives insist we shouldn't protect children from armed nuts who routinely target schools because they know they will not be stopped by armed child guardians, then they are proving that they actually want children to die.

If my dog was chained outside in a street where he had no shelter, and was run over by a car...that would be evidence of me trying to kill that dog.

When you send children to schools that advertise their locations and their gun-ban status, and adamantly refuse to take precautions to protect them from being shot like fish in a barrel, that is evidence that you want them to die. If you didn't, you would protect them.

Progressives don't protect them. And they NEVER WILL. Because they WANT PEOPLE TO DIE.

It's not rocket science. Progressives in this country stand for death in all it's forms...euthanasia, abortion, assisted suicide, forced sterilization, you name it. They think our teachers are too stupid to be trusted with weapons and have actually implied that if we provide our teachers with the tools to defend our children, the teachers will go berzerk and slaughter the kids...They have even suggested that a teacher with a gun would have made the Conn massacre WORSE (I think the implication is that the crazed teacher would join in on the fun) So think of the groups who have, historically, supported those things, and tell me that you think people who belong to those groups care about the safety of children, or are interested in anything but visiting death upon all but the most exclusive groups of people.