18 Children Among 26 Dead in Conn Elementary School Shooting

Something the Dog Said wrote:

FredHayek wrote: The only way to prevent CT with laws would have been to confiscate all weapons from the mothers of mentally disturbed teens. Sounds pretty oppressive to me. And what would have been more likely to stop Lanza an armed guard or a new Clinton Assault Weapons Ban? Columbine happened under Bill's old one. Dems think of hired guards as a stimulus plan. Aren't our children worth 50K per school?

How would an armed guard prevented the slaughter of the 20 five and six year old kids in Newton? The shooter broke into through a window, entered the classroom, fired over 100 rounds within 10 (TEN) minutes before taking his own life. At a manufacturer's recommended sustained fire rate of 15 rounds per minute and with 30 round clips, that would have been 30 rounds in less than two minutes. So those tiny victims would have been slaughtered most likely within the first minute or so. What would have been the response time of an "armed guard" posted at the entrance of the school (incident occurred just after lock down), to recognize the situation, determine the location, run to the location, evaluate the situation, enter the classroom without getting gunned down and take out the shooter? At best, let's say 3 minutes, more likely 5 - 10 minutes. How many lives saved? None.

Here is what Gov. Christie had to say about the NRA proposal (and I have to agree):
In contrast to National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Friday said he doesn't think putting armed guards in every school is a sound response to last week's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn.

“In general I don’t think that the solution to safety in schools is putting an armed guard because for it to be really effective in my view, from a law enforcement perspective, you have to have an armed guard at every classroom,” Christie said while appearing at an event in Newark, N.J. “Because if you just have an armed guard at the front door then what if this guy had gone around to the side door? There’s many doors in and out of schools.”
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/e ... on?ref=fpb

How would an armed guard have prevented this? The shooter might have moved to another, softer target. If armed guards don't work, why do the President and banks continue to employ them? As a deterrent?

Banks don't employ them... When's the last time you went into a bank and saw an armed guard?...They rely on cameras, exploding dye packets, silent alarms, etc.

You really must stop trying to repeat bogus talking-points from a raving lunatic....

LadyJazzer wrote: When's the last time you went into a bank and saw an armed guard?...

Not to get entirely off the subject or anything, but just making a point: While I haven't seen a uniformed armed guard in a rural or mountain area bank in a while, I have seen CC, (concealed carry) clerks and guards in place here along the 285 corridor in the past 14 days. Sorry if that puts a wrench in any kind of agenda, planning, plot, point/counterpoint, etc. but its a fact, armed "guards" are closer to home than one might think.




Badger

I don't think armed guards will prevent all school shootings but it should be one of the tools considered.

FredHayek wrote: I don't think armed guards will prevent all school shootings but it should be one of the tools considered.

So, we tolerate billions in fraud so one innocent is not deprived of x, y or z. surely any amount spent is worth it if it saves one life.

LadyJazzer wrote: Banks don't employ them... When's the last time you went into a bank and saw an armed guard?...They rely on cameras, exploding dye packets, silent alarms, etc.

You really must stop trying to repeat bogus talking-points from a raving lunatic....

I saw 2 last week taking money out of King Soopers

Going to admit upfront that I haven't read enough of this thread, (hardly any in fact) and am just going out on a limb here, but I would like to go on record and state, (if the point hasn't already been made):

I think arming teachers is a great idea providing they are comfortable and trained. And "trained" is emphasized more than comfortable. Let's face it, my buddy's girl friend's attitude towards hand gun ethics is eager, learning well, but in my humble opinion STILL needing a bit of improvement before I'm ready to see her walk onto the range unassisted with that side arm.

With that said however, the 'cute' factor only weighs in so much and many teachers would probably readily explain, if/when they are ready/willing/able to carry. If they weren't comfortable, it should NEVER be forced, but if it were deemed a lack of sufficient security is in place then that is when a security guard or LEO be put into effect.

People seem to think that an "armed guard" is a bad thing, but growing up in Florida there were cops on campus all the time. Sidearms in plain view. We (as students) were not scared at all. There was no fear, and there wasn't a feeling of totalitarianism either, it was just a simple fact there was a cop on campus whether you needed him/her or not. At that age we were too busy worrying about what our peers thought of us... (well some students anyway, I was a dick, I'll admit it.) Had to have a Swatch, (didn't have one, thought they were ugly.) Had to have Nike shoes, (had some, but preferred my mil surplus combat boots or hiking boots), had to wear Levi's (that one stuck, they actually fit and are pretty durable.) Trust me, when I say kids aren't worried about whether or not security is in place, and the ones that are.... watch that child, they concern me.



Badger

Mass shootings with a suicide are a symptom of a larger problem in society than guns. The guns just amplify it.

Soulshiner wrote: Mass shootings with a suicide are a symptom of a larger problem in society than guns. The guns just amplify it.

Ya think?

Suicide shooters? Just not a lot will stop them. But is there any way to prevent young males from getting that way?