NRA Conference: LaPierre Calls for Armed Cops every school

gmule wrote: Go ahead and keep thinking the police will be there to protect you.

“Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.” -Lynch vs North Carolina Department of Justice 1989
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982) (no federal constitutional requirement that police provide protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 475 So. 2d 560 (Ala. 1985); Cal Govt. Code 845 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Calogrides v. Mobile, 846 (no liability for failure to arrest or to retain arrested person in custody)
Davidson v. Westminster, 32 Cal.3d 197, 185, Cal. Rep. 252; 649 P.2d 894 (1982) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Stone v. State 106 Cal.App.3d 924, 165 Cal Rep. 339 (1980) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C.App. 1983) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C.App 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Sapp v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla. App. 1st Dist.), cert. denied 354 So.2d 985 (Fla. 1977); Ill. Rec. Stat. 4-102 (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Keane v. Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1st Dist. 1968) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Jamison v. Chicago, 48 Ill. App. 3d 567 (1st Dist. 1977) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. App.) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Silver v. Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. 1969) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Wuetrich V. Delia, 155 N.J. Super. 324, 326, 382, A.2d 929, 930 cert. denied 77 N.J. 486, 391 A.2d 500 (1978) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Chapman v. Philadelphia, 290 Pa. Super. 281, 434 A.2d 753 (Penn. 1981) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)
Morris v. Musser, 84 Pa. Cmwth. 170, 478 A.2d 937 (1984) (no liability for failure to provide police protection)

Nobody that I know of is "thinking the police will be there to protect" them. They are part of the equation, however. It takes a concerted effort by everyone - police, fire, schools, communities, parents, even students - to address this issue. If all we're willing to do is cast judgment on one group or another, keep on finger pointing and blaming others, and not taking responsibility for our own inaction, then, yes, I agree these types of tragedies will continue. The questions, from my perspective, are along the lines of is that how we really are? Is that how we want to be? Are we so steeped in our own inaction and apathy that we choose to do nothing?

Pretty pessimistic and fatalistic, don't you think?

I am not saying to do nothing I am saying to prepare for them by expecting them to happen.

From your link

One Connecticut school superintendent dismissed the NRA’s suggestion as “an ill-conceived reaction from an organization that does not have any credibility or expertise with respect to addressing school violence” and said that the idea “is an excuse for not addressing the need to enact meaningful safe gun legislation in conjunction with an investment in mental health services.” Putnam Police Chief Rick Hayes called the proposal “scary,” noting that teachers can’t possibly have the kind of training necessary to safely handle large weapons.

By simply dismissing the suggestion is denial.

gmule wrote: I am not saying to do nothing I am saying to prepare for them by expecting them to happen.

From your link

One Connecticut school superintendent dismissed the NRA’s suggestion as “an ill-conceived reaction from an organization that does not have any credibility or expertise with respect to addressing school violence” and said that the idea “is an excuse for not addressing the need to enact meaningful safe gun legislation in conjunction with an investment in mental health services.” Putnam Police Chief Rick Hayes called the proposal “scary,” noting that teachers can’t possibly have the kind of training necessary to safely handle large weapons.

By simply dismissing the suggestion is denial.

My apologies, then. How, then, does one "prepare" for them? That's the crux of the issue, in my opinion.

ZHawke wrote:

gmule wrote: I am not saying to do nothing I am saying to prepare for them by expecting them to happen.

From your link

One Connecticut school superintendent dismissed the NRA’s suggestion as “an ill-conceived reaction from an organization that does not have any credibility or expertise with respect to addressing school violence” and said that the idea “is an excuse for not addressing the need to enact meaningful safe gun legislation in conjunction with an investment in mental health services.” Putnam Police Chief Rick Hayes called the proposal “scary,” noting that teachers can’t possibly have the kind of training necessary to safely handle large weapons.

By simply dismissing the suggestion is denial.

My apologies, then. How, then, does one "prepare" for them? That's the crux of the issue, in my opinion.

We need an open dialog to discuss and implement meaningful strategies. Those on the left won't compromise and those on the right won't compromise. Both sides continually shout each other down without listening to what is being said or suggested. We have to get past this before anything will be accomplished.

I'm not claiming to have all the answers or any of the answers for that matter. I am opposed to meaningless knee jerk legislation that has not thought put behind it is all.

ZHawke wrote: [
My apologies, then. How, then, does one "prepare" for them? That's the crux of the issue, in my opinion.

In my opinion the crux of the issue is not how we can reform society, culture even human nature itself to prevent this from ever happening again after the year 2525. Feel free to discuss that and maybe you can even come up with some programs that will have an effect for the next generation of children.

The crux of the issue is what can we do in the next 12-14 days.

Blazer Bob wrote:

ZHawke wrote: [
My apologies, then. How, then, does one "prepare" for them? That's the crux of the issue, in my opinion.

In my opinion the crux of the issue is not how we can reform society, culture even human nature itself to prevent this from ever happening again after the year 2525. Feel free to discuss that and maybe you can even come up with some programs that will have an effect for the next generation of children.

The crux of the issue is what can we do in the next 12-14 days.

Already provided. Check out the website in my signature line. It contains info on doing things right now. Problem is, many parents won't want to get involved (that volunteerism thingy, don't you know). Concerted efforts by everyone, not just passing off the responsibility to first response organizations, is the key, in my opinion.

We have to asked what changed in society in the past decade or two that has suddenly triggered these mass killings. Once we get to some of the root causes then we can begin to solve the problem. Otherwise we are addressing symptoms and not the cause.

I'm all for addressing the cause...AND the symptom. I'm for removing as many assault weapons and High-cap magazines from the population as possible so that WHEN one of the gun-nuts/loons "goes off", they don't have the capacity to spray 20-100 rounds in seconds before having to reload.

You don't need an assault weapon, and high-cap magazines for "protection." That's absurd. And hopefully, soon, it will be illegal to sell them.

Two of the most recent mass shootings were the Newton and the Aurora killings. There were two underlying key facts in both. Both Lanza and Holmes (from media reports) suffered from severe mental health disorders. Both were being considered for diagnosis of dangers to themselves and others. The other fact was that both had easy access to weapons that high rates of lethal fire, at least 15 rounds per minute per the manufacturer's suggested sustained fire rate. In the Holmes case, he fired off 85 or more rounds in less than five minutes. 12 dead, 58 injured. Lanza fired off over 100 rounds in less than ten minutes. 26 dead. In both cases, most of the deaths and injuries probably occurred within the first two minutes.

Obviously, one part of the answers to the complex situation is how do you prevent easy access to those types of weapons from those who are more likely to use them for evil purposes?

You can talk about arming teachers, armed guards, etc. but those would have had little effect on these two horrific scenes. No kindergarten teacher is going to be strapped and have their weapon on the ready for a madman bursting through the classroom door with an AR-15 firing. No armed guard is going to be able to react and be on scene within 120 seconds to prevent mass murders when the fire rate is 15 rounds per minute. We need a preventive solution not a reactive one.

I did not say a complete ban on military style weapons with large capacity magazines, although that is in the discussion. There are problems with such a ban since there are of millions these military style weapons out there already. There definitely needs to be something done, such as much more enhanced background checks, require background checks in private sales, strict liability on those who purchase such weapons to secure those weapons from unauthorized use, wait periods, etc. I believe it would be in order to have those who desire to possess such weapons be certified for training, storage and possible mental health.

Nobody is going to take away someone's assault weapon...But they can stop selling them, and they can set aside money for a buy-back program. ANYTHING that gets as many of them out of circulation. But this constant silliness that "they're coming to take my guns" is just that--silliness.