Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...
video production in Manassas and Prince William County

Bob Marshall: Let’s Protect Children

By Greg L | 20 December 2012 | Schools, 13th HOD District, Virginia Politics, Prince William County | 47 Comments

Once again I am pleased to be in the house district represented by Delegate Bob Marshall.  According to NBC4, Marshall has submitted a bill to have Virginia schools designate staff members who would carry concealed firearms on school property, and be in a position to respond to emergencies.  While the proposal is certain to draw hysterical outrage from liberals, it’s the only school security proposal out there that isn’t utter nonsense.

We’ve already seen how making schools “gun free zones” has done nothing to improve security, and has arguably made schools more dangerous.  ”Gun free” zones of any kind are already the most dangerous places one could possibly be, and the site of nearly every mass casualty tragedy we’ve suffered in the last decade.  No quantity of utopian laws to make it more illegal to do something already illegal will possibly dissuade criminals and the insane from harming people, but they sure will prevent law-abiding citizens from reacting to those that might.  Instead, these laws designate easy targets.  Our children should not be painted with such a bullseye.

Liberals despise, above all else, two things in schools: guns and prayer.  Yet when tragedy strikes, they pray that someone with a gun will soon arrive to rescue them.  Hopefully soon, conservatives will offer thanksgiving that the good people entrusted to care for their children will have firearms to immediately protect them with if necessary.  One of the things they’ll be thankful for will be Bob Marshall.

The left will, without any doubt, loudly howl about this proposal and once again make wild and ridiculous claims about Bob Marshall’s character.  They won’t offer any alternatives that have the slightest chance to actually protect children, as none that such an ideology might allow do anything but promise we continue to sacrifice innocents on the altar of political correctness.  Instead, we’ll hear name-calling, character attacks, and insults.  Marshall’s used to this, though, and as long as the end result improves safety and security for our children, I don’t think he’ll mind all that much.

UPDATE: The Superintendent of one school district feels a similar policy has been very successful.

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.


  1. Vigilant1 said on 20 Dec 2012 at 3:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    I hope that Delegate Marshall’s proposal will seriously be debated and ultimately passed by both the House and Senate. I am cautiously optimisticsc that it has a chance to pass but I wouldn’t bet the house on it.

  2. Joseph M Heinzinger said on 20 Dec 2012 at 7:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Is this not what we have police for? I am sorry but what would ever happen if a child found the librarians gun and pulled the trigger thinking it was a toy? There is a reason why we have no guns in school. period.

    This nothing but a panty candy ars way of provideing security other than ponying up the tax hike it would take to have a cop in every school! You guys are some out of cotroll right wing lunatics.

  3. Joseph M Heinzinger said on 20 Dec 2012 at 8:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    This thinking is what Sherrif Roscoe P Coltrain use to call his deputy for thinking something so stupid. Dipstick! I just wonder what the liability inshurance would be for such a policy? Anybody think of that? One mistake is all it would take to show how unthought out this whole thing was. There is a reason why we have law enforcement. Lets use it.

  4. Joseph M Heinzinger said on 20 Dec 2012 at 8:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    So would the cafeteria lady open holster while giving your kids tater tots? Police are highly trained to do this kind of work. If it is that great of a concern for our yours mine childs safty, support a tax hike to pay for it with more law enforcement. Do you realy trust the school janitor with a conceiled weapons permit in your kids school? WTF?

  5. Greg L said on 20 Dec 2012 at 9:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    When you go to the store, statistically speaking you are almost certainly among several people carrying concealed. That doesn’t seem to make you feel unsafe. When you attend a parade, you’re also among a number of people carrying concealed, yet you don’t seem to fear that someone is going to get hurt by it.

    Nearly every day you are among lawful firearm owners who are carrying their pistol with them. How many times have you already witnessed that “one mistake” you are so concerned about? This isn’t anything new, it’s just allowing that same safe environment to exist where your children spend a lot of their time, instead of keeping it a “gun free zone” that quite obviously has failed as a means of keeping children safe.

    If you really want to argue that putting police officers in every school is a viable option, how about costing that one out for us a bit, and specifying what we would now have to do without in order to make this happen. There are 93 schools in PWC, 57 of them are Elementary Schools. The police department spent about $80 million with 763 employees in the 2013 budget, which works out to about $108,000 per employee. You want to add enough police officers to cover all 57 elementary schools, which would probably take about 70 sworn officers and other employees when you consider management and support requirements. That’s a bit over $7.3 million annually. What would you like to cut from the school budget in order to be able to afford this kind of expense?

  6. Scout said on 20 Dec 2012 at 9:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    What does cost have to do with it? Funding police protection for 6 year olds is cheap by any standard if the alternative is that they get blown away. I would hope that our options for addressing the fact that we have chosen to create a society where children can be slaughtered in their Grade 1 classes isn’t driven by whatever the relatively trivial cost of providing them with police protection might be.

  7. Greg L said on 20 Dec 2012 at 9:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Great Scout, then you should have no problem figuring out what the schools will cut in order to afford this. It’s for the kids, after all, so just about anything could be chosen, right?

  8. Charles said on 20 Dec 2012 at 10:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    We don’t need funding. Why not just fire one school employee and replace them with an officer. After all, 99.9% of the time, the office won’t have any policing to do. (Mass attacks are so rare that it would be absurd to spend millions to stop it (imagine the cost to put one police officer in every single school in the country — it would be in the billions. If you took that same amount of money, you could find other ways to spend it that would save a LOT more than 20 lives.)

    So if the liberals think the current school employees can’t be trusted with a gun, we fire one, and train a police officer to do their job. I’m sure there are a few people who can handle being a police officer, and also dish out a school lunch, or answer phones in the office, or provide “counseling services” that are mostly listening for a kid to say they have an issue, and then kicking them out of school until they get a psychiatric evaluation. Heck, I bet there are officers who would do a great job of actually teaching students.

    Personally, I think there is at least a couple of teachers in each school that, having been trusted with being alone with our children, could be trusted with having a handgun. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if there aren’t a couple of CCW permit-holders teaching in our schools already. So I think we could train them. But I’m certain we could do it the other way.

    And certainly, if saving those 20 lives is the most important thing in the world, it’s worth getting rid of one teacher per school. Just get rid of the one that you don’t trust alone with kids with any form of deadly weapon.

    Remember, in a “lockdown”, your kid will be trapped in a locked room with just that teacher, who will have a very sharp, large pair of scissors which they could use to kill those children. Remember, I think the teachers can be trusted — but apparently the liberals don’t trust the teachers like I do.

  9. Charles said on 20 Dec 2012 at 10:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m also curious — can anybody find a single example in the United States of any case where a child got hold of a gun from a school employee and killed anybody with it? After all, the school gun restrictions are a relatively new phenomena — for most of our history, guns were permitted in and around schools.

    So, if employees having guns was a danger, you’d think we’d have evidence of it.

  10. freedom said on 20 Dec 2012 at 10:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    Why not require that the NEA and the AFT fund (with dues paid by the teachers) a professional protection force for those same teachers AND the students? Sounds like a deal to me! Surely those organizations are good for something!!??

  11. Greg L said on 20 Dec 2012 at 11:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Of note:

    Cost to put a sworn officer in every elementary school in the Commonwealth: approximately $126 million annually. Gov. McDonnell has announced a program to help fund this, but no budget figure has been disclosed yet.

    FY 2013 budget proposal for PWC schools for 20.8 FTE unarmed school security “specialists” in schools: $2,050,351 ($98,574 per security guard)

    FY 2013 budget proposal for Superintendent’s staff: $3,933,265 (23 FTE, $171k average)

    FY 2013 budget proposal for communications services: $2,536,662 (19.3 FTE, $131k average)

  12. Anonymous said on 21 Dec 2012 at 5:35 am:
    Flag comment

    I still want to see Marshal gone, but he makes more sense than the little girls posting above. It seems that most of the guns that are left laying around are in personal dwellings (even those of cops) and not out in public. In the one case I can think of it happening recently the kids had enough sense not to pick it up, they notified a teacher! Liability??? Talk about a dipstick, what will the local/state cost be for the shooting that we are talking about here? Police are highly trained? Maybe you should work with them. Some are excellent, some aren’t.

  13. Charles Sutherland said on 21 Dec 2012 at 8:05 am:
    Flag comment

    I agree with Greg, and with Charles (whoever he is…?), on several of the points.

    According to some news reports, the Colorado shooter looked at three other movie theaters before deciding upon the Century Theater — because, unlike almost any other place in Colorado, the Century Theater banned guns, and the others did not. He chose the ‘criminally safe’ environment! We also know from New York and Chicago with their strict gun control laws that violent crime has gone up, and when D.C. loosened its gun control laws violent crime went down. These types of statistics have been around for years.

    If a potential perpetrator knows that ’someone’ in a school building is armed, he will think twice before doing anything there. And, despite the scare tactics of those who fear a faculty member or administrator will accidentally shoot a student… please…if there is a gunman in the school, the armed teacher is not the one to worry about. Alternatively, hire a rent-a-cop, an off-duty police officer, on an hourly basis, to stand in sight and show his/her visible presence.

    With Obama’s love for the Saul Alinsky agenda, which includes deliberately causing social unrest in order to justify more authoritarian domination, and with what Obama is doing with his race-bating and economically destructive agenda, there will probably be a need for protection for our nation’s students…and for others in our nation.

  14. BSinVA said on 21 Dec 2012 at 8:14 am:
    Flag comment

    Honest question here: If a mad man enters the school and walks into a classroom and opens fire with an assault rifle, how does an armed third grade teacher prevent it in time to save lives? Seems to me, she can’t. I think we need to fence the schools, have secured entrances with metal detectors to try and keep the insane from entering the school in the first place.

  15. anon said on 21 Dec 2012 at 8:27 am:
    Flag comment

    While we’re so interested in protecting children, how about giving some attention to the Centreville Library entrance? It shouldn’t be just about protecting kids from being shot and killed in their school.

  16. Doug Brown said on 21 Dec 2012 at 9:51 am:
    Flag comment

    An increased presence of police officers visiting local schools, parking police vehichles prominently near school entrances are reasonable responses, as are several more that I can think of without running to a microphone or TV camera, to the recent tragic event in Newtown, but I don’t think Marshall’s bill is well thought out from a security point of view.

  17. Anonymous said on 21 Dec 2012 at 12:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    To answer BSinVA: If the shooter gets all the way to the classroom without an alarm being raised then there are other problems. I don’t disagree with the fences idea but some people are willing to trust their children to a person that they don’t trust to have a gun….seems kind of contradictory

  18. Doug Brown said on 21 Dec 2012 at 1:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    You don’t want to start TSAing the schools, some schools in the nation and Virginia may require metal detectors and fences (barbed wire?) but most do not. As for teachers and guns, there are many items in a school which can be weaponized, don’t assume teachers, staff, and students have not thought about what they may be. Communication and safety protocols are imperative to maintain and practice, just like the old air raid drills, when you have a shooter(s) in the classroom improvisation is obviously something to consider - the goal should be turning the chaos in the room to the shooter’s disadvantage and God willing his/her demise.

  19. clarke conservative said on 21 Dec 2012 at 3:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    An immediate deterrent would be for local police or sheriff departments to perform unscheduled, unannounced and very visible visits to local schools. If each deputy spent at least 15 minutes a day visiting some of the local schools, wandering down a couple of hallways, visiting a classroom or two, eating their doughnuts in the parking lots and let their presence be seen by the public no half-wit lunatic would think twice about targeting a school. At the very least give some of the teachers tazzers.

    And please take down those stupid liberal feel-good signs saying schools are gun-free zones. It is like those idiots in San Francisco declaring their city is a Nuclear-Free Zone. I am sure a terrorist is going to say in their pre-terrorist meeting, “We can’t bomb Oakland because City Council has declared themselves as Nuclear-Free. It wouldn’t be fair.”

    When I was a kid in High School, especially around deer season, there were more guns in the parking lot than were at the local National Guard. Half the pick up trucks in the parking everything from shot guns to carbines to lever action rifles. Two or three would have a deer carcass someone was bragging about. And we didn’t have the problems then like we do now.

  20. Doug Brown said on 21 Dec 2012 at 11:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Charles Sutherland said:

    “With Obama’s love for the Saul Alinsky agenda, which includes deliberately causing social unrest in order to justify more authoritarian domination, and with what Obama is doing with his race-bating and economically destructive agenda, there will probably be a need for protection for our nation’s students…and for others in our nation.”

    Charles what do you think of calls by NRA’s LaPierre for armed guards in every school? Wouldn’t that constitute playing the useful idiot in a movement towards more authoritarian domination by the Federal government?

    And Asa Hutchinson another spokesperson for the NRA is talking biometrics and TSA type security in all the schools.

    I take such statements as statements by big government, big business stooges or conservative leaders who have simply panicked and wilted under the pressure of the public discourse that has arisen in the aftermath of Newtown.

    Surely, such leaders should forfeit their place in a discussion where cool heads and common sense are required to keep our children safe in our ‘local’ schools.

  21. Anonymous said on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:28 am:
    Flag comment

    This interview needs to get out there. It isn’t playing on the ABC website but it got to youtube before the “issues” began.


  22. Charles Sutherland said on 22 Dec 2012 at 8:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    Doug, I think LaPierre’s suggestion for federal armed guards in schools is fantasy bordering on insanity, both as a concept and in the impossibility of its implementation.

    I was surprised that he, of all people, would even want such a strong federal government presence, instead of local or state government, especially because of the inevitable corollary that the federal government would then suggest that weapons be taxed in order to pay for this inane suggestion…and, in the process, ban weapons by taxing them out of existence.

    I think the entire country has gone mad, except you and me, and I have been wondering about you lately… :-)

  23. Doug Brown said on 22 Dec 2012 at 9:10 pm:
    Flag comment


    I have a copy of the Omega Man around here somewhere, if they come for me it’s yours.

  24. dr. david montgomery said on 23 Dec 2012 at 12:10 am:
    Flag comment

    To Charles Sutherland:

    “With Obama’s love”

    How wonderful for those parents that you politicize this issue (well, you’re on the right blog for that!…). No matter how you voted (or would like to vote, if you even voted at all), you should should just find a big tomato and stuff it in your mouth (as the first choice among two). Mr. BIG GUN, BIG BALLS, BIG SHOOTER (oh, did I hit a vein there?).

    father of two in this county school system.


  25. Charles Sutherland said on 23 Dec 2012 at 9:41 am:
    Flag comment

    dr. david montgomery,

    My, my, my… all the hatred and vitriol. Please let me know where you practice medicine so I can avoid your operating table. Since you spewed forth your venom at 12:01 AM it’s probably safe to assume that you were mixing your tomato juice with something else, which may explain why you used that particular reference. (I hope you were not ‘on call’ while your anger was festering in preparing your odious ‘comment.’)

    Opposing putting federal police in our schools is ‘politicizing’ the issue? BTW, perhaps you didn’t notice: Obama, the Democrats, and the ’state-supporting’ media began to politicize this tragedy within 48 hours! And that so-called main stream journalism reported an assault rifle in the school, then in the car, then back in the school… I don’t know if they ever agreed on their story line (what they pathetically describe as ‘reporting’), and, of course, facts be damned.

    In addition to my previous comments, I have another reason to oppose this nonsense suggested by LaPierre: having armed ‘federal security police’ on official duty in every city and state in the country is the beginning of martial law.

    Why would anyone possibly want federal police, instead of dealing with school security on the local level, paid for by taxing local citizens who know and understand their local issues and can hold local people accountable? That was a rhetorical question; so please spare me (and others, I suspect) another detestable diatribe.

    Merry Christmas.

  26. Doug Brown said on 23 Dec 2012 at 11:59 am:
    Flag comment

    Dear David,

    HoHo, I think you misread Charles. Charles is one of the right wing wackos to whom people from the looney left should at least listen. He is as skilled and talented a writer as you are a musician, and you both share a loathing of mediocrities and scoundrels, though you both might want to consider running some of your comments thru a public relations outfit or app, now and then.

  27. Doug Brown said on 23 Dec 2012 at 1:04 pm:
    Flag comment


    p.s. Charles Sutherland is not Charles, if that makes sense?

  28. Anonymous said on 23 Dec 2012 at 8:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    You folks not wanting to protect the schools/kids because you are afraid of a gun on school property need to get over it. As a person mentioned above, you walk by more folks than you realize who are armed and I bet you would thank them should they rescue you. This does happen.

    School protection would be done best with a trained and armed staff person or two. There are a lot of capable military persons available for this task and they are likely experienced enough to outsmart and take down a would-be attacker of any kind. ( They might not just show up with a gun, some do think outside the box.)
    I see some schools are largely fenced in already. Weems is for instance. Why not add some external cameras strategically placed. You know, just like banks, sports stadiums, malls and City businesses.
    Place a video monitor person in a safe area office and at least one armed person on the ground to listen to direction from the monitor as mentioned above. They could also have some technology on hand besides guns… Chances are if a loon knew an ex Marine or Seal type (who were trained to the hilt) were on hand to send him to hell, he would think twice about coming to that place. Maybe have mandatory physical standards for these two folks.
    This is a chance to employ the persons leaving the military and we all have heard how this is needed.

  29. Doug Brown said on 23 Dec 2012 at 10:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    The assumption that most schools don’t already have security measures in place because there is not someone with a gun in the school ready to blast away is wrong.

    And I question the judgment of pro-gun in schools advocates for hyping, wrongly in my view, that our kids are somehow completely undefended.

    Relying on one person, or even two person fix, with whatever they may be armed with, will give a false sense of security, can be easily taken out, and can be co-opted.

    Overly focus on the last attack and set yourselves up for the next one.

    There are plenty of simple practical steps that schools can consider to improve their security. I’m sure communities across the US are reviewing their security measures right now, wisely probing their security, i.e., without doing anything that would set off a panic. Maybe a chic-fillet guy delivering domino pizzas, something mild.

    Simply parking police cars more frequently in school parking lots would deter Lanza type shooters.

    So far both sides of the public debate that has arisen over this tragedy sound a little wacky and extreme, the safety of our kids and schools seem secondary to winning a public policy debate. One side wants to rewrite the Constitution the other side seems intent on giving them an opening to do it.

    And since Charles S brought up sanity:


  30. Anonymous said on 24 Dec 2012 at 6:47 am:
    Flag comment

    Now Doug Brown is acting like an arm chair commando and devising scenarios where it’s trained teams hitting schools and bribery and black mail is in play. Yet it is the “others” who are wacky. Really? Check out how they do it in Israel.

  31. Doug Brown said on 24 Dec 2012 at 11:07 am:
    Flag comment

    I’m not ‘devising’ scenarios. There are many scenarios schools have to take into account. A national armed force of armed school guards is a wacko, goofy idea. It’s a overreaction and erroronous reaction to a tragic event.

    Gun advocates who panic into LaPierre type solutions give plausibility to the erroronous premise that guns are the problems not the wack jobs /criminals who use them.

    Watching them and the loony left debate is like watching clown debating, they reinforce each other arguments and get madder and madder when they can’t figure why people take the other clown so seriously.

    Funny you bring up Israel, because if you understood what I was saying you would realize I am bringing an Israeli mentality to the problem without hopefully forcing our children to live in an Israeli type state.

  32. Anonymous said on 24 Dec 2012 at 1:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    Putting a PD car in the lot would do about as much good as hanging a sign up gun stating Drug Free, Gun Free Zone. We see how well that works now. On a lighter note and for example. Out in Fauquier County they parked a Sheriffs car on 17 that is marked for 45MPH. After a day or two, there was a box of doughnuts and a coffee cup stuck to the hood. IE folks catch on.
    I do not think any person is saying that there is no security at present. It is simply not rapid enough to attempt to disarm someone 4-5 minutes after they are on campus blazing away. When seconds count you do not have time to wait forPD. And, you must have missed the part about it might not be a shooter the next time. And overreaction? And Doug here wants to probe with Chicken and Pizza… will they being wearing black or camo, all cheese?

    Aside from this banter, I cannot imagine what those folks that are close to this tragic event feel like today. We should continue to think of them in the coming days.

  33. Doug Brown said on 25 Dec 2012 at 12:08 am:
    Flag comment


    Yeah, let’s start having swat drills in elementary schools. What I implied in an intentionally understated way was that checking and adjusting a school’s security system should be a continuous process by those responsible for it. And it should be appropriate for schools and take into consideration that people are jumpy right now. Accidents can just as easily lead to a tragic event as intentional acts.

    And yes people are saying/trying to give the impression that the schools have no security in order to justify an armed school guard in every school. And just like the anti-gun nuts who have now contributed to a huge surge in guns and ammo buying across the country, thereby making what they consider a bad situation even worse, I’m fairly certain that those pushing for any kind of national program that puts an armed guard into every school will also make a bad situation worse.

  34. Nancy said on 27 Dec 2012 at 1:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    I grew up in New York City and went to Bayside High School and there was always a policeman in the school. He was a great guy and seemed to love us kids. It was normal and natural so I have trouble understanding why this should even be a controversy.

  35. Tell the truth said on 28 Dec 2012 at 8:42 am:
    Flag comment

    Doug,the wacky ideas are yours. You haven’t really offered anything except that “everyone else is wrong and you are right”. School security setups are continuously audited and most of the decisions are based on budget. You use some nice words but when your “ideas” are examined in depth there is really nothing there.

  36. Robert L. Duecaster said on 31 Dec 2012 at 5:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Some teachers I know are already packing. Might as well legalize them. Cowards like Lanza and the Aurora and VT shooters choose helpless victims. Decreasing the level of their helplessness would be one deterrent. It should be utilized in conjunction with other methods of deterrence and security. Thank you, Delegate Marshall.

    Here’s hoping for freedom in 2013 for all those who yearn for it and are willing to work for it. God bless America and the Commonwealth of Virginia.

  37. Doug Brown said on 3 Jan 2013 at 8:59 am:
    Flag comment

    Tell the Truth said:

    “School security setups are continuously audited and most of the decisions are based on budget.”

    So TtT what are you going to do? Throw a spread sheet at the unanticipated and unplanned for threat?

    What I have attempted to get across in my response to the feel good, for some, knee jerk response of an armed guard in every school in America is that it was not a smart response to the equally dumb response of the anti-gun crowd to a tragic event.

    I believe Marshall’s bill, and LaPierre’s more extreme statement, played to the wrong focus at a crucial time when 2nd Amendment advocates should have been directing public debate towards keeping guns away from criminals, the criminally insane and the mentally unstable.

  38. Doug Brown said on 4 Jan 2013 at 8:14 am:
    Flag comment


    To identify the shooters you cite as “cowards” does not accurately describe them. They are individuals operating with altered states of mind, they are not right in the head.

    Whatever merits, or good intention, Mr Marshall bill may have had I found it to be terribly timed and poorly promoted. And since I have children in public schools and I do take security in those schools very seriously, to the extent I have pulled a child from a public school in part due to security concerns, I do not appreciate Mr. Marshall’s grandstanding, however well meaning Mr. Marshall may have been.

  39. Robert L. Duecaster said on 4 Jan 2013 at 6:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    I agree, Doug, that the timing is terrible. Such a law, allowing school and college administrators and teachers who have concealed carry permits to do so on the job, should have been in effect prior to the Tech shooting. Our kids would be much safer on campuses.

  40. Doug Brown said on 5 Jan 2013 at 2:02 am:
    Flag comment


    I agree in regard to college campuses and the Tech shooting, it’s a shame and a little surprising that VA didn’t have such a law on the books. Elementary and Secondary schools would probably require a stricter regime than a college environment, as a parent I would want to know which admininstrator, staff or teacher was carrying concealed and I would make it my business to get to know them, and I don’t have a problem with armed guards per se in schools, they may be needed in some instances, but the knee jerk reaction to rush guns to the good guys in all our schools does not necessarily make our schools safer and may make them less safe.

  41. Fyreman1 said on 5 Jan 2013 at 11:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    Teachers in Israel have carried guns for years. When is the last time you heard of a school shooting there. As long as the teachers go through additional training, not just your normal handgun training, I am all for it.

  42. Charles Sutherland said on 6 Jan 2013 at 12:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    The history of gun-control statistics is clear: When the ‘bad guys’ know that a facility has someone in the facility who is armed, the ‘bad guys’ stay away…period. And, the opposite is true: in Chicago, where guns are banned, violent crime is UP; similarly in New York, and in the various places where the MIT study demonstrated that a presence of legal gun owners reduces crime. Even Washington DC crime rate went down when guns were allowed.

    That was even the situation recently in Colorado, where the (mentally disturbed) gunman chose the Century Theater because it banned guns — unlike almost every other location in the State of Colorado where people HAVE guns!

    Interestingly, in China and Japan where guns are banned, mass killings with knives (a more vicious death) is the norm, even in attacks on schools.

    And, to suggest that it is more dangerous to have a trained and armed teacher or principal than to have a maniac show up with a gun is far-fetched, and counter-intuitive. Indeed, once someone in a school is armed, there should probably also be a sign on the front door: “Armed Security Inside.”

    Alternatively, one could hire off-duty police officers by the hour, even on a staggered part-time schedule, and they could walk around and show their presence.

    This is not a complicated subject, particularly since the statistics have been available for decades. Of course, the best solution is to outlaw lunatics, and people who don’t do their homework on these issues… :-)

  43. Doug Brown said on 6 Jan 2013 at 4:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Armed Security Inside.”

    I don’t see anything from preventing schools from putting up that sign right now. :-)

    A little ambiguity is harmless.

  44. Doug Brown said on 6 Jan 2013 at 4:48 pm:
    Flag comment


    “The history of gun-control statistics is clear…

    This is not a complicated subject…”

    Charles I’m addressing school security in my comments on this thread and it is more complicated than the armed guard in every school advocates argue.

    You stated:

    “And, to suggest that it is more dangerous to have a trained and armed teacher or principal than to have a maniac show up with a gun is far-fetched, and counter-intuitive.”

    Suppose they turn out to be the same?

    After all, pedophile teachers are possible, why not armed pedophile teachers?

  45. T2T said on 6 Jan 2013 at 8:12 pm:
    Flag comment


    In regard to your comment about the police providing this protection in the schools - didn’t you hear the response from the police unions after the NRA president proposed this same suggestion? It was shot down hard and fast. The police unions claimed that there was no way they could come up with 100,000 police officers to provide armed protection within the schools.

    So, that takes us back to square one. How do we successfully implement such a plan to make schools a better deterrent for sick individuals? The answer is simply just as Del. Marshall has proposed. There are plenty of people in the school systems that probably have more time logged at the firing range than a typical police officer.

    Finally, your comment about “Right Wing Lunatics” is a bit off. Or, I guess that’s about what I expect from the LIberal community. But, I’ll also question why doesn’t bad parenting, violent movies and destructive video games come into question when we look into the whole paradox of these shootings? Clearly, there are plenty of LIberal “I don’t care” parents out there that could provide better parenting and possibly cut the rate of such incidents down. Don’t you think?

  46. Doug Brown said on 7 Jan 2013 at 9:39 am:
    Flag comment

    “Right Wing Lunatics” vs “Left Wing Loons” / Conservative Community vs Liberal Community

    Unfortunately, we all use the same public schools and that is why Marshall’s proposal especially the timing and way he brought it out works against the common sense from one perspective that is in it.

    It would have been preferable for 2nd Amendment advocates to stick to the basic principle that people kill people and that guns are just one of many weapons available. If one proceed from there maybe public discussion of this tragedy would have forced public disclosure about what treatment this sick individual was receiving and what drugs he was on or had been on. Almost all these wack job shooters have been on mind altering drugs, yet we still have no public pressure from our political leaders to force examination of the issue on this case. I guess the drug industry and lobbyists have more pull, or are simply smarter than the NRA.

  47. Citizen-Veteran said on 28 Jan 2013 at 12:58 am:
    Flag comment

    Has anyone else see this?
    Why is it that none of the disturbed and evil men, who steal guns, then go and kill movie-goers and children in school, has ever been identified as a conservative or NRA member?

    Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat ~ Muslim

    Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and Progressive Liberals

    Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

    Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; Progressive Liberal

    Connecticut School Shooter ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians

    Common thread is that all of these shooters were Progressive Liberal Democrats.”

    INTERESTING, isn’t it?

Leave a Reply

Views: 2554