Glazer: The NRA Is Right, We Need Guns & Guards @ Schools

Little-girl-is-closing-her-ears-with-her-fingers-via-Shutterstock-615x345After listening to all the opinions about how to stop the violence, I see one good answer…

To protect children at schools the only worthwhile answer so far is that we need to post armed guards at them period. It’s an expensive but strong deterrent to violence.

The crazy guys will think twice about walking onto a school property with armed guards all over the place. It will prevent many further attacks from happening at schools.

Nothing else I’ve heard seems to matter much, including stronger gun laws.

Don’t get me wrong.

We need to do away with automatic weapons sales and other severe firearms. Do away with them for public, legal purchase.

However, with more than 300,000,000 guns out there already they will be VERY available on the street at top dollar to anyone who can afford to pay the toll. That’s a fact.

P.S. semi-automatic guns can be converted to automatic very easily.

628x471There’s almost zero proof that concealed carry has saved any lives thus far.

It is a safety block though. And mental peace of mind is often needed. I know we hate seeing armed guards all over the campus and schools with kids, but it’s the only real answer. The killers will just go somewhere else and commit the crimes, but school shootings will end.

imagejpeg_3I was in Phoenix on the way to Las Vegas this past Tuesday and I saw an awful site.

Hundreds of family members watching a flowered casket go up the ramp to the under body of a large airplane. It was the body of a child shot and killed in Connecticut at the school last week. I was told by staffers the little child’s body had been returned home to visit family before going to its final resting place back east with the mother.

So damn sad.

Yes, gun laws will be tougher, speeches louder. With the sadness melting into the Christmas Holidays, in the end nothing can really stop these violent acts.

Putting the killers on notice that they may get zapped before they can even get a shot off though will surely help slow them down. So yes, this is the fastest answer to the problem.

For all Schools – even private ones – and paid for BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

Let’s do it.

This entry was posted in Craig_Glazer. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Glazer: The NRA Is Right, We Need Guns & Guards @ Schools

  1. Super Dave says:

    Won’t happen I bet but if for some reason it does in a year or two all the cost will be cut to continue the program just like all the mental health money was done away with.

    Armed guards and gun control isn’t going to fix the problem just fancy icing on a cake made of s**t.

    Education, Parenting, and Responsiblity as citizens, are needed ten fold instead of a bunch of icing.

    You break the law to damn bad you pay the price. Your right’s you say…. well if you’re convicted of an armed crime you just kissed your rights good bye and hard time is a coming. Chain gangs worked years ago and will work again today. If we have to house and feed the law breakers then lets work their asses 10 hrs a day doing work for the taxpayers. Make going to jail the same as going to hell and lots of crime will drop. White collar, blue collar makes no difference. Only when people really fear jail time will people stop acting stupid and behave themself. These thugs on the streets are young and know as a rule 2-3 years if they get popped and they are out again, when your that age 2-3 years means nothing you’re a bad ass and can do it hands down. Make it twenty years working a shovel and pick 10 hrs a day and life just got real rough.

    Even you Craig, who used a gun to rob as a young person if you knew you could end up in a place like in the movie Cool Hand Luke for ten years would it not have had made you think just a little bit more about doing that crime with that kind of time going with it?

  2. Indeed says:

    1) Require gun safe sales with firearms.

    2) Enforce mandatory, harsh penalties for gun crimes. Increase the penalties. Extend criminal liability to firearms owners whose guns are used in crimes. Civil liability would probably soon follow. This is not a bad thing.

    3) Limit gun sales to an arbitrary amount, say one a month to anything but an certain heavily licensed sellers. ANY amount would limit currently legal multiple sales.

    Without even talking about types and clip sizes, would both sides agree to these things?

  3. Gully says:

    It would only cost about $1500 from each NRA member to pay for this, and the result would be like Columbine. where the armed guard did zero good. This idea has already failed, before that NRA putz made a worldwide fool of himself suggesting it.

    • Indeed says:

      In an attempt to grasp at any straw, the NRA advocates more armed government presence in our and our childrens’ lives, and more government spending, to defend our right to defend ourselves against that very thing.

  4. chuck says:

    I like this narrator’s comment about a minute in.

    “There doesn’t seem to be any looting or rioting where these guys are.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nzkBGQx3HAc

  5. We carry guns to protect ourselves.

  6. the dude says:

    Columbine had an armed guard at the time of that shooting, didn’t do much good.

  7. John Hawkins says:

    There are now calls from the Left for gun control legislation in response to Adam Lanza’s unconscionable mass killing of innocent children at Sandy Hook Elementary. However, very few people seem to be asking the most basic question of all before getting started: What gun control legislation could have stopped Adam Lanza?

    The answer is “none.”

    Let’s consider a few alternatives:

    1) The school was already a “gun free zone;” so obviously that wasn’t effective. Of course, the sort of people who would respect a “gun free zone” in the first place are the very ones you wouldn’t have to worry about carrying a gun; so it’s an almost useless designation.

    2) What about closing the supposed “gun show loophole?” Well, since Lanza killed his own mother and used her legally acquired guns for his rampage, making it harder for googly-eyed loners to acquire weapons wouldn’t have changed a thing.

    3) Some people are calling for a ban on automatic weapons. Setting aside the fact that the regulation of fully automatic weapons is already tighter than Spandex, Adam Lanza didn’t use a fully automatic weapon.

    4) Then there are calls for the “Assault Weapons Ban” to be reinstated. One problem: the semiautomatic Bushmaster .223 rifle that Lanza used wasn’t covered by the bill. So, his mother could have bought that exact same gun with a sheriff looking over her shoulder while the ban was in place.

    5) We could, of course, pass a newly updated “Assault Weapons Ban” that covers the semiautomatic Bushmaster .223 rifle. Then, gun manufacturers would try to create weapons that can get around the ban. They would probably be successful. Even if they weren’t, it’s not as if Lanza was battling Marines. When you’re a coward who’s attacking unarmed children, any gun will work.

    6) We could also ban high-capacity ammunition magazines, but given the 3-5 second reload time, that would have been a minor inconvenience to Adam Lanza at worst. After all, it’s not as if a group of small children were going to be able to scamper away or gang up on him during a four second window.

    7) Congress could ban the manufacture and sale of bullets and magazines. Given the massive number of bullets and magazines already owned by the public and readily available instructions for making them, this wouldn’t stop any determined killer like Adam Lanza. On the other hand, it would lead to a massive black market with tens of millions of previously law abiding Americans buying bullets by the bucketful from back rooms across the country.

    8) Congress could also ban the manufacture and sale of guns. Again, that would lead to the creation of a massive black market, but it would also leave roughly 300 million guns in the hands of the American people. In other words, if Adam Lanza had decided to wait until AFTER that law was passed to go on his killing spree, it would have been the same sad story.

    9) Then, there’s the most extreme step of all: Congress could ban the ownership of guns. One problem: In the vast majority of cases, the government has no record of who owns guns and who doesn’t. In most places, those records are kept at the gun store level and are not updated. If the gun is lost, stolen, given away or sold by the individual, there is no record of it. This is a feature, not a bug, and it’s designed to prevent exactly the sort of confiscation we’re discussing here. So, even if all guns were made illegal, it would be very difficult to enforce, most people wouldn’t turn their weapons in and there would probably be two hundred million guns left in the hands of the American public. Would a man like Adam Lanza still be able to acquire a weapon in that situation? Come on, he KILLED HIS OWN MOTHER for a gun; so you can be sure he’d have gotten one elsewhere.

    10) Let’s go Steven Spielberg on this problem and assume space aliens show up and use some bizarre technology to get rid of all guns. Well, even so, fire and explosives would still exist and as Brian Palmer has noted in Slate, those can be even more effective killers than guns.

    Guns aren’t even the most lethal mass murder weapon. According to data compiled by Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, guns killed an average of 4.92 victims per mass murder in the United States during the 20th century, just edging out knives, blunt objects, and bare hands, which killed 4.52 people per incident. Fire killed 6.82 people per mass murder, while explosives far outpaced the other options at 20.82. Of the 25 deadliest mass murders in the 20th century, only 52 percent involved guns.

    If gun control advocates like Barack Obama, Michael Bloomberg and Michael Moore, all of whom have armed guards protecting their safety, succeed in making guns less available for law abiding citizens, it wouldn’t stop another Newtown massacre, but ironically it would make it easier for rapists, gangs or even the next Adam Lanza to hurt innocent people.

  8. Cuomo says:

    Confiscation

    The New York Times reports:

    … Mr. Cuomo did not offer specifics about the measures he might propose, but, while discussing assault weapons, he said: “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option—keep your gun but permit it.”
    It seems to me that liberals are heading into deeper water than they realize when they propose, not just a ban on the sale of certain kinds of rifles and cartridge magazines, but the confiscation of them. How did the American Revolution start? By the British authorities in Massachusetts sending out a troop of soldiers to confiscate arms held by the citizens. If the federal government tried to confiscate the many millions of assault rifles owned by private citizens in this country, America could turn into a continent-sized Ruby Ridge.

  9. Craig Glazer says:

    All good comments…I left something out, we have a military soon to not be at war…why not use those guards at school, they are paid to PROTECT US..LET THEM..plus I like the idea of rotating guards…keeps them interested and paying attention..what you think?

  10. harley says:

    i’veread where this security at all schools would cost from 3 billion to 11 billion/year.
    So grover won’t allow that so thats out.
    Hey…enforce the laws on the books…outlaw those huge magazine clips…close the
    gun show loophole…make everyone be licensed who owns a gun…permits whatever..
    but do something…something that works.
    arguing for months about a possible band aid solution won’t help.
    The real answer is just let the kids bring guns to schools to protect themselves.
    Arm the teachers like they do in israel. Arm the janitors. Most of this stuff won’t
    wo.rk so everyone needs to sit down…find something to do…tell the nra that even
    their members want something done…then get something done quickly.
    Too bad the deomcrats don’t know who’s running the republican party and who
    to talk with to get something passed. The repubs are lost in space righ now.
    Until they get someone who can get something passed the whole bunch of
    pols in d.c. won’t get anythng done.
    And really…after 60 days everyone forgets about sandy hook…too bad.

  11. chuck says:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/12/23/cnns_don_lemon_on_gun_control_should_we_start_profiling_white_men.html

    Here is a solution that appeals to facists whose willful impercipience is now a set peice couched in the blood of innocents they have included in the culture war. The hubris of the left, is unfettered now by the MSM’s assignment of guilt for this crime to political ideology vis a vis an actual perp.

    The articulation of such a fantastical initiative by an African American announcer in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, while the streets of every major city run red with the blood of African American criminals killing African Amnerican citizens is frequent 4th Estate disgrace that guarantees the continuation of that same slaughter.

    The Machiavellian political machinations of those liars and traitors in the 4th Estate who know, as I know, as you know as we all know, that not one thug, not one criminal will turn in a gun is the penultimate effort to the coda that is the disarmament of not just the fire power, but the political power of the diminishing opposition.

    Suicide on an grand scale.

    • Indeed says:

      Thank God for your concern for our African American population (that was admittedly sarcastic). As Americans begin to crawl out from the broken promises of the Great Society (and here I am not being sarcastic, it is truly a failed experiment), are we to stand by and allow those who fail society as it fails them, to find an easy answer to evening out perceived class differences (a gun?)

      If the true fear is the criminals on the streets being shortsighted and ready to even the score, is an arms race really the answer? The Soviets made millions of AK-47s to advance global Communism, and yet more Americans have been killed by American-made weapons. Did we beat Communism, only to kill each other? That hurts my American pride. And no sarcasm there.

      • chuck says:

        “As Americans begin to crawl out from the broken promises of the Great Society (and here I am not being sarcastic, it is truly a failed experiment), are we to stand by and allow those who fail society as it fails them, to find an easy answer to evening out perceived class differences (a gun?)”.

        “Begin” to crawl out from under the promises…? Trillions and trillions of dollars have been wasted on trying to “Even” the playing field. But we both digress, that is another argument.

        This is, after that failure, no matter who is to blame, if anyone, the right to defend your family and person by way of the 2nd Amendment from civil unrest and the unrestrained force of a possibly (And I think, more and more likely.) malevolent government.

        1911 – Turkey disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1915 – 1917 they murdered 1.5 million Armenians.
        1929 – Russia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1929 – 1953 they murdered 20 million Russians.
        1935 – China disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1948 – 1952 they murdered 20 million Chinese.
        1938 – Germany disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1939 – 1945 they murdered 16 million Jews.
        1956 – Cambodia disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1975 – 1977 they murdered 1 million Educated people.
        1964 – Guatamala disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1964 – 1981 they murdered 100,000 Mayan Indians.
        1970 – Uganda disarmed it’s citizens, and between 1971 – 1979 they murdered 300,000 Christians.

        “If the true fear is the criminals on the streets being shortsighted and ready to even the score, is an arms race really the answer? ”

        Yes.

  12. showmecommonsense says:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/08/30/us-foreign-aid-by-country_n_1837824.html

    We pay $50 billion a year to other countries. Think that could pay military or retired military to guard schools?

    Just sayin.

    • the dude says:

      And I will say it again, violation of posse comitatus is a flat out bad idea. Look to our own history to see why it was enacted.

  13. quotes says:

    “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” – George Washington

    “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson

    “The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.” – Noah Webster

    “A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace.” – James Madison

    “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” – Richard Henry Lee

    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry

    “This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – St. George Tucker

    • Indeed says:

      I agree wholeheartedly. And so, the populace should be educated, and armed. At no point does any founding father say “personal arsenal” and in fact, Washington himself personally led a force to disarm Americans in the Whiskey Rebellion who disagreed on certain taxations, realizing with regret that it was necessary. Jefferson then rolled some of those policies back, since you see, the founding fathers didn’t agree on everything. There was, then, often compromise.

      • chuck says:

        “The Whiskey Rebellion, or Whiskey Insurrection, was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791, during the presidency of George Washington. Farmers who used their leftover grain and corn in the form of whiskey as a medium of exchange were forced to pay a new tax. The tax was a part of treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton’s program to increase central government power, in particular to fund his policy of assuming the war debt of those states which had failed to pay. The farmers who resisted, many war veterans, were fighting for the principles of the American Revolution, in particular against taxation without local representation.”

        “The Whiskey Rebellion demonstrated that the new national government had the willingness and ability to suppress violent resistance to its laws. The whiskey excise remained difficult to collect, however. The events contributed to the formation of political parties in the United States, a process already underway. The whiskey tax was repealed after Thomas Jefferson’s Republican Party, which opposed Hamilton’s Federalist Party, came to power in 1800.”

        Now, Americans have given up fighting against the onerous crucible of taxes implemented by teh Fed in an effort to destroy the Judeo/Christian ethos by way of immigration and set asides for select groups.

        Now Americans must actually justify the constitution to historical revisionists and politicians eager to consolodate power, who would strip those rights away pandering to a political ideology that sees that same power stem from the end of THEIR gun barrels.

  14. chuck says:

    This condescending video is an insult to Americans everywhere.

    http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/287422/scitech/socialmedia/hollywood-stars-musicians-call-for-end-to-us-gun-violence-in-online-psa

    Hollywood, again casting pearls from on high to we plebian swine to guide us through the our lives by way of their vast knowledge and experience pretending to be other people for a living.

    Filmed behind walls with armed guards, after they were through, they no doubt attended some very tony parties with other celestial beings and smirked up their collective sleeves at the hoi polloi while they fart through silk.

    Beyonce is first on the film.

    Nah…, Jay Z, he ain’t got any guns.

    Total B*llsh*t.

    • harley says:

      chuckles…you have one of the most negative atittudes ever. Get over it.
      seriously…you’re comments are just out there in another world.
      it’s going to be okay chuckles. We are living in a beautiful world.
      Yes we have problems…yes we will take steps back and need to correct
      things periodically…
      but dude….take a happy pill once in a while. relax…all that anger and
      anxiety is going to destroy you…

    • the dude says:

      Nice to know they want to take away what truly protects us plebes from a tyrannical government while they sit in their well guarded ivory towers.

      Ugh, actors can be incredibly stupid.

  15. Craig Glazer says:

    I was watching the news and listened to the head of the NRA also advocate this program. He was told there was an armed guard at Columbine and it didn’t stop anything. Agreed.

    These have to be for real guards, armed, trained, more than one, moving, with video of all halls classrooms etc…not an old guy with a gun in his car having a sip of booze every hour and helping walk kids across the street…Real guards, nice, trained, but ready for action types…

    There is no one answer is there.

    • balbonis moleskine says:

      We already have these in Kansas city, Glaze.

      They are called SRO (Student Resource Officers) they are an armed cop in school there to keep his ear to the ground and bust the stoners mostly. It’s a nice little graft program for the cops because the SRO is officially an employee of the police department and not the school district.

      The SRO for your old highschool is Officer Parker. You used to have two, but the other cop resigned after being arrested for aggravated assault.

      here’s the list of cops in the schools at shawnee mission:

      http://www4.smsd.org/campuspolice/html14395.htm

  16. Blaster99 says:

    It would barely impact the budget of a school district to add one salary per school for a true armed security specialist. Take a look at your tax bill. The schools already get multi-millions from the taxpayers every year. It wouldn’t add a tenth of one percent.

Comments are closed.