In a Friday morning press conference, the National Rifle Association broke its weeklong silence following the horrific shooting of 26 people at a school in Newtown, CT and called for a surge of gun-carrying "good guys" around American schools.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre called for a new kind of American domestic security revolving around armed civilians, arguing that "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
"We care about our president, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents," LaPierre said. "Members of Congress work in offices surrounded by Capitol Police officers. Yet, when it comes to our most beloved, innocent, and vulnerable members of the American family, our children, we as a society leave them every day utterly defenseless, and the monsters and the predators of the world know it, and exploit it."
LaPierre's speech was a call to supporters to mobilize around a new vision of American domestic security, at a time when voices for gun control are steadily rising. On Friday morning before the press conference, President Obama released a video (above) citing a petition by hundreds of Americans calling for swift action.
At the grassroots level, groups like Newtown United, a group of Newtown neighbors, are working to address major issues related to the tragedy, including gun control, violent media, mental health and legislation.
In stark contrast, LaPierre called for a great mobilization of gun-carrying "good guys," a term he used repeatedly but did not define, who could be more present and respond more quickly than police.
"If we truly cherish our kids, more than our money, more than our celebrities, more than our sports stadiums, we must give them the greatest level of protection possible," LaPierre said. "And that security is only available with properly trained, armed 'good guys'."
LaPierre, who was interrupted twice by protesters who held signs in front of TV cameras, made a direct call for local action.
"I call on every parent. I call on every teacher. I call on every school administrator, every law enforcement officer in this country, to join with us and help create a national schools shield safety program to protect our children with the only positive line of defense that’s tested and proven to work," he said.
In his speech, LaPierre also accused the media of selling "violence against its own people" through violent video games, music videos and "blood-soaked" films. He did not take questions from reporters, and did not acknowledge the protesters.
Think about a time when such a scenario existed: It was called the Wild, Wild West. Supposedly civilized society back east thought such a situation was barbaric. As the West was tamed and civilized, the need for guns disappeared as the land created organized methods for controlling crime. Everybody being armed with guns has no place in a civized society.
The answer is also not just gun control alone.
I agree with you except that I would send the mental health folks to all of our schools. In my short 3 years as a teacher in Richmond, I saw kids living in unimaginable situations. I'm not talking about poverty. I'm talking about some very troubling situations. They came to school haunted and overwhelmed. School was the last thing on their minds. Any teacher could see they needed help. Our schools are supposed to build confidence, but for many of these kids dealing with adult situations, our schools only shatter their confidence as they fall farther and farther behind. Our schools become one more place where these kids do not feel welcome because many of them have been derailed by problems they do not even comprehend. For starters, we need teachers who have the time to perform their duties, not teachers who are overwhelmed with an excess of students or teachers who are still students themselves, still learning their trade. With this equation, such children will continue to fall through the cracks. At my high school, we had peer counseling. It was a great program where we could talk things out with a qualified counselor. Do all schools offer this? If not, they should. The NRA's solution is reactive. We need to be proactive.
I also don't hear any concerned Patch parents screaming about the armed guards that can be found in almost every banking institution. Why is it okay for your children to be exposed to their weapons? Why is protecting money with a weapon acceptable but protecting children with a weapon is not? How do you explain this hypocrisy to your children? How do you tell them that your money matters more than their precious little lives?
Schools are public institutions and rely of monies gathered from the public to run. Those monies are generically known as TAXES. You want more protection for children? You want more police and fire in order to have a swifter response? You want to increase the number of guidance counselors and child psychologists to help deal with children in crisis? You/We have to come up with the funds. That means raising taxes (including Corporate taxes), or, pulling the money from some other programs like, say, roads, libraries, military, welfare, seniors, etc. Well, so what will it be? Taxes or programs?
Spoken like someone who keeps his money in a mattress. Whose money do you think they use to pay for those guards? Do you imagine it simply appears out of thin air? Wait, maybe you do. But speaking of schools, are you aware that Sidwell Friends in D.C. has ELEVEN security officers on staff? Some are ex-cops and some are indeed well armed. This is in addition to the Secret Service officers on site. We all know what they are packing, don't we? Do you think they will be surrendering their "semi-automatic" weapons at any time in the near or distant future? *chortle* "You want more protection for children? You want more police and fire in order to have a swifter response? You want to increase the number of guidance counselors and child psychologists to help deal with children in crisis?" Hmmm, interesting. I don't recall making any such proposals. Probably because I didn't make any such proposals. If it is really that difficult for you to respond to the things I have actually typed, it may be time for you to take a break from the internet. I would suggest a brisk walk in the night air. Just be sure not to wander into certain neighborhoods. Unless you believe that your self-righteous indignation is indeed bullet-proof. In which case, go for it! :-)
And if you REALLY want to be nit-picky about things, it was also tax monies that paid for the ARRA, remember that? Way back when in 2009? So, technically speaking, we (those of us in the approximately 50% who still do pay taxes, that is) did indeed pay for quite a few of those bank and other such security guards, even in institutions we may never visit or profit from. Enjoy your walk! Breathe deeply. Air is still free.
First banks don't use your money. They use the profits they get from using your money. You can remove your money any time you wish. Do schools make profits that they can use to hire guards? And yes, you asked the question about explaining banks vs children in your statement. And I answered it. But of course, you can't read, can you? And like I said (if you could read, which it doesn't seem like you can) if you want more protection in schools, unless you raise revenue, then perhaps those guards in state and federal buildings will need to be removed because the monies used to pay them will be transferred to the guards protecting the schools. Capiche?? And regarding those *only* 50% who pay taxes: if you believe that, then please forgive me for saying this: you are an IDIOT. My suggestion, take a remedial class in reading (if you can still find one.)
Ten bucks says you praised Bill Clinton's "COPS in School" program with nary a whine about the 60 MILLION spent. ; - )
(Pun entirely intentional.)
But last year, his administration took a less muted tone as it submitted its 2012 Education Department budget to Congress that eliminated the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools (REMS) funding, which for years provided between $20 million and $30 million in annual grants to help schools create emergency and crisis preparation and prevention plans for tragedies just like the one that unfolded Friday. The Education Department’s Web site says it last made REMS grants in 2011. The funding was cut off even though the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, warned in 2007 that many “many school district officials said that they experience challenges in planning for emergencies due to a lack of equipment, training for staff, and expertise and some school districts face difficulties in communicating and coordinating with first responders and parents.” Cue liberal outrage in three....two.......one...... Eh? What's that you say? It's Bush's fault? ; - )
Good for you!