NRA calls for armed officers in every school

WASHINGTON (AP) — Guns and police officers in all American schools are what's needed to stop the next killer "waiting in the wings," the National Rifle Association declared Friday, taking a no-retreat stance in the face of growing calls for gun control after the Connecticut shootings that claimed the lives of 26 children and school staff.
"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, the group's chief executive officer.
Some members of Congress who had long scoffed at gun-control proposals have begun to suggest some concessions could be made, and a fierce debate over legislation seems likely next month. President Barack Obama has demanded "real action, right now."
The nation's largest gun-rights lobby broke its weeklong silence on the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School with a defiant presentation. The event was billed as a news conference, but NRA leaders took no questions. Twice, they were interrupted by banner-waving protesters, who were removed by security.
Some had predicted that after the slaughter of a score of elementary-school children by a man using a semi-automatic rifle, the group might soften its stance, at least slightly. Instead, LaPierre delivered a 25-minute tirade against the notion that another gun law would stop killings in a culture where children are exposed daily to violence in video games, movies and music videos. He argued that guns are the solution, not the problem.
"Before Congress reconvenes, before we engage in any lengthy debate over legislation, regulation or anything else; as soon as our kids return to school after the holiday break, we need to have every single school in America immediately deploy a protection program proven to work," LaPierre said. "And by that I mean armed security."
He said Congress should immediately appropriate funds to post an armed police officer in every school. Meanwhile, he said the NRA would develop a school emergency response program that would include volunteers from the group's 4.3 million members to help guard children.
His armed-officers idea was immediately lambasted by gun control advocates, and not even the NRA's point man on the effort seemed willing to go so far. Former Republican Rep. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, whom LaPierre named national director of the program, said in an interview that decisions about armed guards in schools should be made by local districts.
"I think everyone recognizes that an armed presence in schools is sometimes appropriate," Hutchinson said. "That is one option. I would never want to have a mandatory requirement for every school district to have that."
He also noted that some states would have to change their laws to allow armed guards at schools.
Hutchinson said he'll offer a plan in January that will consider other measures such as biometric entry points, patrols and consideration of school layouts to protect security.
LaPierre argued that guards need to be in place quickly because "the next Adam Lanza," the suspected shooter in Newtown, Conn., is already planning an attack on another school.
"How many more copycats are waiting in the wings for their moment of fame from a national media machine that rewards them with wall-to-wall attention and a sense of identity that they crave, while provoking others to try to make their mark?" LaPierre asked. "A dozen more killers, a hundred more? How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation's refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?"
While there is a federally maintained database of the mentally ill — people so declared by their states — a 1997 Supreme Court ruling that states can't be required to contribute information has left significant gaps. In any case, creation of a mandatory national database probably would have had little impact on the ability of suspected shooters in four mass shootings since 2011 to get and use powerful weapons. The other people accused either stole the weapons used in the attacks or had not been ruled by courts to be "mentally defective" before the shootings.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the NRA is blaming everyone but itself for a national gun crisis and is offering "a paranoid, dystopian vision of a more dangerous and violent America where everyone is armed and no place is safe."
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., called the NRA's response "both ludicrous and insulting" and pointed out that armed personnel at Columbine High School and Fort Hood could not stop mass shootings. The liberal group CREDO, which organized an anti-NRA protest on Capitol Hill, called LaPierre's speech "bizarre and quite frankly paranoid."
"This must be a wake-up call even to the NRA's own members that the NRA's Washington lobbyists need to stand down and let Congress pass sensible gun control laws now," CREDO political director Becky Bond said in a statement.
The NRA's proposal would be unworkable given the huge numbers of officers needed, said the president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Craig Steckler.
He pointed to budget cuts and hiring freezes and noted that in his hometown of Fremont, Calif., it would take half the city's police force to post one officer at each of the city's 43 schools.
The Department of Education has counted 98,817 public schools in the United States and an additional 33,366 private schools.
There already are an estimated 10,000 school resource officers, most of them armed and employed by local police departments, in the nation's schools, according to Mo Canady, executive director of the National Association of School Resource Officers.
Gun rights advocates on Capitol Hill had no immediate comment. They will have to walk a tough road between pressure from the powerful NRA, backed by an army of passionate supporters, and outrage over the Sandy Hook deaths that has already swayed some in Congress to adjust their public views.
A CNN/ORC poll taken this week found 52 percent of Americans favor major restrictions on guns or making all guns illegal. Forty-six percent of people questioned said government and society can take action to prevent future gun violence, up 13 percentage points from two years ago in the wake of the shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that killed six and wounded then Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
Since the Connecticut slayings, President Obama has demanded action against U.S. gun violence and has called on the NRA to join the effort. Moving quickly after several congressional gun-rights supporters said they would consider new legislation to control firearms, the president said this week he wants proposals that he can take to Congress next month.
Obama has already asked Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 and to pass legislation that would stop people from purchasing firearms from private sellers without background checks. Obama also has indicated he wants Congress to pursue the possibility of limiting high-capacity firearms magazines.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said former President Bill Clinton called her with an offer to help get an assault weapons ban reinstated. Clinton signed such a ban into law in 1994, but it expired after 10 years.
Feinstein said she's not opposed to having armed guards at schools, but she called the NRA proposal a distraction from what she said was the real problem: "easy access to these killing machines" that are far "more powerful and lethal" than the guns that were banned under the old law.
___
Associated Press writers Andrew DeMillo in Little Rock, Ark., and Alicia A. Caldwell in Washington contributed to this report.
Really! About every other week for a while this year, the bangers were trying to give each other lead poisoning.
I agree that banning firearms won't stop killers. Â I also don't agree that putting cops in schools will solve anything. Â
Â
How will we pay for the police protection when many from the right vote against police budgets and larger Government. Â If someone who wants to kill then be killed can't do it at a school, then would they choose a mall or theater? Â Will cops be there to stop them also? Â No!
Â
This is a complex issue that will take more than sound bites to solve.Â
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gregory-mocks-lapierre-proposing-armed-guards-sends-kids-high-security-school_691057.html
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @NGerblansky Typical or not, why is it OK for him to send his kids to a school that's heavily armed but it's not for us peons? He's just your typical hypocrite liberal.
Those of you saying this is a bad idea, did you also critizice it when Clinton called for the same thing in 2000 in his "COPS in Schools" program? Would you also thing it was a bad idea if Obama suggested it? Or is it only a bad idea if the NRA proposes it?
 @HuskyKMA It's a bad idea if anyone purposes it. Of course people will always let their political affiliations blind them.
 @HuskyKMA Yep, When $120 million was pledged to support this by the liberal's sweetheart Clinton, the Republicans were demonized for opposing it.  And yet now, when a very similar proposal is presented by a group perceived as being "on the other side of the isle", the same people that demonized the people for opposing it, are demonizing the people that now support it.....  Jeeze folks, make up your mind.
Â
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323?utm_source=The
Â
Thank you Mr. LaPierre for presenting an idea rather than being part of the Barry and Joe let's form a committee and discuss it for months, then let the findings sit on the shelf while other tragedies happen. Let's see now, we have armed security at sporting events, armed guards at big office buildings, banks with their security, airports with their security, but we can't keep our kids protected? Obama raised $1072 million + and Romney raised $992 million + for the run for the presidency. Now we are being told we can't afford to provide security for schools! If money to fund school security is an issue, then the whole gun ban idea is a scam to punish honest Americans and infringe on our rights. Move to Great Britain if guns bother you. It seems to me we kicked their butts with our guns when they tried to put us under their thumb of tyranny.
Iâm sitting in our friendâs living room in Wonga Park, a small community outside Melbourne, Australia. Briefly our discussions turned to the tragic murders in Connecticut. Tony, who is Australian, supports his governmentâs restrictive firearm laws, passed after the tragic 36 murders in Port Arthur in 1996. He suffers no delusions that he needs a gun to protect his home or family.
Â
Yet in America, following yet another mass murder tragedy, the policy debates appear to be focusing on various limits on assault weapons, powerful handguns, and ammunition magazine sizes.Â
Â
I would prefer our elected leaders focus on two other issues: the dramatic cuts to our mental health services and firearm owner duties. Mental disorder is the single common thread in all-mass murders in the world. The policy debate must focus on funding programs that address mental disorders. Our neighbor's adult son suffers from the mental disorder schizophrenia. What if he has access to a firearm owned by his parent? Tragic consequences would result. The Sheriff has visited this troubled young man many times, but unless he commits a crime or commits himself to treatment, law enforcement can do nothing. The policy discussion must focus on how we finance a robust mental health system.
Â
Firearm owners must also be part of the solution. Common law needs to establish the basic duties of citizens who exercise their rights to own a firearm. Modeled after similar liability laws related to selling alcohol to minors or intoxicated persons, firearm owners should be subject to civil and criminal liabilities when they breach the duties of ownership.
Â
Policy discussions could then center on the extent of civil and criminal actions following the use of a firearm in a crime, with the debate naturally focusing on the severity of such legal actions. For example, the legislature could pass a law that requires a person to lock and secure their firearm. If the unsecured firearm is used by someone in a crime, the owner would face civil and criminal penalties. (The Connecticut mother of the psychopath murderer paid the ultimate criminal penalty for having an unsecured firearms cache: death by her son with her own firearm.) A more common cause of firearm death is when a child handles a handgun, accidentally killing himself or herself, a sibling, or a friend. The owner should face civil, or criminal, charges.
Â
The best gun control is when firearm owners are responsible. Lock your firearm.
 @Scott Finally, someone on this forum who is promoting a sensible discussion.  Thank you for that.
Whether or not we can effectively legislate a morality, or even a responsibility within our citizenry is yet another layer of discussion your views necessitate. Â One i'm glad to engage, for the record.
However, I, as a gun toting uber-conservative, think you're touching on the base issues of these horrific events. Â
Â
@Scott ---Well said my friend. I have 3 gun safes in my home which only I have key or combination too. Plus I have one in my vehicle. Be responsible for the security of your weapons..
In the end, I have to say the LaPierre gave a brilliant speech. The NRA isn't about finding common ground or solutions to problems. It's about getting its way, and it has been spectacularly successful.
Â
I disagree with everything he said, but the speech wasn't for me or the general public - or for most NRA members. It was for the true believers and it gave them everything they wanted to hear - it's not guns, it's just about everything else in society that is causing these shootings. He proposed some impossible solutions (a database of the mentally ill, a cop in every school) so that next time he can say that none of his ideas were acted upon.
Â
The line "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" is especially brilliant. It has the same oversimplified but attractive logic as "Just say no to drugs." Sure, if all drug users just said no, the drug problem would go away. The world just doesn't work that way. The same with good guys shooting bad guys - it happens once in every so often, but by chance. If every bad gun was shot the moment he pulled out a gun, then sure, it would. But, the world doesn't work that way. In fact, it's the same sort of cartoonish logic you might find in a video game.
Only if the NRA provides 2/3 of the funding
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323?utm_source=The+Lid+List&utm_campaign=f8dea4a233- RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email Clinton Pledges Funds to Add Police to Schools. Marking the first anniversary of the shooting deaths at Columbine High School, President Clinton announced $120 million in new federal grants Saturday to place more police officers in schools and help even the youngest kids cope with their problems.
I agree with all the NRA says but having security guards that are overweight people we're seeing more of these days, we need physically fit people who can move at a moments notice, and not one person but several. I agree when Mr LaPieree stated no one says anything when the President or any other official is surrounded by high powered guns but all complain when we want to protect our children and that mayor Bloomberg has no reason to talk as he's surrounded by security with guns, put the guns in the hands of professionals and see this carnage vanish but do it NOW because the next Sandy Hook is going to happen but the people who oppose guns in schools will never admit that they were wrong if more kids are killed without any protection, but please do outlaw those assault weapons and the high capacity magazines that is a must.Â
 @parrot456 try costing this out.  We have a hard time getting enough funding for either school or law enforcement.  Which budget will you take this from?  Or, will you raise taxes?
What do you expect? bellicose, stupid, utterly without any salient responsibility as any kind of leader, time for regime change!
 @Social Glimpse Wait. Let me guess! It's because he's black, right?
Fortunately, school shootings don't happen every day, and any individual school is unlikely to ever have one. So what are all these armed guards going to be doing the rest of the time? Policing the students of course! And making schools even more like prisons than they already are. Pat-downs, lock-downs, cavity searches... there are few things conservatives love more than prisons. You never hear them whining about their taxes where prisons are concerned.
Ok, so the NRA comes out after a respectful period of silence, while they gathered their thoughts and announced a proposed program called the âNational Model School Shield Programâ, to work with schools to arm and train school guards, including retired police officers and volunteers. Unsurprisingly, the media railed at the idea of âputting more guns in schoolsâ. Oh the horror! Frankly, I find it hard to disagree with Wayne LaPierreâs statement that âThe only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,â. Sounds pretty logical to me. The fact that the criminal destroyed his computer, stole the gun before or while his mother slept and murdered her while she slept with four shots to the head clearly demonstrate that this individual had Malice aforethought. A detirmined individual bent on doing harm will be succsessful in his intent unless there are options available to stop, delay, or deter that intent.
Â
The National Model School Shield Program offers up at least one layer of protection for those âsoft targetsâ called âGun-Free Zonesâ of which many schools are. The NRA isnât talking about having Johnny Redneck stalking the halls waiting for a chance to get the bad guy. They are proposing that retired law enforcement officers who have had years of training, or volunteers who will receive training, add a layer of protection for your children.  Â
Â
I have seen statements in reaction to this proposal saying âThat guy was scary to watch. âHorrid speech and terrible delivery. Basic message, arm everyone and let the bullets fall where they may.â Well, I really donât care about LaPierreâs orating skills but I donât mind the message. What I care about is that itâs a proposal, an option; at least itâs something else that could be a viable option rather than the knee-jerk reaction of ban everything thatâs black and sinister looking. This would provide that first layer of protection in order to stop, deter, or delay a threat to your children. At least it is something proactive rather than reactive. What would you rather propose, sprinkle some fairy dust and wave a magic wand to make this evil go away?
Â
People need to come to grips with the reality that there is evil in this world. There are evil people in this world intent on doing evil and despicable actions. To not recognize this is to live in a state of denial. This evil will always prey on the weak and take advantage of the fear they can create. Knowing that, they will always target the places where they can accomplish these horrible acts such as schools and other âgun-free zonesâ. Have you ever heard of a mass shooting at a gun show? Evil will not stop because you want to give a group-hug, sing kum-by-ya and discuss his screwed up childhood.
Â
To say that the banishment of AR-style rifles and so-called high capacity magazines because they are the latest buzz-word in vogue, is ludicrous. For one, face it. There are just too many out there to hearken back to your magic wand and make them all just disappear. The bad guys will always find a way to get one. Thatâs why theyâre bad guys. Versions of the AR-15 were outlawed in the United States under the 1994 assault weapons ban. That law expired in 2004, and Congress chose not to extend it. The ban didnât really do anything to change the cycle of violence. The Columbine shootings occurred in 1999, five years after the ban was instituted. And oh-by-the-way, one of the shooters was using a Hi-Point 995 Carbine 9 mm carbine with thirteen 10-round magazines, which he fired a total of 96 times.  So much for the high capacity magazine theory.Â
Â
The idea that re-instating a Clinton era, 1994 style firearms and magazine ban once again is near the definition of insanity; the idea of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome each time. The idea that the NRA is actually offering up something that will provide a tool to protect your children, is proactive and not oppressive to individual rights is something our law makers should listen to.
Â
Idiots! Columbine High School had an armed deputy and it did not save them. Read:Â http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171099/-Columbine-High-School-had-an-armed-deputy#
 @NWGuy BUT THESE GUYS WEREN'T AT THEIR POSTS EITHER, THEY WERE EATING LUNCH IN THEIR CAR IF THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE SCHOOL AT THEIR POSTS THIS SHOOTING MIGHT NOT HAVE OCCURRED.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @NWGuy and you have a selective memory with who actually first suggested placing armed police in schools.
Â
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323?utm_source=The
Go to the prisons and take a survey - who do they support - Obama or Romney.
The $20,000 and under crowd support Obama and are violent. Do some research.Â
 @Lei22 I'm sure they don't support Romney considering the election is over and he lost.
 @Lei22 Cite your source or your talking out of your other mouth.
Face reality. There is violence everywhere but it is not the top 1% who are out murdering people. It's the BOTTOM 10%. The Obama voters.
 @Lei22 Yes, the the top 1% don't need to go out murdering people because they can send out people to murder for them.
This comment has been deleted
Yes, or he didn't. Do some research. The other Dems said he shouldn't have been nominated there was so much cheating by his gang in the caucuses. RESEARCH!
 @Lei22 If people cared about this country, they would have voted for Ron Paul.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku Another thing we agree on! I was really, really into guns, explosions, action movies, and GI Joe dolls when I was twelve years old but lost interest after discovering music, boobs and masturbation. Â
 @HarryJuku There are the gun enthusiasts then there are the gun fetishists.
 @HarryJuku so instead of debating what the facts they are giving, you've resulted to simply name calling and being childish??
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @commonsense33 you mean these rights?  1857 Oregon:  The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power   Art. I, § 27 (enacted 1857, art. I, § 28)
@HarryJuku @commonsense33 ---Molon Labe. Portland has a gang problem because the police let up pressure on those losers. When I dare to venture over to Portland with my family, in Glock I trust. Police do the best they can, but can't be everywhere. I will avoid trouble at all costs, but if I have to fightbI will the tools and training to do it. Good job Wayne, you came up a proposal while Barry and Joe are going to form a comittee to study the problem, next year. I will sleep well knowing that.
Harry, have you noticed on this forum that generally speaking pro gun people outnumber people like yourself 3 to 1 ish? Why do you have this dillusional idea that you far out number us? I'm a democrat, I've only voted for 1 republican in my entire life, I can promise you I will never vote for anybody who supports an assault weapons ban. Promise. Now for somebody who actually tries to solve the problem.........
 @HarryJuku Naw, not angry, because I am smart enough to know that your hate for guns, no matter how many democratic politicians you put into office you will never get your way. Guns will always be legal. Sure people like you might be happier with the Assault weapons ban and the restricted to 10 round mags again. However, the kicker is it will expire after more mass murders happen and people wonder why. Because unlike you, the public will pull their head from their butts and realize that guns were never the problem in the first place. It was the lack of proactive enforcement, the lack of the justice system and the lack of mental health assistance.Â
 @HarryJuku Well i think people like you who are out of touch with reality are morons, but we are both entitled to our opinions. Opinions are like as*h*les, everyone has one.
 @HarryJuku So what do you think of an openly gay man who packs a gun around town? Paranoid? I believe in the right to defend yourself, but you have the right to your opinion.
You're 12 - we know and the whole world is nonviolent and there are no murders in Chicago or cartels in LA.
Yup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ
So the democrats scoff at the NRA for not immediately making a statement, they protest outside of their main building and then when the NRA makes a statement like this "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," said Wayne LaPierre, the group's chief executive officer." The democrats then scoff at them saying that they are paranoid and pushing an agenda. Why is it so crazy to have armed professionals in every school in the country? They can afford it, dont tell me schools cant. It cracks me up that the democrats solution is to simply rely on school lock down procedures which didnt stop the columbine shooters or the virginia tech shooter, but heck legislation and gun control for law abiding persons will stop criminals. Time to adopt practices that Israel does to protect their kids and get over this PC BS.
This comment has been deleted
 @HarryJuku  @commonsense33 One year after Columbine Clinton also unveiled a $60-million fifth round of funding for "COPS in School," a Justice Department program that helps pay the costs of placing police officers in schools to help make them safer for students and teachers.
Â
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/apr/16/news/mn-20323?utm_source=The
Watch "We Will Not Be Silenced" made by Democrats themselves. They are bullying people.Â
Have people not been aware how many threats to caseworkers and other workers there are?Â
Working with the poor is dangerous and they are Obama voters. This demographic of low-income voters (incomes under $20,000) vote for Democrats.Â
There ARE guards in some of the Portland welfare offices and all kinds of safety precautions have to be made.
In the larger buildings no one can sit on the ground floor near windows due to the danger.
It is not only schools that are targeted by Obama voters.Â
Â
This comment has been deleted
So - the Japanese didn't bomb Pearl Harbor and....when did your grow up and where?
Â
You sound like a little kid.Â
 @Lei22 The U.S. military fought the Japanese, not private gun owners.
Whatever happened to the MOTIVE in the CT murders - the incident with the school officials?
What did they SAY to the guy?
Were they not using the right words to speak to him? Were they not sensitive enough?Â
There are no easy answers. Too many have too many weapons. Some respect them and take care to be trained properly. Others just want to blow things away. Being responsible is a major issue.
Having armed guards at the doors of schools probably will not work, but it might be a deterrant for a short time.
It could or would move up to having guards in malls, stores, train stations, airports etc etc.
Â
I remember walking through Rhein Main airport years ago. The security teams were pairs...One carried a pistol and radio, the other carried a pistol and Uzi. When they flagged cars over for traffic checks, one person held a sign to direct the driver, the other held an Uzi.
Â
 @Just Lookin Terrorists in that part of the world would be my guess as to why you saw what you saw - most likely military that work for pennies on the dollar compared to the U.S. I used to able to carry my Colt .45 and M-60 machine gun on airplanes going from one place to another...