“The Only Thing That Stops A Bad Guy With A Gun Is A Good Guy With A Gun.”

[CattyWampus]

This morning, the NRA came forward with their statement (http://www.therightscoop.com/watch-wayne-lapierres-speech-at-the-nra-press-conference/) regarding the Newtown shooting and the week's worth of rhetoric following it. On balance, I thought it was a solid and constructive statement. It's really worth the time to read the transcript (http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf).

Of course, the left went nuts with the idea of having armed security at the schools, but overall I don't think it's an approach that many people would oppose. I do not favor federal funding for the program, but I think it's an idea that can be implemented rather quickly.

There may be some parts of the NRA presentation that you disagree with, but what the NRA did here was to present a plan that addresses school safety and the plan does far more to protect our children than any amount of "gun control" will. I think their plan is workable, but my biggest concern will be how much the teachers' unions and other lefty organizations will try to derail it.

I know one thing. If Obama had made this presentation today, it would be lauded by the media as the best plan ever.

[CitizenBBN]

I think the NRA needed to address some thing and throw some bones, some of them I've listed, without having to support any bans, BUT this is a sound proposal.

I support using fed money for it b/c both politically it's smart b/c people demand federal action and also on the sad grounds that we're throwing money at useless things left and right, might as well use some for something useful.

It will be dismissed by many, and I understand frustration with the NRA b/c they don't pretend to be willing to compromise much, BUT this is the only proposal put forward that has any chance of stopping the next such nightmare. Nothing proposed by the anti-gun people has any hope of stopping another 100 of these incidents. This really could save lives.

Of course I don't think those people care nearly as much about the victims as about how the victims can be used to further an agenda they think is battling the root of some great evil.

They didnt' call for just arming teachers, but putting in trained, professional security officers. Regardless of the gun ban issue, isn't this a really good idea as well?

it was smart to propose SOmETHING instead of just saying "no more gun laws." they presented an alternative solution that in fact is more likely to work and directly address the threat without infringing on anyone's rights or choices.

It's really a great proposal b/c it can be effective IMMEDIATELY whereas no gun ban can possible do so. It has a far greater chance of saving children's lives. If the Left had been smart they'd have embraced it as part of a comprehensive solution, but if they stand against it the NRA's move may pay off politically b/c who will be against putting more security in schools?

[CitizenBBN]

I know one thing. If Obama had made this presentation today, it would be lauded by the media as the best plan ever.


You got that right.

Re the unions, a smart move would be to propose from the outset this be a federal union like TSA just to cut that group's opposition. I hate it but if we have to compromise somewhere that's a good one to pick.

[KeithKSR]

A Clinton initiative put armed police officers in schools, grants were given out for six years or so before being non-renewed. The media loved Clinton's plan.

[CitizenBBN]

A Clinton initiative put armed police officers in schools, grants were given out for six years or so before being non-renewed. The media loved Clinton's plan.

The NRA would have done well to site that fact, saying Clinton was right. Looks like a bipartisan thing.

[Darrell KSR]

Bringing the Clinton era initiative would have been very smart.

I am struggling with the "good guy with a gun" tag. Trying to put on an anti-gun hat, I don't think that will endear them to the idea, as catchy as it may be. To me, it conjures up images of posses and the Wild West. Bunch of idiots running around with guns drawn.

Somehow including SROs in that catch phrase, or a "well-trained guy with a gun," etc. would have been more palatable to anti-gun people. JMO.

Sent using Forum Runner. All typos excused.

[CitizenBBN]

Bringing the Clinton era initiative would have been very smart.

I am struggling with the "good guy with a gun" tag. Trying to put on an anti-gun hat, I don't think that will endear them to the idea, as catchy as it may be. To me, it conjures up images of posses and the Wild West. Bunch of idiots running around with guns drawn.

Somehow including SROs in that catch phrase, or a "well-trained guy with a gun," etc. would have been more palatable to anti-gun people. JMO.

Sent using Forum Runner. All typos excused.

Agreed. I think something more along the lines of "police" or something other than what they used b/c I agree it conjures up images of civilians with guns and they're talking about trained security.

I liked the one about "when there is a threat you'll call an officer with a gun to defend your children. Do you want him to be miles away or down the hall?"

[Darrell KSR]

I liked the one about "when there is a threat you'll call an officer with a gun to defend your children. Do you want him to be miles away or down the hall?"

Yes, perfect.

Sent using Forum Runner. All typos excused.

[CitizenBBN]

Just a twist on one that is cliche but true: when seconds count the police are just minutes away.

To be clear that's NOT a slight on the police. They can't be everywhere at once and it's crazy to expect them to be. This proposal puts some where we have something very valuable to protect. seems pretty brainless to me whether you want gun laws in addition to the security or not.

Portraying it as "putting guns in our schools" is almost so simplistic as to be offensive to the claim they want to protect children. It's the equivalent of saying hiring more police is "putting guns on our streets".

[suncat05]

Wasn't the Clinton initiative the one where 100,000 police were hired? Am I remembering that one correctly? Or at least the federal government offered up monies to local governments to do that? Something of that nature, anyway.

Good idea, but there's that growing of more government idea again, which in my estimation is not a good idea.

[CitizenBBN]

Wasn't the Clinton initiative the one where 100,000 police were hired? Am I remembering that one correctly? Or at least the federal government offered up monies to local governments to do that? Something of that nature, anyway.

Good idea, but there's that growing of more government idea again, which in my estimation is not a good idea.

I don't like expanding government but as you know protecting the people from criminals and such is a valid role of government as opposed to the other 10,000 things it does.

Also at least this one has a real tangible benefit. It's also just a matter of political expediency. Better this for many reasons verses Feinstein incrementally disarming the people. I know I'm preaching to the choir.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

[KeithKSR]

I don't like expanding government but as you know protecting the people from criminals and such is a valid role of government as opposed to the other 10,000 things it does.

Also at least this one has a real tangible benefit. It's also just a matter of political expediency. Better this for many reasons verses Feinstein incrementally disarming the people. I know I'm preaching to the choir.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

The Clinton initiative offered grants for LLEs to put trained officers in schools. Good program as far as government goes, especially since the money was spent at the local level.

IMO, we could pull some of the billions we send over seas to fund despots and pay for officers in our schools.