Should we keep armed guards at schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, there may be a real answer to this problem. At least for the female population. All these shooters, or 99% of them are male right? Stop allowing men to go to school. Girls will be safe. Men (boys) can be homeschooled. Then the sane population can be safe. (This is tongue in cheek, but seriously, it is always men who do this)

Except when it's not. Such sexism is unnecessary.

Of all the mass shootings since 1980 only 3 we’re committed by women. It isn’t sexist to acknowledge that.

[Anonymous]

NO guarantees that the armed guards will not become the shooters if they are hired in the same manner other school staff psychos are hired.

There must be metal detectors everywhere AND there has to be a ban on guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NO guarantees that the armed guards will not become the shooters if they are hired in the same manner other school staff psychos are hired.

There must be metal detectors everywhere AND there has to be a ban on guns.

Everywhere? All guns? For everyone? If so, that's too extreme.

[Anonymous]

How can we afford enough security at every school? We can't even afford to fund the schools adequately TODAY. And this in our "rich" areas.

But sure OP, I will give you the armed guards at every school if you give me common sense gun control like increased age limits, waiting periods, mental illness restrictions, mandatory training, etc. etc.

Let the law abiding people keep their guns and tighten up the "law" in "law-abiding".

[Anonymous]

There was a sheriff's deputy at Parkland. Hate to say it but it didn't help at all. Have no idea what this person was thinking or if it went against his regulations to intervene.

https://apnews.com/553d0d00e67740928d285cf111bb8d2a/The-Latest:-Sheriff:- Deputy-never-entered-school-in-shooting

[Anonymous]

People have this vision of having a single point of entry to a school that can be controlled, like a prison or a secure facility will a wall around it and a gate. It just doesn't work that way, especially in bigger middle schools and high schools. The weakest link in every building is the need for enough doors to serve as fire safety exits, and the students who open them to let people into the building, even if the doors are locked. A security guard can only prevent a gunman from entering, if the gunman comes in the door the guard is at. Metal detectors might deter a student from easily bringing in a small weapon, but they won't deter someone with an AR-15.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To thwart shooters?

I don't know.

What I do know is that whatever Obama dI'd -- NOTHING -- didn't work, so we should try something else.

[Anonymous]

You guys realize that we already have armed security officers at most area high schools, right? And installing metal detectors at every school? You think the crazy guy with the AR-15 is going to stop in his tracks because he set off an alarm? And as others have pointed out -- what about school trailers, what about at soccer games, what about at the Metro stations, what about at the park, what about at restaurants, what about at church? Humanity is everywhere.

I thought this was a very interesting article written by Chris Ladd:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/10/06/ten-lies-distort-the-gun-control-debate/#6ef54c511fad

[Anonymous]

All security measures should be paid for through massive taxes on firearms and bullets. AR-15s and similar should be banned.

[Anonymous]

Not in FCPS. The board just decided it wasn't even worthy of a discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a sheriff's deputy at Parkland. Hate to say it but it didn't help at all. Have no idea what this person was thinking or if it went against his regulations to intervene.

https://apnews.com/553d0d00e67740928d285cf111bb8d2a/The-Latest:-Sheriff:- Deputy-never-entered-school-in-shooting

+1. Parkland has a trained police officer who didn’t help one bit during this massacre. When will people stop dancing around the issue that it’s easier to buy an assault weapon than it is to adopt a kitten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not in FCPS. The board just decided it wasn't even worthy of a discussion.

I'm an elementary teacher and I think it should at least be an option that is part of a discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a sheriff's deputy at Parkland. Hate to say it but it didn't help at all. Have no idea what this person was thinking or if it went against his regulations to intervene.

https://apnews.com/553d0d00e67740928d285cf111bb8d2a/The-Latest:-Sheriff:- Deputy-never-entered-school-in-shooting

+1. Parkland has a trained police officer who didn’t help one bit during this massacre. When will people stop dancing around the issue that it’s easier to buy an assault weapon than it is to adopt a kitten.

I can only imagine what that deputy is going through right now. I honestly feel for him.

[Anonymous]

My answer is : Hell no!

More guns I see nit the answer....
And not just because Parkland had an armed deputy who did nothing, did not enter the building at all.

[Anonymous]

Has the ACLU changed its position since last year? I think they modified their stance a bit when asked to support the rights of armed protestors in Charlottesville. I was surprised the ACLU remained firm about their position in this day and age, especially since many consider it a liberal organization.

Consider the following statement from the ACLU standpoint. I thought looking at gun control from a position about fairness interesting and thought-provoking, as well as an overlooked part of the national conversation. I'm not in favor of assault weapons in the general population, let alone guns in schools, but I don't know what the right solution is.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/disability-rights/gun-control-laws-should-be-fair#comments-top