New gun laws

[Ryano]

Originally Posted by Goat

I would rather see volunteers, but don't think there will be enough.
.

I would gladly spend several hours/week at my grandaughters school to protect them. I'm sure that there would be enough volunteers to maintain this armed presence if allowed.

[nighttrain]

^^^ me too....

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by Ryano

I would gladly spend several hours/week at my grandaughters school to protect them. I'm sure that there would be enough volunteers to maintain this armed presence if allowed.

My wife and I were just talking about this and thought it would be a great idea.

Less laws and more common sense. Anyone can walk into our local schools right now. They buzz people in without looking.

[Goat]

Originally Posted by Ryano

I would gladly spend several hours/week at my grandaughters school to protect them. I'm sure that there would be enough volunteers to maintain this armed presence if allowed.

Another way could be for the Police to do this, maybe as a way to earn over time? Now that I think about it there would be many advantages of having a Police officer at our schools.

[J_Byrd]

Originally Posted by BendtheBar

My wife and I were just talking about this and thought it would be a great idea.

Less laws and more common sense. Anyone can walk into our local schools right now. They buzz people in without looking.

Do these schools not have resource officers at them? All our schools have at least one.

I wonder what safety protocols they have in place at other schools. We practice drills regularly for if something of that nature happens.

[MC]

The schools in my system have a partnership with the police agencies and all secondary (middle and high) schools have School Resource Officers. They are positioned at the school all the time. They patrol the school and school events, do D.A.R.E. presentations, counsel students, and the like. They are also available to assist elementary schools if need be, although they are not stationed there. I'm not for armed citizens in schools with firearms, not even some people I know.

I recently adopted two rescue cats from the ASPCA and it was a long, complicated, and expensive process. I could walk into WalMart or KMart today during my lunch break today and purchase a gun in less time and for less money than my two cats cost me. Something's not right with that picture. Consider everything you have to do to get a Driver's License compared to what you have to do to purchase a gun.

The hole in the "don't take guns from law abiding citizens" argument is that, in all the last dozen mass murders, each one of those accused was a "law abiding citizen" right up until they killed people. Which brings us to the point where we as a nation have to come together, not make this come liberal-conservative or urban/rural battle and really talk about a proper screening process for individuals who want to purchase firearms and whether certain types of firearms should even be sold to citizens. The standard of "law abiding citizen" doesn't appear to be stringent enough.

[J_Byrd]

Originally Posted by MC

The schools in my system have a partnership with the police agencies and all secondary (middle and high) schools have School Resource Officers. They are positioned at the school all the time. They patrol the school and school events, do D.A.R.E. presentations, counsel students, and the like. They are also available to assist elementary schools if need be, although they are not stationed there. I'm not for armed citizens in schools with firearms, not even some people I know.

I recently adopted two rescue cats from the ASPCA and it was a long, complicated, and expensive process. I could walk into WalMart or KMart today during my lunch break today and purchase a gun in less time and for less money than my two cats cost me. Something's not right with that picture. Consider everything you have to do to get a Driver's License compared to what you have to do to purchase a gun.

The hole in the "don't take guns from law abiding citizens" argument is that, in all the last dozen mass murders, each one of those accused was a "law abiding citizen" right up until they killed people. Which brings us to the point where we as a nation have to come together, not make this come liberal-conservative or urban/rural battle and really talk about a proper screening process for individuals who want to purchase firearms and whether certain types of firearms should even be sold to citizens. The standard of "law abiding citizen" doesn't appear to be stringent enough.

Both of those guys were "not in their right mind" for sure. Was this second guy even a gun owner? Didn't he steal them from his mother? I have to agree with you that there should be an ownership process, that includes more than having a drivers licenses to buy a shotgun (and being of age).

This is going to sound heartless, but it is my opinion. 50 years ago these people who go on these shooting sprees would have simply killed themselves. I think these shootings are more a reflection on our society and our baby everyone along mentality that is a result of this.

[Off Road]

I believe something should be done to protect citizens from gun violence, I am not sure what the answer is though.

The problem is that stricter gun laws are NOT effective and once the anti-gun groups get a foot-hold they will not let go and it won't be long before ALL guns are illegal. That is why there is such a fight on both sides when new gun laws are introduced, it's the give-an-inch and take-a-mile mentality that we have to guard against.

Maybe if there was more of a give and take relationship, then something may get accomplished. Free up the ownership [and carry] of "acceptable" firearms and we would gladly give up purchasing "unacceptable" firearms. I would trade all my high capacity magazines for [returning] my right to carry a five or six shot weapon on my person.

I do not believe any normal citizen has a need for high capacity magazines, and certainly the reduction in the amount of rounds a weapon can carry will reduce the number of victims in these horrific situations. But I'll be damned if I will willing vote for that reduction when I know that it will just be a stepping stone to further restrictions and eventually lead to the outlawing of ALL firearms.

[J_Byrd]

Originally Posted by Off Road

I believe something should be done to protect citizens from gun violence, I am not sure what the answer is though.

The problem is that stricter gun laws are NOT effective and once the anti-gun groups get a foot-hold they will not let go and it won't be long before ALL guns are illegal. That is why there is such a fight on both sides when new gun laws are introduced, it's the give-an-inch and take-a-mile mentality that we have to guard against.

Maybe if there was more of a give and take relationship, then something may get accomplished. Free up the ownership [and carry] of "acceptable" firearms and we would gladly give up purchasing "unacceptable" firearms. I would trade all my high capacity magazines for [returning] my right to carry a five or six shot weapon on my person.

I do not believe any normal citizen has a need for high capacity magazines, and certainly the reduction in the amount of rounds a weapon can carry will reduce the number of victims in these horrific situations. But I'll be damned if I will willing vote for that reduction when I know that it will just be a stepping stone to further restrictions and eventually lead to the outlawing of ALL firearms.

Very well said!

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by J_Byrd

Do these schools not have resource officers at them? All our schools have at least one.

Junior high schools do.

Right now as it stands someone will buzz to be let in and they just do it, no questions asked. They are not near the doors, nor is the person asked why they want to be let in. They are just buzzed in.

As a parent it drives me nuts. I can't understand why the school administrators don't see this as a red flag.