Wayne LaPierre made a few interesting points in his address Friday. Like it or not, schools are one of the very few remaining vital institutions not protected by armed guards.
The jobless rate among veterans is far too high. Why not look into this as a resource to recruit school guards rather than arming teachers or using "resource officers." When and if the proper screening is conducted, (i.e. more thorough than the Defense Department's child care) these already weapon-trained individuals could provide a tremendous service to themselves and society.
How to pay?
1) Several defense department lackies no longer have a job - use their salaries. John Kerry can easily donate his salary and continue living from his wife's Heinz largess.
2) On the other side, the NRA can do yet another promotional mailing, but this time use the funds for the school protectors. And a small and reasonable tax on weapons and ammunition could be used for this purpose if the tax is small and reasonable. Just some thoughts.
* * *
Somehow the public has gotten the false belief that more guns equals safety. Putting guns inside school buildings is not the solution to a vexing problem. Our society had become immune and jaded when it comes to guns and gun safety. Only in Tombstone did cowboys fight in the streets and multiple pistols being fired bullets going everywhere or at least that is the image of the cowboy movies of old and new.
A friend of mine suggested with tongue firmly in cheek that schools need to place next to the fire alarms a locked glass cabinet (break to open) and inside contains a weapon. Putting guns in school does not solve the gun problem in society. It only means more guns and more guns.
I taught school and actually using my weapon to repel an intruder might endanger others. For those that have had military training, myself included, I probably could hit the targeted intruder but to the semi-skilled shooter the danger of hitting others too great. Let's rethink something simple like guns no longer sold as bread.
* * *
Mr. Brooks, with all due respect, there are almost as many guns in circulation as there are loaves of bread. Seriously, everyone has an opinion, and some people will stick to their opinion no matter what. Lets be realistic, drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and guns are here to stay. In other words, the genie is out of the bottle and there is no going back. If every gun was banned, criminals/psychos will always have the guns. It seems a lot of people just can't grasp this reality. Criminals love "Gun Free Zones", its like a fox going into an unguarded hen house, the fox knows it can get whatever it wants without any intervention.
Let me ask you this, you say your a semi-skilled shooter, and the danger of you hitting someone besides the psycho is too great, therefore a gun in the hands of the good guy is out of the question.
Based on the above, apparently you wouldn't take a chance to fire your firearm to take down the psycho knowing you might accidentally hit someone, so you would rather let the psycho be free to take down 15 to 20 innocents, when you could have potentially stopped the carnage. Is that what you are telling us?
The solution to school shootings is a complex issue, but, having someone firearm trained in each school should be priority number one. Number two should be better secured entry to the school, number three should be a radical change in our mental health policies.
All of this costs money. Question is, are you/we willing to spend the money to protect our children?