WatchSonoma Watch

Sonoma County educators decry NRA proposal for armed guards


Putting armed guards in schools to deter violence is not something local educators, parents and even law enforcement see as viable.

The National Rifle Association’s suggestion Friday that armed guards should be placed at every school to protect children from mass shootings was quickly dismissed as counter-productive, costly and probably unnecessary.

“Schools are safe havens and while you may have some horrible things happen in isolated incidents, by and large our schools are very safe,” said Windsor Schools Superintendent Tammy Gabel, echoing the sentiments of other educators interviewed Friday.

The NRA’s solution to stopping shootings like those that occurred last week in Newtown, Conn., was condemned by California elected officials.

“Everyone agrees our schools, movie theaters, shopping malls, streets and communities need to be safer. But we need a comprehensive approach, and the NRA proposal needs to go beyond just arming more people with more guns to make this happen,” Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, said Friday in a post on his Facebook page.

Thompson, who is heading a congressional task force on gun violence, called for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The solution, he said, must also involve improving background checks on people buying firearms, enhancing mental health services and “addressing our culture’s glorification of violence.”

Attorney General Kamala Harris decried “reckless calls to saturate our schools with guns” instead of efforts to remove guns from the hands of dangerous people.

California Senate leader Darrel Steinberg called the NRA’s proposal to “militarize” schools “profitable fear mongering.”

“What’s next? Armed guards at Starbucks and Little League games? This is completely the wrong direction,” Steinberg said in a statement.

Santa Rosa Police Chief Tom Schwedhelm also said there needs to be a different approach to the problem.

“If you’re looking for an easy fix, like putting armed guards in school, I don’t think that’s the answer,” he said.

Schwedhelm said he agrees with proposals for reducing gun violence that include reinstating a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity bullet magazines, as well as closing loopholes at gun shows.

The police chief said gun violence is a complex problem that requires a “holistic approach” to address a range of societal problems, including the need for more preventative mental health programs.

“There’s no magic bullets out there,” he said.

Sara Nerius, PTA president at Santa Rosa’s Proctor Terrace School, also disagreed with the NRA proposal.

“I don’t personally feel that the answer is to have people with guns inside the school — that fighting guns with guns will make things any better,” she said.

The mother of a kindergarten student and a fourth-grader, Nerius emphasized she was speaking for herself and not the PTA.

“What kind of message is that sending to kids who are supposed to feel safe going to school, if there are people there with guns? How does it make them feel even if they are there to protect them?”

Steve Herrington, Sonoma County superintendent of schools, said schools should be safe havens for teachers and students, but armed guards are not the answer.

“I think the use of any type of police or military presence is counter-productive to the purpose of education. It’s the antithesis to what I believe in,” he said.

Herrington, like other school officials, makes an exception for programs with police officers that come on campuses and interact with students.

Santa Rosa Police, for example, have five “school resource officers” assigned to all the high schools and feeder middle schools. They interact with students and also deal with illegal student behavior.

“I would prefer that versus armed guards at schools,” Herrington said.

Overall, he favors a different approach to reducing gun violence, including an assault weapons ban and more mental health care programs available to families.

Windsor Schools superintendent Gabel agreed more emphasis needs to be placed on mental health treatment.

“De-stigmatizing mental health issues will go a lot further to creating safer schools,” she said.

But with armed guards, “If you aren’t careful, you create a culture of fear, instead of a culture of trust,” she said.

Jenni Klose, Santa Rosa school board member, agreed.

“As tragic as these school shootings are and they’re awful … they’re extremely rare,” she said.

She said adding a full-time officer to each of the more than 200 public school campuses in Sonoma County would be costly at a time schools are wrestling with budget issues.

“I don’t know any evidence it keeps kids safer, and there is evidence to show it creates an uncomfortable environment,” she said.

She noted that there was an armed guard at Columbine High School, but that failed to prevent the notorious 1999 mass murder of students.

She said the presence of armed guards on campus actually make children feel less safe.

Bill Carle, president of the Santa Rosa School Board, said “the concept of ramping up the stress level of the learning environment and basically throwing in the face of every student, every day — that there is a risk and there needs to be a gun on the campus — completely takes away from the kind of environment you want at a school.”

And he said it won’t get at the root of the problem, such as avoiding shootings in shopping malls, movie theaters and even in church.

Carle predicted the idea of widespread use of armed school guards is not going to go far.

“I don’t see a clamor for that from our community,” he said. “And I see way too many downsides.”

50 Responses to “Sonoma County educators decry NRA proposal for armed guards”

  1. Phil Maher says:

    @Gun owner/ex NRA member-

    I’m not quite sure if your monicker is intended to qualify the credibility of your opinions, but it is an interesting one. But it does raise some questions, the least of which is certainly not; why do you own guns? Is it just one, or is it many. How many, and for what? Why are you an “ex NRA member”?

    In case you failed to notice, the vast majority of the venues you list already do either employ security, or do come with an increased police presence. Not all may carry guns per se, but go to any of them with ill intent and see what you get because of it. Whether it’s a gun, or mace, or pepper spray, just having you outnumbered, or even just a good home alarm system…just locking your door, all these “weapons” are designed to act as deterrents and to make you think twice before you act out. Hell, we spent over 50 years dedicating the majority of our tax money to things like mutually assured destruction (MAD). Did we really ever intend to nuke the Soviet Union, or was it enough to let them know that we were going to get them before they got us? That’s a “deterrent”, not necessarily a solution and a viable option, but it is one that a person bent on destruction will consider. People, especially criminals, are opportunists…they want easy. If, in any number of ways, I’m not “easy”, the person likely moves on to something that is. If you think I’m going to cook you without batting an eye, you go somewhere else or take the consequences…period. And, when it comes to crime, appropriate consequences are something we, as a society, have let slide to the point where we inevitably get we helped create.

  2. Gun owner, ex-NRA member says:

    @Phil Maher

    Do you also propose that there need to be armed guards or employees or doctors or spouses at every workplace (to ‘prevent’ disgruntled employee shootings), at malls, at clinics, at hospitals, at public squares, at WalMarts, and everywhere people gather?

    Are you proposing that each partner of a couple who are having major relationship problems be armed and ready to shoot their partner in case the threats escalate or get to violence?

    Your claim that armed teachers, with guns in a desk drawer, sounds ridiculous.

    What else to you have to reduce gun violence?

  3. Phil Maher says:


    What good are the police and why are they called via 911 when situations like that occur? Is it that they need people in uniform to stand there and look official, or is it because they’re armed with weapons capable of stopping what others that aren’t armed can’t? Also, the history of the world and the warfare that created what we know today has always given the victory to those with the biggest and best weapons. Our own government is fully aware of things like “Peace through superior firepower” and “Might making right”. They tell us that guns are bad and inherently evil, yet they spend trillions to demonstrate just the opposite. Unfortunately, again, in situations like school shootings, guns are “the great equalizer”. A gun can sit there forever and do nothing…until a person either using it for good or evil picks it up.

    I’ve spent time in 3rd world countries with a very present and obvious police or military presence, and yes, it is admittedly more than a little unnerving to see someone with a machine gun watching your every move, but for at least a couple of trained school officials to simply have a pistol secured in their desk drawer, out of sight and out of mind, but available, is nothing that should raise eyebrows. It just makes sense. My kids know we own guns…they know where they are and how to use them safely and responsibly. No adverse psychological issues whatsoever. In fact, because of where we live and the time it would take for outside intervention to arrive to help us in what would otherwise be a situation wherein we would have absolutely no ability to help ourselves, should the unthinkable happen, they sleep soundly in knowing that we’re prepared for almost anything that comes our way. The alternative is potentially just being relegated to victims of the sitting duck variety, just like the teachers and children in Newtown were.

  4. David says:


    If it would be so easy to attack a school like you say, then why do they have armed guards at the Sidwell School? Politicians children can be protected by armed guard but our children can’t be???

  5. The Other Guy says:

    I grew up in Southern California, we had LA County Sheriff’s at our school when the school opened til everyone went home and then there was a patrol car sitting in the parking lot. It necessarily doesn’t need to be a crazed person with a gun, it could be a crazed person with any kind of weapon.
    My first year in high school, a rival gang from another high school walked into the school, found the person they were looking for and stabbed her to death with screw drivers. All we had at that time before the Sheriffs department came in was the two unarmed security people that were there during break and lunch, and that was it!
    Having the Police there made it feel safe. We had other incidents that if they weren’t there, would had made the situation even worse.
    I’m for arming teachers and having either a police presence or armed guard present. It’s not always people on the outside of the school you need to worry about as we’ve seen at Jonesborough and Columbine.

  6. Follower says:

    @ David
    I’m sure they didn’t!

    But what they DID “envision” is the extreme difficulty the Government would face trying to oppress it’s citizens while adhering to the Constitution as written.

    They knew that a Government by nature will always seek the path of least resistance.
    It’s much easier to Govern a citizenry that is limited to simply complaining (if that). Easier to control and oppress an unarmed citizenry than an armed one.

    They recognized the weaknesses of the Democratic aspect of our Republic, so much so that they chose a Republic rather than a strait Democracy in an attempt to curtail that inherent weakness.

    But it would appear that the experiment has failed.

    We have been conditioned through the generations to expect Government to be our mommy, from Social Security to Obamacare. And we are now more than willing to hand over our power over that Government in exchange for more free stuff. Just as Congress is handing over it’s power to regulators and Presidential directives.

    The 2nd amendment wasn’t enacted for the purpose of protecting your right to hunt or defend your home.

    It was enacted as a “stop gap measure” to place a limit on our Government’s ability to turn to tyranny as a means of Governing.

    A President “leads” his citizens toward the right path accepting that some will follow & some will not.

    A Tyrant forces you to buy Heath Insurance against your will.

    Oh wait… that’s right, it’s a “TAX”!

    Keep digging that hole libs. You’re in for a BIG surprise when you reach the bottom!

    Thanks to the 2nd amendment, Americans won’t be reliant on another Government to arm it’s rebels.

  7. The Hammer says:

    Some one gets killed by a Ford and no one, absolutely no one, makes an effort to close down Ford or make it more difficult to purchase a Ford. What hell is the difference here?

  8. Kevin says:

    Lets see, if I were going to go to a school, knowing now that they are all guarded by armed guards, what would I do. Oh ya, take my 308 out with my high powered scope and snipe him where he stood. Problem solved. Now I can go down and blast away.
    Come on really people, armed guards at schools. You have been watching to many westerns. This is a feel good fix for rednecks who think they can save the world by having a bigger gun. There is a much bigger problem and its because of the lack of compassion and respect that we have for each other.

    The truth is we as a nation are to lazy to deal with it. Its do to our “not my problem attitude” along with the lack of real conviction to want to understand the whole big picture. I really feel sad for our kids…

  9. David says:

    “I am pretty sure the forefathers never envisioned the internet when they wrote the 2nd amendment.”

    That should have said 1st amendment.

  10. David says:


    By your rational, you shouldn’t be posting on this site all day long because the 2nd amendment only covers newspapers and oral speech. I am pretty sure the forefathers never envisioned the internet when they wrote the 2nd amendment. Why do the president’s children deserve armed guards at their school and your children don’t?

    As far as the guard at Columbine goes, repeating a lie over and over does not make it a fact>

  11. David J. Spencer says:

    Armed guards in schools will be a lot like the French Maginot line of W.W.II–something to be easily gotten around.

    A better way to go is to find a way to keep guns out of the hands of wackos.

    Remember Jared Lee Loughner, the Arizona shooter? He tried to enlist in the Army, was rejected because he failed the drug test, and then–this part is really incomprehensible–went to a regular gun store to purchase the guns with which he committed his crimes.

    Surely if you must pass a drug test to join the Army or work at Wal-Mart it is not unreasonable to pass a drug test to purchase a firearm.

    That requirement, I am sure, would go a long way in keeping firearms out of the hands of the dingbat population.

  12. MOCKINGBIRD says:

    They had an armed guard at Colombine and it did not make one bit of difference. He ran.

    Okay, you ASSAULT WEAPON and gun people. Please give me the statistics of how many people saved themselves, or their families or others because they had an assault weapon and/or a gun. THEN GIVE ME THE STATISTICS OF HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE KILLED BY GUNS (please include suicides).

    Pray tell, as far as I am concerned you don’t have a probability leg to stand on no matter how much you spout your 2nd amendment rights (which really only apply to militias and one shot weapons anyway-not military assault weapons).

    More people, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE PEOPLE, are killed by guns than are saved because someone had a gun at the right time and moment.

    My brother had a gun at the right time and moment. He killed himself with it.

  13. GAJ says:

    Not sure I agree with the proposal, however, it is nothing new.

    LA has had a Police Force guarding schools since 1948, so this is really nothing new or “fringe.”

    “The Los Angeles School Police Department (LASPD) is a law enforcement agency in Los Angeles, California, whose duties are to provide police services to the Los Angeles Unified School District and to enforce state and city laws. LASPD Officers assist staff with disturbances and potential criminal activity on the campuses on a daily basis.”

  14. Snarky says:

    An interesting turn of events just occurred with the ownership of guns debate.

    A “journalist” and her staff decided that they would impose THEIR politics upon innocent people and publish the names and addresses of people who owned guns in her area.

    Now, a private blogger has published HER name and address, along with the personal information of her staff… after all … fair is far in publishing, correct?

    Its a wake up call to the media. Before YOU impose YOUR politics upon innocent people, remember that the modern electronic age can and will provide you with the same treatment.

    To view that private blog, use the following link.


    Its important… whether you are in favor of guns or not.. to realize you do NOT have the right to interfere in the lives of law abiding people… just because you work in a particular field of media.

  15. Skippy says:

    Democrats cheered Dred Scott, as it made blacks 3/5 of a white man, and ineligible for full citizenship, therefore ineligible to own guns.
    Gun control is not for liberals, only conservatives.
    Actually, gun control controls no guns, only citizens.
    Democrats actively hobbled the black man for 100 years until Republicans passed the Equal Rights laws.
    Democrats want to disarm you so that they will be the Massa and you will be the slave.
    Your gun makes you a citizen, rather than a subject.

  16. Jim says:

    There are armed guards at the private school the Obama children attend. Many New York elite send their kids there.

    Where is the outcry about the armed guards there?

  17. Mike says:

    I believe people should realize things before they speak. For example they think armed guards and police are different, when actually there not. First, I supervise a armed security company and the training 90% of my company has is even more than you local police. The employees who worked for me are P.O.S.T certified, meaning same school police went to and have a long military background which is where the real training is. I personlly have years of security, military and all kinds of training most regualr police would never receive. So next time, sit and think when you see a security guard and what they might know and be able to do. I believe no matter what, we just need to increase the saftey around us no matter what is put in to place.

  18. Ricardo Sorentino says:

    Not sure what the complete answer is, but if guns aren’t a deterrent, why do the police and military have them? Guess I thought it was to get the bad guys.

    It’s not the ‘answer’ here in Sonoma County, at least not until some tragedy happens here. Let’s see what the politically correct people then have to say…

  19. Me says:

    Thank you NRA! I totally agree that there should be armed guards everywhere. Let’s turn this baby into a police state!

  20. Phil Maher says:

    This isn’t normally one of the topics I would weigh in on, but I was taken by the fact that the principal at Sandy Hook, with no other options seemingly available to her, courageously threw herself in front of the shooter in an effort to protect the children…I believe she took about 11 rounds. What would have happened, and how would the death toll have potentially been reduced, if she had instead emptied her 9mm on the guy? I just can’t help but wonder.

  21. Former NRA member says:

    It’s just amazing how many writers of comments here love their guns and their right to have guns, but don’t provide any real help in stopping gun violence and mayhem. It’s always someone else’s problem to fix.

    Are any of them stepping up to provide more government funds or private money for mental health and emergency medical service programs? education? protection against domestic and workplace violence?

    Just as there are limits to every right vested in the Constitution, there are reasonable limits to the 2nd Amendment, but none of these guys seem to like that at all.

    Pray tell, just what justification is there for civilians to own automatic and semi-automatic (but convertible to automatic) weapons of war, or large clips of ammo, or armor piercing and flesh destroying bullets?

    Not one of them has anything to say except how the jack-booted government thugs are out to get them and they need to be armed to the teeth to stop them.

    This is crazy, uncivilized behavior.

    C’mon, gun owners, get real. What would you actually do and pay for to reduce gun violence?

    A tax on bullets and arms for prevention? Limits to ownership? Full background checks at gun shows and other private sales? Limits on number of weapons purchased? Waiting times for all?

    Or is it all up to someone else to figure it out, provide the bandaids and prayers?

  22. Snarky says:

    I KNOW what should be done about gun violence at the local schools !!!!

    Ask the Santa Rosa Police Dept to send their gun toting officers BACK AGAIN to show all the kids the wonderful assault weapons that police use. What a joyful event that was. Remember ?

    Speaking of local Santa Rosa police, will the Press Democrat be updating us on the “local” Santa Rosa Junior College cop who is being prosecuted right now for theft of public funds over a years long period of time ?

    AND… maybe more importantly… has anyone called for the “Chief” of the SRJC police dept to be fired / terminated due to those thefts by his own cop employee… right under the “Chief’s” nose? If he can’t even stop theft by his own sworn employees, how can he be trusted to do anything as a police chief ???

  23. Juvenal says:

    @Joe in Nor Cal

    “Why punish about a hundred million honest citizens for the acts of a very few?”

    Hve you read the terms of the assault weapons ban? I do not see how “law abiding” citzens are “punished” by having their magazine size limited and certain information kept on file.

  24. BigDogatPlay says:

    @ Juvenal… The canard of Columbine….. in that incident the armed school resource officer (a police officer, not a security guard) backed out, waited for the cavalry which surrounded the place until overwhelming force was on scene. Then they entered the school hours later. That approach was dictated by law enforcement doctrine then and that incident changed that doctrine forever. Now doctrine and training indicate that the first two to three officers on the scene intervene immediately and offensively. Mass shooters are, almost always, cowards who either surrender or kill themselves at the first sign of resistance. That is exactly what happened in Newtown; the suspect shot himself as the first police units arrived on scene.

    The sooner the resistance to violence happens happens, the sooner it ends. There is no way to completely stop criminal violence. Thousands of years of human history tell us that it’s not possible. What is possible is to present as firm a defense as possible to deter the criminal from attempting the attack.

  25. Marc says:

    “NRA=Industry lobbyists to sell more guns and ammo”

    All this anti gun posturing is Backfiring as a friend of mine went into a local gun shop to buy a gun and due to possibility of more gun control it was doing a brisk business with people 10 deep filling out forms and buying the store out.

  26. Citizen says:

    “Just remember that the NRA is financially and politically the lobbying arm of the gun industry. Do you really like being played for fools in barfing out their non-stop propaganda without getting paid?”

    Is that so? It’s just the gun industry’s lobbyist? Then how come it FEELS like I’m paying them to protect my right to bear arms?

    Ever wonder why so many people give them money? It’s because they’re lobbying for a large portion of Americans who aren’t being served by politicians with an agenda and no qualms about sidestepping the constitution.

  27. Kevin says:

    Yes armed guards in our schools, instead of school nurses, or school counselors. This will work! NOT

  28. Frank Matyus says:

    The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.

    If you dismiss this by saying, “Of course they have armed guards — they get Secret Service protection,” then you’ve missed the larger point.

    The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC’s David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren’t used (and weren’t even allowed).

  29. Pepe LaPierre says:

    Why not simply arm all the kids? I learned to shoot a gun when I was 4. The first time I shot a 22 I was 6 or 7. I was a pretty good shot too.

    An armed society is a polite society.

  30. Sports Fan says:

    Wow! To all the uninformed, Santa Rosa City Schools have had cops on campus for YEARS! I know, because my son entered a public school for the first time when attending SR Middle School.

    At first I was appalled but then after observing the student population going to/from school in the morning and afternoon, it quickly became obvious it was more than necessary and my shock turned to relief very quickly.

    Needless to say, he did not continue in a public school after 8th grade.

  31. Betty R says:

    we just got our first gun this pass Oct. We are on our second hand gun safty course and plan on taking more. If anyone trys to break in our house we are ready and willing to do what is needed!

  32. John Olson says:

    You wouldn’t need all this if the ANSWER to all our problems didn’t come from the PSYCHIATRISTS supplying DRUGS. For gosh sakes, drugging our kids, drugging everyone, for what, MONEY.It’s no surprise that Adam Lanza was on heavy-duty pharmaceuticals, as was Aurora shooter James Holmes, the Columbine shooters, Ted Kaczinski the Unambomber, and many more. Many of the drugs handed out to troubled individuals have troubled histories in Food and Drug Administration testing themselves, and come with a list of side effects including hostility, aggression, confusional states, and impulse-control disorders.

    There is nothing about these drugs that should make them so easily prescribed by doctors whose pockets are being lined by the likes of GlaxoSmithKline, which was recently fined for faking research and for 14 infant deaths in illegal vaccine testing.
    Let’s cut the crap and put a stop to the FDA ruining our food supply, and limit Psychiatrists power, but no, it’s going tin the opposite direction. Let’s make sure we STOP clinics from being put on our school campuses and our children treated with drugs without our knowledge, that’s next you know.

  33. Jay Me says:

    “Oh no, they passed a new anti-gun law! I guess it’s time to turn in all my guns!” said absolutely NO criminal EVER!

  34. David says:

    “But I believe the right to keep and bear arms should apply to the flintlock weapons available when the Second Amendment was passed! That would give us time to stab aggressors while they reload.’

    I see this argument over and over regarding the 2nd amendment, “our forefathers never envisioned the weaponry we have available today when they wrote the 2nd amendment”.

    Do you think our forefathers ever envisioned radio, TV, 24 hour media, the internet, bloggers, paparazzi, violence in movies – video games – etc., when they wrote the 1st amendment?

    How many of you anti 2nd amendment people are anti 1st amendment rights? I will give up my 2nd amendment rights when you give up your 1st amendment rights.

  35. Joe in N. Calif says:

    Snarky, by your reasoning, since guns are so often stolen from police, cops are not effective and shouldn’t be armed.

    Juvenal, Columbine happened when the last “Assault Weapon” Ban was in effect. Seems that it didn’t work as advertized. There is a saying about doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results.

    It isn’t the tool that commits the crime, it is the thug using the tool. We don’t ban cars because of the half million deaths and injuries inflicted with them each year, nor do we ban bikes for the half million deaths and injuries they are involved in. Why punish about a hundred million honest citizens for the acts of a very few?

  36. joe right says:

    The administration that protected Bengazi is going to protect children in schools?????????

  37. Follower says:

    There is no way we are ever going to get rid of all the guns in America. Never mind the logistical impossibility, the constitutional and political hurdles alone will never allow that to happen.

    That’s just the reality of our society.

    So the anti-gun crusaders will just have to settle for making sure only criminals have guns.

    When you live in a city or town where the police are a matter of minuets away, that may seem like a reasonable solution.
    But when you live miles away from any Law Enforcement, you may need to fend off an attack for awhile before you’ll get any Government help.

    But the anti-gunners are so sick of their loved ones getting murdered by punks & nuts with guns that they have no concern for people who chose to live outside the zoo.

    Can’t blame them.

    I’ll fight to the bitter end to keep them from getting their way, but I understand their point.

    They have a very nasty problem with two very nasty solutions.

    Get a gun and get trained on how to use it or take mine away from me.

    As long as I have a Constitutional right to use a gun to defend myself, my family & my property I’m afraid that they’re just going to have to overcome their fear of guns or embrace their victimhood.

  38. sheryl says:

    Think of all the “things” we protect with guns. Are any of them more important than our children?

  39. accountability says:

    we pass a law not long ago, no texting while driving, Howd that work out. life terms for all those caught driving while texting, how many people get killed from cars every year.
    but do the leaders and educators listen with eyes wide open, let’s ban or the thought process would be to get just the foreign cars and foreign texting devices off the road, because inanimate objects are the problem

  40. NRA=Industry lobbyists to sell more guns and ammo says:

    Jeez, if all you gun nuts would just volunteer to stand guard at every entrance to schools, malls, bars, sports centers and play fields, gun violence will be solved, right?

    Wait – we forgot all workplaces where someone might have a beef with their boss or co-workers. So, get to work, fools.

    And can one of you please rationally discuss why everyone who wants should have their own semi-automatic or automatic (with a few alterations, of course) weapons and large clips, normally only issued and used for war?

    Just remember that the NRA is financially and politically the lobbying arm of the gun industry. Do you really like being played for fools in barfing out their non-stop propaganda without getting paid?

  41. Dan Drummond Sr says:

    I agree with the NRA and Snarky. The more weapons carrying guards in our schools the better!

    I propose we pay for them by collecting a National Redemption Ammo (NRA) fee of 50 cents on every bullet casing/shell. When you return an empty bullet casing, you get 25 cents back. Magic bullets sould carry an NRA fee of $1.00, of course.

    More guns & bullets – thumbs up
    Less guns & bullets – thumbs down

  42. Dan Drummond Sr says:

    I agree with Skippy,
    “In a free America, as originally envisioned and founded, every citizen is an armed guard.”

    But I believe the right to keep and bear arms should apply to the flintlock weapons available when the Second Amendment was passed! That would give us time to stab aggressors while they reload.

  43. David says:

    The President has armed guards, anti-gun celebrity’s have armed guards, banks have armed guard but our children are not worth guarding?

    “Steve Herrington, Sonoma County superintendent of schools, said schools should be safe havens for teachers and students, but armed guards are not the answer.

    “I think the use of any type of police or military presence is counter-productive to the purpose of education. It’s the antithesis to what I believe in,” he said.”

    It is counter-productive if your agenda is to ban guns.

    “What kind of message is that sending to kids who are supposed to feel safe going to school, if there are people there with guns? How does it make them feel even if they are there to protect them?”

    So any time a child sees a policeman they feel unsafe?

    The problem is the mentally ill and the lack of mandatory treatment.

  44. Brad says:

    It seems like most every time I drive by Piner High there’s a cop car parked out front, so they’re already set to follow the NRA’s proposal. Seriously though, the chances of school children getting killed in traffic accident while commuting to and from the campus are much greater than getting caught in one of these massacres. Over the span of my life I’ve read about many more cases of bus loads of school kids getting wiped out in collisions than school yard shootings.

  45. Snarky says:

    In all seriousness, there was a security guard hired to guard a public school in Los Angeles about 20 years ago.

    They found that guard deceased and his weapon stolen, as I recall.

    Guards with weapons at a school simply add to the problem of violence.

    The best bet is to simply design the school from the blueprints onward in such a fashion that entry and exits are as secure as possible to forced entry.

  46. Snarky says:

    Know what a determined killer would do who wanted to attack a school ?

    He would quietly seek out the cop guarding the school and kill that cop as the first victim.

    Whats the solution?

    TWO cops at every school !! Of course !!!

  47. Skippy says:

    In a free America, as originally envisioned and founded, every citizen is an armed guard.
    Despite the intent, there is no need to add another layer of Big Govt to solve a simple problem. Imagine the TSA in every school.
    We have passed many laws to guarantee that a madman will have the only viable defensive tool in a building full of innocents. Maniacs may be crazy, but they aren’t stupid.
    In right-to-carry States, where the citizenry is trusted by The Govt to be responsible adults, these incidents are rare. Dotto car-jackings and armed robberies.
    Look to Illinois and D.C. for further corroboration.
    We need to expand the doubt that the predators among us have, not shrink it by placing further restrictions on the law-abiding to defend themselves.
    Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein has a Ca. concealed carry permit and Federal Agents at her service who carry fully automatic weapons, yet she is demanding that you be disarmed.
    The 2nd most important thing The Founders inscribed was our right to personal contemporary arms, and our responsibility to take that right seriously.
    Americans must quit relying on the tender mercies of Big Govt to protect us by making us defenseless.
    They fear an armed citizenry even more than the criminal and whackos do.
    Ever wonder why that is?

  48. Juvenal says:

    Reportedly there was a security guard at Columbine. He ran for his life, being outgunned by the killers.

  49. Jim says:

    Well until the media actually reports facts rather than anti-gun politicians spouting nonsense nothing will change.

    The media loves to dig into the background of these murderers, sensationalizing their lives and making them famous. I’ve seen news reports about what the shooter had for breakfast. Who freaking cares!?! The media’s fascination with these murderers is a huge part of the problem.

    The blame always ends up on guns. In this situation the shooter took the guns from his mother. No gun law would have stopped him. COMMONSENSE regarding locking them up may have slowed him down but nothing would have stopped him. There IS an “assault weapon” ban in Connecticut. There was one in place when Columbine happened. You think street thugs and gang members follow the law when they get guns. Gun laws only restrict law abiding citizens from getting a gun.

    The suggestion of putting armed guards in schools is a little extreme but not crazy. The lunatic who shot up the Clackamas Mall shot himself when confronted by someone with a weapon. The Connecticut shooter shot himself when the police arrived. Almost every shooter is a coward, targeting those who cannot defend themselves and when confronted, like all bullies, show their true cowardice.

    More kids died from poisoning last year than school shootings. Lets put a background check on anyone purchasing anything that can be poisonous, including all plants.

    If the government is so focused on assault weapons, why NO investigation into Fast and Furious, the program where the US Government armed drug cartels with assault weapons?? Oh, because the government makes laws, they don’t follow them.

  50. Rick says:

    One county in another state had a school shooting in 1997. The Sheriff put a deputy at every school since. He said it cost a lot, but how much are the lives of our children worth?