AWR Hawkins (via Ammoland.com) writes:
On December 21, 2012, the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) Wayne LaPierre spoke of the heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary by decrying the fact that “we protect our banks…airports, office buildings…even sports stadiums…with armed guards” while our children are left “utterly defenseless.” Nearly one year since that speech, banks, airports, office buildings, “even sports stadiums,” remain better protected than our schools . . .
According to Reuters, in the year since Sandy Hook, the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO) “has trained slightly more than 1,800 new officers.” Further, in September, the Department of Justice announced it would spend nearly $45 million on 356 new officers.
Considering there are approximately 99,000 public schools in the United States, these 2,156 officers are a “drop in the bucket,” at best.
To be fair, President Obama has lately put in a request for Congress to fund just over 1,000 more officers; however, where was this willingness in the aftermath of Sandy Hook? The majority of school security changes that have taken place in 2013 still concern the ability to “shelter-in-place” and hide until police arrive.
Meanwhile, our banks, our office buildings, subways, and yes, our NFL stadiums continue to have armed security personnel.
Earlier this week, NBC reporters were able to breach school entrance security at seven out of ten schools they tried and walk through their halls unimpeded. If they had criminal intent, the results might have been tragic. “Sheltering-in-place” would not have stopped them.
An armed guard could.
Better title: “14 years after Columbine, and Progs still think Gun Free Zones work”.
Wow scary thought, not really that surprising how easy it would be to get into some schools however. Prob some of NBCs best reporting ha
It would be even easier to get on if they were willing to do some damage too
seems to be a mathematical fallacy here.
more armed security personnel = more safety
some would beg to differ
Second mathematical problem – $45 million for 356 officers? That’s @ $126,400 each. If we multiply that by 99,000 schools it becomes $12 Billion dollars, a number that at that point would become of interest to the Progressives so long as they were all SEIU employees.
Defund the TSA and you have $7.6 Billion covered right there…
That’s what immediately came to my mind too.
Yep!
‘“Sheltering-in-place’ would not have stopped them.
An armed guard could.”
Nope – doesn’t fit the bigger story. One airing. Period.
We really need more armed guards. Those darned NBC reporters are more dangerous than they look.
What we have here is a problem beyond the public establishments ability to solve it.
A security guard or police officer will serve only as the first victim.The uniformed guy with the gun is the first one to get shot when the shit hits the fan.Worse, the spree killer could actually plan a gun grab and target the openly armed security personell.Happens to LE all the time, unfortunately.
A hidden school resource officer might seem to be the answer-but kids are a perceptive bunch. Such a person would be outed fast in the closed social circles of most high schools, cover ID or no, which takes us back to Problem One above.
Then you have the teachers.It would apprear that arming them discreetly would be the best answer, but which teacher should undertake the grim task?Stats show only 5% of any states population even holds CCW permits at any time.Given that fact and the liberal culture in most schools, we can deduce that many schools’ don’t have a single gun owner on the payroll.So , in many places were faced with the ugly proposition of forcing someone to carry a gun when they wouldnt willingly want to.
One thing is for sure-this problem is beyond the ability of our government to solve.
Easy fix: Post signs at all entrances.
“This is NOT a gun free zone! Some or all of our staff may be carrying concealed weapons.”
These losers that shoot up schools aren’t looking for a fight, they’re looking for a slaughter. They may play COD all day but in reality they’re not ready for a gun-fight. If they were they wouldn’t off themselves the moment a cop comes near them.
Not saying that SROs are the answer, but we should be clear about the problem.
Sorry dude, nothing but opinion here with no basis in fact. Verifiable stats or photographs, or it didn’t happen.
Third paragraph is nonsense as illustrated by two undercover cops in a Riverside, CA high school who spent an entire semester in classes ferreting out the druggies there. News item this week.
Then there are the teachers. Yes, there are. I have a close personal friend who is a 20 year teacher. She hates guns but has told my wife and I several times, “Give me the training and issue me or help me buy a gun and I will protect my kids with something other than just guts.”
“One thing is for sure-this problem is beyond the ability of our government to solve.” No, it is not. All the government needs to do is get the FVCK out of the way and let us protect our kids!
Glad to know your personal friend is OK with protecting her students.
Can you state that every school in America has people on staff of similar attitude?Because I can’t.
Note that there is a vast difference between an undercover cop working on a temporary assignment versus a school resource officer whose permanent tasking is protecting the school.
And as for the stadium in the photo…
I do not go to stadiums (Deficient in the sports gene) so I do not know what is in place outside this view, but you could not pay me enough to stand there unarmed like these guys and pat down people entering. I fail to see anything that would prevent a large pick-up truck from crashing that gate. (Terrorists LOVE to put bombs in trucks and cars, as I recall.) I see nothing that would prevent anyone with an MSR (or AK) from walking up and simply bypassing these unarmed guards without even a simple “Excuse me, passing through.” Not to mention the havoc that could be wreaked as the crowd bunched up outside the stadium waiting like sheep for their turn to be fondled. (Might be worth it if the cheerleaders were doing the fondling?)
They MAY be better protected than the schools, I still don’t think of them as safe places to congregate.
My comment to all of them: “Your OpSec SUCKS!”
They’re trying to get kids young, I bet. Stadiums, banks, and other places are full of grown-ups with more or less made-up minds about things. Schools, however, are full of kids just learning about the world, so they want to make sure those kids are almost never exposed to guns used in a positive manner (protection, fun, whatever.) If those kids start seeing grown-ups carrying guns and in full control of themselves, why, who knows what that might lead to?
Carrying that logic through, where will the next generation of gun-toting police/rent-a-cops come from?
The football team like every other generation??
Terrorist attacks hurt Obama’s credibility
Mass shootings at schools further the Progressive agenda
Credibility?
Stupid sheeple, aiding and abetting the Police State.
There is no money in protecting schools.
No, there’s plenty.Just ask the cc cam vendors. Just no follow-on sales.
“To be fair, President Obama has lately put in a request for Congress to fund just over 1,000 more officers; however, where was this willingness in the aftermath of Sandy Hook?”
He wanted to publicy denounce Wayne’s idea as hogwash from the evil NRA, before quietly doing (or suggesting) exactly what Wayne had proposed.
When I’m elected president by write-in landslide, I’m going to ask to be inaugurated in a stadium where everybody that comes brings at least one long gun, so that the citizens can take down the government thugs that will no doubt want to Kennedize© me.
I like it.
You’d give the Secret Service goons a hemorrhage. Nice idea.
I totally disagree with the title of this story: One Year After Newtown, Stadiums Better Protected Than Schools.
Just as we saw at the Washington D.C. Navy Yard, a determined spree killer could walk up to the security screeners and promptly blow them away … and then walk into the stadium and kill dozens/hundreds of totally defenseless spectators.
Alternatively, a determined spree killer could smuggle any manner of firearms into a stadium well before the game … then retrieve them inside and apply them to the huge throng of totally defenseless spectators. Do stadiums X-ray every single box of hotdog buns and 5 gallon pickle buckets as food distributors offload them at the stadium shipping/receiving docks? I didn’t think so.
If armed security guards and/or armed police officers are inside the stadium, of course they have the tools to respond to a spree killer onsite. That said, it could still take an armed guard or police officer more than 30 seconds to get to a point where they have a shot at the spree killer. And in 30 seconds, a spree killer could easily deliver fatal wounds to dozens of victims.
Add it all up, and stadiums are no safer than any school in my opinion.
Afterthought: absolutely nothing stops a spree killer from mowing down dozens/hundreds of spectators condensed and waiting in line for the security screeners OUTSIDE of the stadium.
And keep in mind that a spree killer could use a pickup truck (you know, the best selling vehicle in the United States) to mow down those spectators much faster than he/she could with a firearm.
Stadiums have always been a security nightmare. The fact that all the patrons are now guaranteed to be unarmed just makes that nightmare even worse. Note that I said “patrons” because a spree killer would certainly be armed, whether their weapon was a firearm or a vehicle.
Remember in the movie version of “Sum of All Fears” the bomb was delivered to the stadium inside a Coke machine.
“To be fair….” Why?
Of course Obummer would love to bankroll 1,000 officers in schools. That’s an easy way to buy another 1,000 votes. Think about it: how many government employees are going to vote for candidates who are going to eliminate their jobs and hence their income? Countless elections are won on razor thin margins these days and no
CommunistProgressive incumbent/candidate is going to create a platform on eliminatingvotesgovernment jobs. That is why it is next to impossible to shrink government.1,000 jobs such as this is chicken sh… feed. If Obama was interested in such a move he would turn it over to the TSA on some pretense and create the whole 100,000 jobs, all union.
Nothing says “I love you” more than packaging children into nice tight packages, then abdicating your responsibility to protect them to a bunch of people who think “gun free school zone” signs will do the job.
I had the same thought today while taking my wife and kids to an arena to see Diney On Ice. We had to get wanded by security, and all the bags and purses were searched. In contrast, when I go to visit my daughters elementary school you can just walk in. It makes no sense it all.
Comments are closed.