The best ideas...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt McKenzie

First off, it isn't obvious to everyone that "something has to be done". But why is it that when a mentally ill person commits an atrocity we need to have a discussion about tools rather than a discussion about mental health?

---

Bingo ! People can't fix a problem that they won't admit is present in our country. Per Dr. Phil's ideas.

I have given this much thought.

I beleive at this point we do nothing.
This is an horrible event, done by an evil person.

We want, due to human nature, to blame someone/something.

I don't beleive this kind of evil can be stopped.
I don't beleive anyone/anything is to blame.

It is unfortunate that the incremental secular progressives have pounced on this opportunity to try to disarm the citizenry, 1 increment at a time.
Make no mistake, they will get something out of this tragedy.
And we will never get it back!!!!

JMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDogger

So much time and words are spent here on PP criticizing teachers, yet now we want them to not only teach but to be armed guards as well. We voice oppostion to the Dept of Ed., but maybe now their role becomes clear..They are to become the guards for our children that we are unwilling to be ourselves.
We don't want to fund health care, including mental health care. Sometimes we reap what we sow. JD

---

I have to dissagree with almost all you say here. I would guess that all of us want our children to have a better chance than we had. I for one was determined that my child would have a choice as to where he went to school. Given the gov. policy, that required that I have a better income than most. Tell me of an incident involving a Charter school, a home schooled child, a school where teachers are required to have a consealed permit and carry or a guard at every door. I have no idea what is the best policy but i do know that given gov. control of schools with NO CHOICE of parents and NO OPPORTUNITY OF EDUCATORS to offer choices, there will be one and only one solution by the gov. You expect the Dept. of Education to solve the problem. Hell they created the problem. You expect the Dept. of Ed. guard our children? They were SUPPOSED th be the GUARDIANS of our children. They aren't, never have been and never will be.

I posted this on the Hide Your Guns thread and in my opinion makes the most sense.

The Official stance of the Libertarian Party...

The Federal Gun Free Schools Zone Act prohibits carrying firearms on school grounds in most cases, effectively criminalizing the right to self-defense in places filled with the most vulnerable citizens. Without that federal prohibition, adults working at the school would have been free to defend themselves, very possibly saving the lives of many of the young children and adults who were slain in this horrific tragedy.

"We must stop blinding ourselves to the obvious: Most of these mass killings are happening at schools where self-defense is prohibited," said Carla Howell, executive director of the Libertarian Party. "Gun prohibition sets the stage for the slaughter of innocent children. We must repeal these anti-self-defense laws now to minimize the likelihood they will occur in the future and to the limit the damage done when they do."

.................................................. ..

Anyone else disappointed in the amount of Repubs that voiced their support for more gun laws yesterday?

We provide all sorts of tools and training for most all other emergencies. Fire extinguishers. Defibrillators. CPR training. Heimlich training. The list goes on. Yet we deliberately remove the most effevtive tool that could end this type of situation.

Why?

This video might provide some insight to what goes through someone's mind who has been through this type of situation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo3y...ature=youtu.be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franco

I posted this on the Hide Your Guns thread and in my opinion makes the most sense.

The Official stance of the Libertarian Party...

The Federal Gun Free Schools Zone Act prohibits carrying firearms on school grounds in most cases, effectively criminalizing the right to self-defense in places filled with the most vulnerable citizens. Without that federal prohibition, adults working at the school would have been free to defend themselves, very possibly saving the lives of many of the young children and adults who were slain in this horrific tragedy.

"We must stop blinding ourselves to the obvious: Most of these mass killings are happening at schools where self-defense is prohibited," said Carla Howell, executive director of the Libertarian Party. "Gun prohibition sets the stage for the slaughter of innocent children. We must repeal these anti-self-defense laws now to minimize the likelihood they will occur in the future and to the limit the damage done when they do."

.................................................. ..

Anyone else disappointed in the amount of Repubs that voiced their support for more gun laws yesterday?

---

As I posted on another thread, IMO this is no longer a REP vs DEM issue....even though the Dem leadership is at the forefront of the charge....there is now a pro gun vs anti gun stance that knows no political boundary which makes perfect sense, because there are plenty of Dems that are gun loving, toting individuals and there are many Rep's that think that guns are unneccesary...Even many of the on air personalities on Fox showed their emotional anti gun stance

Trying to depict the Libertarian Party as the only one that is pro gun is somewhat disingenuous..The Party is pro gun because the issue deals with a liberty that they feel is being infringed...those from the other political parties arent looking at it thru one's civil liberty...they are looking at a gun as something if removed would somehow diminish certain times of crime and violence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonMallari

As I posted on another thread, IMO this is no longer a REP vs DEM issue....even though the Dem leadership is at the forefront of the charge....there is now a pro gun vs anti gun stance that knows no political boundary which makes perfect sense, because there are plenty of Dems that are gun loving, toting individuals and there are many Rep's that think that guns are unneccesary...Even many of the on air personalities on Fox showed their emotional anti gun stance

Trying to depict the Libertarian Party as the only one that is pro gun is somewhat disingenuous..The Party is pro gun because the issue deals with a liberty that they feel is being infringed...those from the other political parties arent looking at it thru one's civil liberty...they are looking at a gun as something if removed would somehow diminish certain times of crime and violence

---

But it does have a political boundry! As you pointed out the Libertarian Party's stance is for citizens to have the Right to defend themselves. Whereas, the other two parties have members that are more than willing to infringe on the Right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDogger

So much time and words are spent here on PP criticizing teachers, yet now we want them to not only teach but to be armed guards as well. We voice oppostion to the Dept of Ed., but maybe now their role becomes clear..They are to become the guards for our children that we are unwilling to be ourselves.
We don't want to fund health care, including mental health care. Sometimes we reap what we sow. JD

---

You think the teachers will just become "armed guards"? How about allowing them to protect themselves first and foremost and just maybe they'll stop some whacko from killing someone else as well.

I think it would be good for some teachers to carry guns. The thing is they need to be able to keep their mind on the lesson and the kids. That's just my point of view as a volunteer at school in the past.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/...ool-tragedies/

This is an opinion piece from Fox News, but I see some common sense in this ...

Quote:

---

But protection is a national pastime as we put locks on our phones, our homes, our cars, our bank accounts, our computers.

It’s ironic that so many exalted opinion leaders in government and the media live in gated communities, sending their children to private schools, all the while lecturing the great unwashed to trust in a level of security they do not accept for their own families. Apparently guns are bad, unless protecting them and their loved ones.

---

Quote:

---

Tears have been shed for the heroic teachers and school employees who gave their lives to protect children. I wonder if I am alone in wishing that one of them was armed and able to fight back?

If this horrible event happened in a movie, Jason Bourne, living undercover, would have been the school gym teacher, and when violence entered the school, he would have protected those children with all the skills and force necessary. And we all would have cheered.

And yet, politicians argue that the answer to armed maniacs is a disarmed, unprotected citizenry. Parents should trust others to stand in the gap for their beloved children.

It is not enough. Even with the best intentions, government can’t be everywhere. A right to bear arms just may be a need to bear arms – on some occasions and in some locations.

Our schools need better trained and equipped protectors, and our citizenry deserves the right to fight for the weak. It’s not that a discussion of gun laws is a bad thing. But it is not enough.

As Americans grapple with an increasingly dangerous world, let’s not pretend the answers are easy or that playing politics with children’s lives is acceptable.


Kristi Stone Hamrick is a media consultant.

---