I think the idea is utterly insane, but I think I thought of how I’d handle it:
If you were gonna institute police at every school, I’d have police set up a small sub-station at each school. Not new officers, just existing officers from some precinct who now have the school as a base of operations.
When I was a lad in Hawaii, they had a Waikiki Police substation at the edge of the beach, near the Duke Kahanamoku statue. It was a small building, just a visible place to report crimes, staffed by a few officers with a couple of patrol vehicles parked outside. The school version wouldn’t even have to be staffed all day. Just from 8 to 4.
I’m sure that would take the pricetag down a few billion.
Are there enough police officers to do that, though? My city usually only has three or maybe four police officers on duty, and there are four public schools. ETA: And there are something like 15 schools in the unincorporated parts of my county, but I think there are only six or seven deputies that are usually on the streets. Some of those schools already pay for resource officers, though, so that would bring it down a little.
And then there is the next target of opportunity once schools are sealed up and armed: school busses packed with children, and school bus loading zones with dozens of children milling about. Obviously armoured school busses with armed guards and armed outriders, and armed escorts for bus loading, are the only reasonable solution.
I think getting a truck and printing it to look like those abortion trucks would work. It would be vile, but probably much more effective than an abortion truck in moving public opinion.
The media driven hysteria will do little, very little, to change the minds of informed NRA members.
Insults, uninformed rage and lies will not deter the members of one of Americas oldest grassroots civil rights orgs.
As mentioned before, I have seen that the whole thing is a wash, there is little to show that there is an increase in crime when there is more or less guns.
If it was that clear then most of the research would support one side or the other, the annoying thing is that the results of many studies are contradictory, pointing very likely the view that this is a wash for the pro and con positions.
I doubt if anything will change the minds of uninformed network news viewers, so we will continue to win important SCOTUS cases and winning lawsuits in the circuit Courts. Please, dear freedom haters, continue with your uninformed,useless rage. It always fails where it counts, In Court.
That’s why I always tell my gunny friends that it makes little difference to me if guns deter or makes crime easier. Free speech isn’t always pretty either but I support it too.
Its my right to keep and bear arms, not giving in an inch.
Meh, instead of an armed guard, why not put a psychiatrist in every school, trained to look for early warning signs of mental illness? Sure, not every budding spree- or serial-killer will be spotted, and some kids will get unfairly labeled as mentally ill when they’re really just eccentric or unconventional, but surely this is a mental-health issue, not a gun issue, no?
Of course it means that it was mostly bullshit when you mentioned that book.
Be as it may, the main point that will be mostly taken seriously in the end, is that many of the current laws will finally get more support and compliance, guns will not be taken away from law aviding citizens.
If there is something I do hate coming from the pro side is that they mosltly do ignore that the people in government that supports the NRA are the ones that mostly played lip service to the enforcement of the laws, I do remember that it was mostly the conservative governors the ones that made a joke of properly reporting, for example, the list of people that should not use guns due to mental problems.
