Hillsboorough Hiring Armed Security Guards For Each Elementary School. (Sarasota: crimes, neighborhood)

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by Morals Always

I don't think Adam Lanza swiped his ID at the front desk.
Or maybe he did, and the he started shooting?!

We cannot have the 2nd amendment and safety at the same time. Something's got to give, and we have to asks ourselves what's more valuable.
1. People's lives
2. People's misplaced prides

Do you realize that if you banned guns, the only ones left with guns other than the police would be criminals?

Making something illegal does not prevent criminals from obtaining it. See drugs and alcohol at one point in time.

Disclaimer....I personally do not and will not own a gun. However, I do realize that banning them only stops law abiding citizens from getting them.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by DUNNDFRNT

Soldiers are trained to soldier not police, that is not what they are for, anyone who has any kind of military background will tell you that.

Lame excuse for not utilizing resources we already have, IMO.

Soldiers operate checkpoints......could do that at school entry.

Soldiers are trained to shoot and kill......comes in handy when a criminal is shooting at kids.

Soldiers are trained to monitor premises and look for bad guys......again, comes in handy in schools.

Soldiers are also not stupid. They are totally capable of receiving new or enhanced training specific to the schools.

[Tampaite]

Originally Posted by FloridaKash

Hillsborough schools to hire 130 security officers | TBO.com


Third, amazing how they can spend $4.1 million dollars on our schools for something that will never be used and yet they cannot find $4.1 million for educational purposes when its budget time.

I want to know the same thing - If they have $4.1 Million sitting somewhere - then it means I have been over-charged for my property taxes.

My property taxes pay for school and am not going to support this ridiculous proposal.

What's next? A cop on every street corner because kids need to be safe - pretty too we will turn into an autocratic country!

[DUNNDFRNT]

Originally Posted by PriusH8r

Lame excuse for not utilizing resources we already have, IMO.

Soldiers operate checkpoints......could do that at school entry.

Soldiers are trained to shoot and kill......comes in handy when a criminal is shooting at kids.

Soldiers are trained to monitor premises and look for bad guys......again, comes in handy in schools.

Soldiers are also not stupid. They are totally capable of receiving new or enhanced training specific to the schools.

So your plan take soldiers coming back from a WAR, give them weapons let them guard elementary schools. I am just going to let you read that to yourself. BTW you hate Priuses because you bought a faulty one? you had to replace the batteries right after you bought the car? You don't like the shape? just trying to figure out why that feeling would exist towards an inanimate object.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by DUNNDFRNT

So your plan take soldiers coming back from a WAR, give them weapons let them guard elementary schools. I am just going to let you read that to yourself. BTW you hate Priuses because you bought a faulty one? you had to replace the batteries right after you bought the car? You don't like the shape? just trying to figure out why that feeling would exist towards an inanimate object.

Yes, I would use soldiers at home, instead of overseas. We are already paying them and it costs more for them to be stationed overseas. Bring them home and "among things" they can do, security is one of them. You can make them not soldiers and make them police if you like.

The point is there is no reason to pay an additional $4 million dollars on this, if you plan on doing it, when we already have the manpower. Think of it from this angle. The plan is to use security at the schools. That is the point of the thread. So if that is what they are going to do, should we hire even more security on the tax payer dime or should we reallocate resources we are already paying for? That should make it easier to understand.

Prius's? They are always in my way. For some reason, every time I am behind one they always are going well below the speed limit. I am not a speeder, but I do like to go the speed limit. That is the main reason. Other reasons are they are butt ugly, I can't hear them coming and they are a rolling hazmat cart. Hey, but to each their own. Other people love them and that's great for them.

[SarasotaBound1]

Originally Posted by DUNNDFRNT

Compromise to me, would be gun control without loopholes, and I guess we will see, so far all the rhetoric I hear is how we already have the laws in place, i.e. "we have laws against murder, people still kill each other". I don't have a problem with people owning guns, I have a problem with people owning arsenals, concealed weapons, private sales that don't require registration, lack of screening, lack of training, all the well known loopholes/inadequacies in current gun control legislation. I think most people feel that we need stronger gun laws, also with the understanding that no one single thing is going to do it, its going to take a concerted effort from all angles.
I am not sure if you are talking about civil war type scenarios, the goverment has tanks, planes, drones etc, no assault weapon is going to protect you from that, as exemplified by Syria.
I for one not a believer that Young Black Man are just prone to killing each other because of some intrinsic factor, therefore we cant address that as a society. The maximum penalty for gun smuggling is 10 years, gun dealers get off easier than that, we persecute the bartender when someone drives drunk and kills people, yet the illegal gun dealers are not, increase penalties on all gun charges, any kind of gun dealing that violates laws should be an end game type of sentence whether is carrying, discharging, selling.

And you think by banning guns somehow the bad seeds will fork over their arsenals right? Does it even matter if they have an arsenal or not? Didn't lanza use just one arm?

I think there was a misunderstanding of the comment above. I stated there has been much mucn more murders when the people are dis-armed than when citizens are armed. 170 million people, yes million, have been killed by governments in the last 100 years. All after citizens had been un-armed. Remember the Jews in Germany? Yes, they were un-armed too. Do you hear anyone in government or the media referencing these numbers? No, but they sure refernce anything related to gun deaths, including figures with suicides and not even matching alcohol deaths.

Additionally, those wanting more 'regulation' are not thinking this through.

The government is by all and for all. We have laws. Some breaks the law while using a gun, a car, a stick, a shoe, and they should pay with a penalty imposed by the government, and this ok. Making it harder fof the good guys is not gonna get guns away from the bad guys. If anything, you may want more good guys to get guns so that when the bad guys show up they don't know what hit them. The law, and the right to carry are separate things. The law says killing is a crime, the constitution says everyone can carry. The law says driving is allowed, but killing with it is a crime. Alcohol kills more people than guns and the majority of gun deaths are self inflicted. Perhaps we should also ban bridges and high rises?

Taking a gun from one state to another is not 'smugling'. The US citizens have the right to life and the right to defend it. So says the constitution and so says the creator.

Your last statement on black you men is sad and shows why our society is rottening from within. We care about 30 mostly white children that were killed during one incident (as we all should), but can care less to see the same number of young black men die monthly by a stupid DRUG war that we started. Let's stop pretending we care, because we dont and let's stop pretending that this has anything to do with our safety because it's not. It's about one single thing, power.

[tpajr]

Originally Posted by FloridaKash

It's not a real problem. It has happened.... ONCE.

shootings in schools or related to schools happen plenty. you can choose what ever sorts of subtleties you like to rationalize your position.

do we wait until 15 kids get shot in a hillsborough school before we put in a basic armed guard as nothing more than a deterrent?

do we wait until something you would consider "minor" or not a real problem like what happened in carlsbad happens here?

Carlsbad, CA
10/8/2010
A man jumped the fence at Kelly Elementary School and opened fire on
children playing outside at lunchtime. When his gun jammed, nearby
construction workers tackled him. Two girls, ages six and seven, were
injured. Neighbors report the shooter often screamed obscenities and
racial epithets, and that the police had been called repeatedly. (Workers
hailed for halting school shooting suspect, ASSOCIATED PRESS, October 11,
2010)

if you want to read about the carnage in schools of all sizes, and age groups, and reasons for the whack job's actions there is some decent details here.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/...-shootings.pdf


it is only the last 15 years but it has some 41 pages of shootings and attacks at schools or related to schools. the idea that there has just been one shooting and columbine and this isnt a problem is just frankly nonsense.



Jonesboro, AR
3/24/1998
Two boys, 11 and 13, fired on their middle school from woods, killing four
girls and a teacher and wounding 11 others. (Two Cousins in Camouflage
Now Wear Orange Jail Coveralls, ASSOCIATED PRESS, March 25, 1998)

Edinboro, PA
4/24/1998
A 15 year old student opened fire at an eighth-grade dance, killing a
science teacher. (3,500 Attend Pa. Teacher Funeral, ASSOCIATED PRESS,
April 28, 1998)

Springfield, OR
5/21/1998
Two teenagers were killed and more than 20 people hurt when a teenage
boy opened fire at a high school, after killing his parents. The shooter, 17,
was sentenced to nearly 112 years in prison. (Second Student Dies from
Wounds in Oregon School Shooting, ASSOCIATED PRESS, May 22, 1998)

Red Lake Indian Reservation, MN
3/21/2005
At the time, the worst school-related shooting incident since the Columbine
shootings in April of 1999. Ten killed and seven injured in rampage by a
student at a high school. (A Very Quiet Sense of Shock'; Small Community
Struggles to Cope, WASHINGTON POST, March 23, 2005)

Essex, VT
8/24/2006
A gunman shoots five people, killing two of them, in a rampage through two
houses and an elementary school, before wounding himself. (Deadly
Rampage in Quiet Vt. Town; Man Kills Two, Hurts Two Others, in
Shootings at School, Homes, BOSTON GLOBE, August 25, 2006)

Nickel Mines, PA
10/2/2006
A dairy truck driver walked into a one-room Amish schoolhouse with a
shotgun, a semi-automatic handgun, and 600 rounds of ammunition,
selected all the female students, and shot them execution-style, killing five
and seriously wounding six. The man then shot himself, apparently having
left suicide notes beforehand. (Man Shoots 11, Killing 5 Girls, in Amish
School, NEW YORK TIMES, October 2, 2006)

[SarasotaBound1]

Originally Posted by PriusH8r

Yes, I would use soldiers at home, instead of overseas. We are already paying them and it costs more for them to be stationed overseas. Bring them home and "among things" they can do, security is one of them. You can make them not soldiers and make them police if you like.

The point is there is no reason to pay an additional $4 million dollars on this, if you plan on doing it, when we already have the manpower. Think of it from this angle. The plan is to use security at the schools. That is the point of the thread. So if that is what they are going to do, should we hire even more security on the tax payer dime or should we reallocate resources we are already paying for? That should make it easier to understand.

Prius's? They are always in my way. For some reason, every time I am behind one they always are going well below the speed limit. I am not a speeder, but I do like to go the speed limit. That is the main reason. Other reasons are they are butt ugly, I can't hear them coming and they are a rolling hazmat cart. Hey, but to each their own. Other people love them and that's great for them.

Agree. Why spend money and resources making other countries better instead of ours.

[SarasotaBound1]

Originally Posted by Morals Always

Who is "the Creator"? And how come he didn't pass the 2nd amendment in Russia, Canada etc?

Perhaps those not caring about the United States constitution can move to one of the nations above. Or alternatively try to amend the constitution. Molon labe.

[tpajr]

Originally Posted by willow wind

There was an armed deputy sheriff on patrol at Columbine . Didn't top the shooters from attacking the school and killing a dozen people and wounding many more.

So does that mean no police in any schools because it didnt work in Columbine?

If that example shows anything it is that motivated whack jobs are going to attack what they want to attack so you had better be prepared to defend it.