Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And why are the lives of "high profile" types any more valuable than anyone else's? Obama is a superb hypocrit -- he obviously believes in the elite having weapons for protection, he views himself and his children as some kind of aristocrats whose lives are to be protected but to hell with the lowly peons.
If there were an honest bone in Obama, he would have those guards and his security agents unarmed. Just like he insists on the people having no protection.
This seems to have nothing to do with reality.
In truth, it's republicans who have been demanding cuts to public education, howling about how teachers are lazy moochers. But now that a class of first-graders have been shot, we suddenly need to dump more money into the exact system they've been insulting for the past four years. Meanwhile, Obama's only action on gun control to date has been to lift the ban on firearms on federal parks.
And in any event, why would Obama have any more say in how Sidwell Friends is run than any other parent? The simple fact is, the school is much more well known for their high-quality education, than for however many guards they have - and given the size of their campus, they'd probably respond pretty poorly to some person on a rampage anyway. The security is more to protect against the press than against some team of kidnappers storming one of their buildings.
And why are the lives of "high profile" types any more valuable than anyone else's? Obama is a superb hypocrit -- he obviously believes in the elite having weapons for protection, he views himself and his children as some kind of aristocrats whose lives are to be protected but to hell with the lowly peons.
If there were an honest bone in Obama, he would have those guards and his security agents unarmed. Just like he insists on the people having no protection.
This is a hilarious question coming from people on the right who are always complaining about poor people and the disabled like they are scum on your feet.You think you're better than they are, but you put yourself in the same class as the power broker class and whine because they get/need more protection for their families. If you can't see that a president's child is in far more danger than your normal little kid that lives down the street then you are too immature to be up pass 8:00 at night.
Someone as opposed to the Second Amendment as Obama is, should not have the option of a guarded school, nor should the agents around him be armed. Or are you admitting that Obama is a hypocriit? Or an elitist who views himself and his own family as special and deserving of protection while the little people are to be defenseless?
Did you even read this thread or the links? The school is guarded by trained officials. Not civilians with weapons. Obama has never pushed for removing guns from armed guards.
In truth, it's republicans who have been demanding cuts to public education, howling about how teachers are lazy moochers. But now that a class of first-graders have been shot, we suddenly need to dump more money into the exact system they've been insulting for the past four years. Meanwhile, Obama's only action on gun control to date has been to lift the ban on firearms on federal parks.
And in any event, why would Obama have any more say in how Sidwell Friends is run than any other parent? The simple fact is, the school is much more well known for their high-quality education, than for however many guards they have - and given the size of their campus, they'd probably respond pretty poorly to some person on a rampage anyway. The security is more to protect against the press than against some team of kidnappers storming one of their buildings.
David Gregory mocked the NRA's Wayne LaPierre for proposing that armed guards be at every school in America. But the NBC host seems to have no problem with armed guards protecting his kids everyday where they attend school in Washington, D.C.
Why should only those children whose parents can afford to do so be protected?
You answered your own question.
Protection costs money. Rich people can afford it.
Come up with a solution of how to pay for security in all public schools.
One solution might be to assign the U.S. military to provide security in public schools, and it would become a federal expense rather than a state or local expense.
It would help guarantee a high level of readiness by these guards, since training would be done at a U.S. military training school, and not at some local security guard school.
Then if a national crisis broke out, these soldiers would already be enlisted and ready to serve. Otherwise, they would be paid government employees performing a useful service to the nation.
It seems that whenever this type of crisis occurs, it becomes a national tragedy, so it seems like a federal solution would make more sense than a state or local solution.
Then we could hold our federal government accountable if a public school did not receive an adequate level of protection.
I think disgruntled students might think twice before acting if they knew the U.S. military was guarding the school and not some local security guard, or retired police officer.
One solution might be to assign the U.S. military to provide security in public schools, and it would become a federal expense rather than a state or local expense.
Put some 20 something guys in charge of guarding 13 to 17 year old kids and watch the hormones flowing both ways. That really makes a lot of sense.
Put some 20 something guys in charge of guarding 13 to 17 year old kids and watch the hormones flowing both ways. That really makes a lot of sense.
Maybe so ... but any guard having sex with a minor would be committing a crime, and likely face jail time.
I think that might be reason enough to avoid such actions, since they already know these kids are all minors.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
