School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards

[tkhayes 348]

I got that part - you are claiming that the Secret Service is 'not' involved, and I am claiming that they most definitely are. It is their job. But feel free to find something in the Secret Service job descriptions, their archives, some law or presidential decree that proves me wrong other than your cherry-picked 'article'.

Go ahead, I am waiting.

[rushmc 23]

Of course they are NOW
BTW, I never claime the SS is not there today
You dreamed that one up somewhere


But

When the presidents family is not there they get 11 armed gaurds a too

I guess their children are more worth protection than the run of the mill poor children

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

I got that part - you are claiming that the Secret Service is 'not' involved, and I am claiming that they most definitely are. It is their job. But feel free to find something in the Secret Service job descriptions, their archives, some law or presidential decree that proves me wrong other than your cherry-picked 'article'.

I haven't seen Rush claim that the Secret Service aren't involved now. He's saying that the school has its own level of armed security that was there before the Secret Service and will still be there afterwards. Point being that any liberal/anti gun/anti armed security rich guys who send their kids there are being hypocritical.

The point would have been better made if he/the article he's quoting had used the name of some other Dem lawmaker who's kids wouldn't automatically have their own armed esorts anyway, but hey, if you want to make a point for the right wing these days you've gotta say "Obama!" in it somewhere.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

I got that part - you are claiming that the Secret Service is 'not' involved, and I am claiming that they most definitely are. It is their job. But feel free to find something in the Secret Service job descriptions, their archives, some law or presidential decree that proves me wrong other than your cherry-picked 'article'.

I haven't seen Rush claim that the Secret Service aren't involved now. He's saying that the school has its own level of armed security that was there before the Secret Service and will still be there afterwards. Point being that any liberal/anti gun/anti armed security rich guys who send their kids there are being hypocritical.

The point would have been better made if he/the article he's quoting had used the name of some other Dem lawmaker who's kids wouldn't automatically have their own armed esorts anyway, but hey, if you want to make a point for the right wing these days you've gotta say "Obama!" in it somewhere.

Put a turd in a bad and light it, and a lib will stomp on it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

However, your explanation is very much on target

Also, it seems that guns in schools are not a problem for those who can pay for very expensive private schools

Seems to be no issue at all

I think they (those who are sending their kids to protected schools) should pony up a bunch of money to help protect ALL school children (/sarcasm button off)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

When the presidents family is not there they get 11 armed gaurds a too

I guess their children are more worth protection than the run of the mill poor children

I'm sure the cost of the security is included in the tuition parents pay to send their kids to that private school. It's also somewhat disingenuous to pretend that kids of the ultra rich or famous are no more likely to be kidnapped for ransom, or targeted for political purposes, than "run of the mill poor children"are.

The city where I live has 21 public schools (14 elementary, 4 middle, 3 high). At 11 assigned police officers/school, that would require 231 officers. The entire city police department has 240 officers. So, you could assign virtually the whole police department to guard the schools, leaving just 9 officers to police the entire remainder of the city. Alternatively you could double the size of the police department, or have the school district create its own police department which would be equal in size to that of the rest of the city. Either way would require essentially doubling the city's budget for police services, which would require a very substantial property tax increase. Do you really believe this is a practical solution to the problem?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

When the presidents family is not there they get 11 armed gaurds a too

I guess their children are more worth protection than the run of the mill poor children

I'm sure the cost of the security is included in the tuition parents pay to send their kids to that private school. It's also somewhat disingenuous to pretend that kids of the ultra rich or famous are no more likely to be kidnapped for ransom, or targeted for political purposes, than "run of the mill poor children"are.

The city where I live has 21 public schools (14 elementary, 4 middle, 3 high). At 11 assigned police officers/school, that would require 231 officers. The entire city police department has 240 officers. So, you could assign virtually the whole police department to guard the schools, leaving just 9 officers to police the entire remainder of the city. Alternatively you could double the size of the police department, or have the school district create its own police department which would be equal in size to that of the rest of the city. Either way would require essentially doubling the city's budget for police services, which would require a very substantial property tax increase. Do you really believe this is a practical solution to the problem?

Don

At your numbers?

No

But armed security at all schools is very doable

As I have said, I would pay more property tax to protect the children. But the money needs to go to a practicel solution. Banning guns and or a buy back program will do nothing to protect them

But in the end, this debate is not about money. It is about the left trying yet again to take guns away from the law abiding because they are either afraid of guns, dont understand gun ownership or they want a disarmed population for what could be many reasons

I for one think our children are worth protecting

At this point, there is only one thing that can make a difference right away

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

However, your explanation is very much on target

Also, it seems that guns in schools are not a problem for those who can pay for very expensive private schools

Seems to be no issue at all

I think they (those who are sending their kids to protected schools) should pony up a bunch of money to help protect ALL school children (/sarcasm button off)

There is definitely a valid point there, but I don't fully agree with the spin that's being put on it.

The article says that the reason rich people send their kids there is the security. Here's my problem with that: there are almost certainly a number of children at that school who are at a real and quantifiable risk of harm because of who their parents are - lawmakers, foreign dignitaries and diplomats etc. and thus the school has extra security.

Does that mean that the reason every other parent who sent their kids there did so because of the security? No, it doesn't. Excellent standards of teaching, strong ties to Ivy League and other top rate colleges, Old Boy networking with business, industry and politics, keeping them away from the influence of the riff-raff - all strong reasons for people like NBC's David Gregory to send their children to that school which have nothing to do with the guns being carried by the security guards.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[DARK 0]

Quote

But armed security at all schools is very doable

Of course its doable but unnecessary and would be very costly. Aren't you usually one for fighting unnecessary goverment spending and involvment in anything?

It is very sad what happened and of course there are knee jerk reactions everywhere but making important decisions at such an emotional time is a terrible idea.

There are far more impactful things armed guard money could be spent on.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

But armed security at all schools is very doable

Of course its doable but unnecessary and would be very costly. Aren't you usually one for fighting unnecessary goverment spending and involvment in anything?

It is very sad what happened and of course there are knee jerk reactions everywhere but making important decisions at such an emotional time is a terrible idea.

There are far more impactful things armed guard money could be spent on.

The only knee jerk reaction happening is from the anti gun crowd

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

The only knee jerk reaction happening is from the anti gun crowd

Don't agree with that. There are plenty of anti-gun idiots running about, no doubt. But they seem to be met with an equal number of pro-gun idiots
Both sides want to pretend like their 'steps' are going to protect them from this sort of tragedy. Neither side, imo, is correct. Putting armed guards at every school will not solve the problem and, in likelyhood, will introduce a new problem. The same can be said for taking all guns away.

The Rambo types need to take a long hard look at reality and realize their fantasies about 'saving the day' are about as realistic as the Hippies who believe we'll all shit out rainbows if guns were taken away

Somewhere in the middle there's a balance that's practical and will provide reasonable/realistic protection but, even then, there's no law that will protect any of us from the brutality of the real world.

Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The school had the armed guards... BEFORE OBAMA"S kids went there.... The school is were RICH people send their kids to school.....

Killler

Beautify ain't it?

And I even gave a warning

Rich folks can pay for whatever they like. Lots of rich folks have bodyguards too. And if the guards were there before Obama's kids, then why mention Obama at all? Is your ODS playing up again?

Maybe the NRA will pay for armed guards at schools in poor neighborhoods. I'd agree to that.

Armed bodyguards were around before Rosie O'Donnell But if she takes a position that armed bodyguards are a problem but uses them, then there is hypocrisy.

Apparently, this school's methods are working. But it's an issue of, "Well, your kids don't deserve it thus we will not allow it. Mine do, though, so it's required."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

you are claiming that the Secret Service is 'not' involved, and I am claiming that they most definitely are

So, then, do you think that all the other parents and students at that school feel less secure knowing that armed Secret Service Agents have the place under constant surveillance? Think of how awful that school must be - a veritable prison with armed guards and the SS walking the halls.

Don't you think that armed guards PLUS the SS are a deterrent?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Also, it seems that guns in schools are not a problem for those who can pay for very expensive private schools

Being rich allows you to avoid all kinds of problems - like homelessness, hunger, inadequate health care, the TSA... You seem fixated on just one.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Yeah, so what. So did Amy Carter & Chealsea Clinton.

As far as politicians wanting more gun control, it's a knee jerk reaction as always, we've seen it what....100 times in the last 50 years? Heres the deal, this last incident was carried out by a cat that had STOLEN weapons.

Where is the evidence that he stole the guns? He lived in his mother's house. His mother took him to the range so may well have given him permission to use the guns. Would you say he "stole" food from the refrigerator in the house he lived in?

Saying he stole the guns is a convenient ass-umption to justify doing nothing.

The guns should have been properly secured.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[killler 2]

As stated in police and new reports the firearms were stored in a " secured " place in the basement in another area from where the son had his computer and games setup.. I would guess that the firearms were stored in a manner that the police found ok...

If my kid takes a twenty out of my wallet that's stealing... Any locked storage can be broken in to with tools and time... He may have stolen the key ? We may never know.. But I'm sure is mother didn't give him the ok to use the guns to go on a killing spree ..

Killler

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

A stated in police and new reports the firearms were stored in a " secured " place in the basement in another area from where the son had his computer and games setup.. I would guess that the firearms were stored in a manner that the police found ok...

If my kid takes a twenty out of my wallet that's stealing... Any locked storage can be broken in to with tools and time... He may have stolen the key ? We may never know.. But I'm sure is mother didn't give him the ok to use the guns to go on a killing spree ..

Killler

You have no idea whether or not he had permission from his mother.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[killler 2]

You have no idea whether or not he had permission from his mother.

COME ON.... Are you saying that it is possible that his mother gave permission for him to go on a killing spree ???

From all reports the mother knew her son had troubles and the guns were in a secure area...

These guns were legally bought and owned by his mother... They were secured as to the police...

If he cut his mothers throat with a butcher knife and the waited for a line of kids waking down the street and used a cars to run over them would that make it better??? THE GUNS DON"T HURT ANYTHING.. THEY ARE A TOOL...

killler....

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

You have no idea whether or not he had permission from his mother.

COME ON.... Are you saying that it is possible that his mother gave permission for him to go on a killing spree ???


killler....

No but his mother certainly had previously given him permission to use her guns.

Making up strawmen doesn't help your case.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

If she gave him permission to shoot her while she was sleeping and then go blow away kids, then, yes, you've got a valid point.

But usually "permission to use access gun" doesn't involve killing mom. INdeed, a more likely scenario is that she wouldn't give permission.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[DARK 0]

Quote

Quote

The only knee jerk reaction happening is from the anti gun crowd

Don't agree with that. There are plenty of anti-gun idiots running about, no doubt. But they seem to be met with an equal number of pro-gun idiots
Both sides want to pretend like their 'steps' are going to protect them from this sort of tragedy. Neither side, imo, is correct. Putting armed guards at every school will not solve the problem and, in likelyhood, will introduce a new problem. The same can be said for taking all guns away.

The Rambo types need to take a long hard look at reality and realize their fantasies about 'saving the day' are about as realistic as the Hippies who believe we'll all shit out rainbows if guns were taken away

Somewhere in the middle there's a balance that's practical and will provide reasonable/realistic protection but, even then, there's no law that will protect any of us from the brutality of the real world.

Ian

This, the major factor in the cause of future dead kids is going to be the inability of both sides to stop the ridiculous rhetoric and work towards finding the root cause together and then creating a solution to it now matter how that solution inconveniences one side or another.

[DARK 0]

Quote

Apparently, this school's methods are working

How do you figure that?

[regulator 0]

Quote

Quote

When the presidents family is not there they get 11 armed gaurds a too

I guess their children are more worth protection than the run of the mill poor children

I'm sure the cost of the security is included in the tuition parents pay to send their kids to that private school. It's also somewhat disingenuous to pretend that kids of the ultra rich or famous are no more likely to be kidnapped for ransom, or targeted for political purposes, than "run of the mill poor children"are.

The city where I live has 21 public schools (14 elementary, 4 middle, 3 high). At 11 assigned police officers/school, that would require 231 officers. The entire city police department has 240 officers. So, you could assign virtually the whole police department to guard the schools, leaving just 9 officers to police the entire remainder of the city. Alternatively you could double the size of the police department, or have the school district create its own police department which would be equal in size to that of the rest of the city. Either way would require essentially doubling the city's budget for police services, which would require a very substantial property tax increase. Do you really believe this is a practical solution to the problem?

Don

-------------------------------------------------------
have the school district create its own police department

Houston has had its own school police force for more than 20 years...all of them carry and are licensed peace officers.

[jakee 1,500]

Quote

Apparently, this school's methods are working.

Oh come on, you know better than that. The methods of 99.999% of schools without armed guards are working also.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Don't you think that armed guards PLUS the SS are a deterrent?

Depends on which SS we're talking about.