WASHINGTON — The National Rifle Association Friday called for stationing armed police officers at every school in the nation to shield children and teachers from such carnage as the attack that killed 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., a week earlier. Democrats and gun control advocates immediately denounced the proposal.
At a news conference in the nation’s capital, NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre said that school children are extremely vulnerable in a culture that glorifies violence, in video games and in movies. “We as a society leave them utterly defenseless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it, and exploit it,” he said.
Comments
Hands down the stupidiest cluster of ideas I've heard in a long time. After we redesign all the schools to be fortresses with armed guards and teachers. After we list all nut cases (even those who haven't shown themselves to be nut cases I suppose) and after we make it manditory that shoppers, movie goers, ball game attendees, etc go through xray stations...then what? Nuts with guns will escalate. When we continue to fuel the crazies with our constant descriptions of the devestation, the culprit, and the mourners we will have a steady stream of wannabe "heros in their own mind" who need to prove how brave they are. If they can get their hands on a weapon they will find a new and improved way to commit mayhem.
It is a complicated new system we need. Medical care for those who need it. Gun control for hand held weapons of mass destruction and NO droning on and on and on about mass murder. None but those immediately involved have any need for the gory details.
The NRA suggestion to put armed guards in the schools is as irrelevant as the organization itself. If the NRA has so much money to spend, its sources should be questioned; where do they get such funding? Disgust with the NRA has never been at a higher level; shame on them!
The NRA is basically a lobby for the gun manufacturers. That`s where most of their money comes from and why they oppose any effort at making any kind of gun illegal.
It's official. The NRA leadership is insane.
I suspect the rank and file of the NRA might not be completely on board with this proposal, which seems to call for a new bureaucracy and enlarge government in a way that usually incenses conservatives. If roughly 100,000 schools need guards, hiring 50-100k trained, armed guards (2 to 3 times the size of the NYPD) by the proposed January date seems fairly fantastical.
Parents might wonder to what standard these people have been trained and by whom, since they would presumably start from diverse backgrounds (military, retired police, national guard, others) with no specialized experience in school settings.
Who might certify them and how would their backgrounds be checked? School officials with no knowledge of guns, the local police, the military, the NRA?
Who would pay them? Underfunded local school districts, states, a national program? How would you measure their effectiveness and justify continuing to fund them?
And worse, who would be responsible if an unsuitable person were hired: among 50k new guards, not everyone would be expected to work out) and would such an armed, trained hire be a greater threat than a protector? The consequences for single errors could be very grave, both morally and legally.
This comment has been removed.
I'd hate to run into this guy in a dark alley. He looks and sounds like one of those unreal James Bond villains -- Dr. No, Goldfinger, or Blofeld (SPECTOR). And he's armed. Scary.
Both the Globe and the New York Times called it a news conference. Wrong. Get out your dictionary. A conference is where people discuss or consult about something. This was a speech, a rant really. He took no questions because he wasn't going to allow himself to be challenged.
I wish I didn't have to breathe the same air as the NRA chief executive, and I'd rather never see or hear him again. A sub-human without an ounce caring or conscience.
Maybe if the media stopped providing vehicles for nuts like this NRA wack job, gun violence would drop in half. After hearing this proposal if I had a gun I would have shot the nearest TV set to make sure no one else would see how unbalanced the NRA leadership truly is.
We need a social media attack on the NRA for this dangerous, insane remark.
Not surprising that the NRA's solution to tragedies like Newtown is more guns.
At what point do you just say No to these idiots?
If not now, when?
Whats' bizarre to me is that people are ok with having armed guards in places like the white house, capitol, obama's kids' schools, but not my kids' schools. That ticks me off. There are obviously people out there what will want to kill other people, for whatever reason. Deal with it.
Here's the rub: there were armed guards at Columbine and Virginia Tech.
(1) We don't have near enough police to put one in every school and the cost of hiring and training them would be huge. There are about 100,000 public schools alone. It wouldn't just requre hiring maybe 150,000 new police, I would require a whole new bureaucracy or bureaucracies.
(2) One cop is not likely to be effective. You'd need several in a large school. These killers don't expect to survive. Besides, there were armed guards at several schools and shopping centers where mass killing took place.
(3) What about theaters, restaurants -- other places where mass murders have taken place?
Mr. LaPierre can serve as a perfect example of a common species of NRA lab rat. The NRA leadership cadre has become so emamored over time, with the obsession of unlimited gun ownership' that their mental balance is unhinged and their critical thought process long ago french fried. When stimulated to think outside their self limiting parameters; all we get is this vomit from their endless, mindless, distorted loop. Hopefully at least a portion of the NRA membership can do better than these nutjobs.
No, No... We can't have logic and common sense in this debate.... Why ? Then we'd lose... Doh !
I think Mr LaPierre and the NRA have been watching too many episodes of "The Rifleman" with Chuck Connors. sic the episode "New Orleans Menace". I just saw it this am and was amazed at the simplicity, innocence and sheer stupidity of it. However it was quaint and harking to a simpler time..... It was hilarious when the henchmen just rode off into the sunset along the next scene with Mark sleeping soundly in his bed, when just this afternoon, his father has killed a man right outside the door of his house. Too bad we as adults have to/ or should be more contemplative of our answers.
This comment has been removed.
Pathetic!
Armedd, trained officers in elementary schools. Let's suppose we do it. But only a handful of mass shootings occur in elementary schools. What about middle schools? High schools? Colleges and universities - and let's remember every building at every institution would need a trained, armed guard? What about malls? Cinemas? ....
This is an inane idea and I'm happy that the Globe's commenters recognized it as such. The NRA has nothing to contribute if this is the level it's capable of reaching.
NRA trying to exploit this tragedy to increase its influence. More gun carrying guards that owe their jobs to NRA. NRA had a real chance to negotiate reasonable changes to our gun laws and the extreme right wingers have blown it. I am a right leaning independent that is not so right leaning at the moment.
The proposal is complete nonsense. Columbine and Virgina Tech had armed guards. Additionally, the Newtown and Denver killers wore body armor.
Uhm.....Mr LaPierre..... Weren't there plenty of guns along with many people who were trained to use them at Fort Hood when Nidal Hasan went on his rampage. Why don't you stick that up your chamber and see what comes out. As they say in computer technology.....Garbage in..... Garbage OUT
If rank and file NRA members are as reasonable and level-headed as reported in the media this past week, there should be an internal movement to oust this gentleman. His proposal is out of touch with reality. We need a ban on military-grade assault weapons and high capacity mags. We need background checks and waiting periods. We need gunshow sales to stop.
I can hardly believe the naïveté of this proposal. The NRA must be a collection of fools if they can reduce this problem to a puerile good guys vs. bad guys solution.
I really tried to give the NRA the benefit of any doubt and I looked for a response filled with compassion while admitting that their members don't hunt ducks with assault rifles fitted with drum clips! We almost turned the radio off during this so-called press conference. I am so glad Mitt Romney did not win the election. If he had, this would have been a real circus. Instead, I hope my NRA friends do resign their memberships in response to this chilling reply to a school shooting that really wounded America.
Did did any one actually read beyond the headline? If this proposal came from the NEA rather than the NRA there would be editorials in support. Personally I don't think it is a truly practical idea. I don't suppose giving teachers personal alarm activators that would indicate need for assistance from fire or police would be approved by unions or civil rights types.
Everyone speaks of the buzzword "conversation". Apparently conversation means you must be in lockstop with the liberal view. Let an organization of citizens like the NRA voice an opinion that differs and they are shouted down. Some conversation!
The answer lies somewhere in between those who would ban guns in the hands of all but the military and police and those who want guns everywhere.
It was a smart marketing move on behalf of the NRA and the munitions makers who are suffering financially since the end of the Iraq war and the pullout from Afghanistan: provide more guns and ammo to hundreds of more police and put them in schools. Brilliant.
What a whack job. What if his kids were @ Newtown?
There was an armed guard at Columbine High School and he was Out-gunned by the attackers.
There were armed security officers all over the Virginia Tech campus.
Do we also need armed guards at every movie theater?
and I seem to remember all sorts of NRA members showing up to shoot-it-out with the Texas Tower sniper in 1966, but they did No good (out-gunned and the sniper had gravity on his side).
No there is something else.
A good start, would merely be to limit the amount of bullets a gun can carry to ten or less. It would be a good start.
After that worry more about statistics. There are 10,000 people killed each year by Drunk Drivers. Almost 3,000 killed by Repeat drunk drivers and 1,200 killed by Under-Aged drunk drivers. There are more serious things (statiscally) to worry about than an insane person getting a gun and going on a rampage.......
Oh, and while people are wondering, Wonder why
It was 33 years between Austin Texas (Texas Tower) and Columbine, and then in 13 years there was Columbine, VA Tech, Arizona, Aurora Colorado, and now Newtown, CT
and in 1966 the autism rate was 1 in 3,000 and now it is 1 in 100. Maybe society has something to do with all of this....
The Wall Street Journal had an interesting article about how it is harder to get guns now than in the 1960s but there have been more mass shootings. There is a correlation between this and the difficulty in getting the mentally ill out of society. Oh and the reason for the incredible rise in autism diagnoses is multifold. Among them are more doctors looking for and an expansion of the scope of what is considered autism.
Mental health care is the big part of the solution - not more restrictions on weapons.
All we do is engage in speculation with no proof that any of it will work. Psychiatry is a far from exacting science. It can take multiple psychiatrists and multiple years to get a correct diagnosis of someone's mental illness, or even if they have one. Follow a trial where psychiatrists testify for both sides and you can easily see the problem.
There is one thing that proved successful. In Australia. If you google "Australia gun control" you'll get thousands of hits.
I rarely leave URL's, but here's a brief article on the Australian experience since a mass killing in 1996:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/autralia-model-successful-gun-control-laws/story?id=18007055#.UNYLVXcVWJE
I believe in our Constitution and our right to bear arms but one must remember what that meant when it was drafted. Guns of that period were single shot black powder. If our forefathers could envision the future of automatic weapons and their possible uses against humanity and innocent people, don't you think they would have written a "right to bear reasonable arms" as defined by us as a people? If the NRA wants to place armed police in schools then why not also in movie theaters and play houses, supermarkets, day care, arcades, libraries and so on? Where does the protection belong? Do we draw straws?
You're comment is sort of funny, and ironic. Many of the pro-gun lobby also believe in "originalism," interpreting the Constitution as the founding fathers envisioned -- that is, until orginalism conflicts with their baser instincts.
We should try limiting arms to muzzle-loaders and flint-locks see what happens. It would be raining hypocrits.
The intent of the 2nd amendment was not to protect guns for hunting but so the citizens could defend themselves from the govt. The US army does not use black powder and lead balls. I'm not advocating arming Americans with M-16s and artillery but it does put things in historical perspective.
I'm rejoining the NRA!! Liberals are useless and can't protect themselves never mind innocent people. Guns are of course no guarantee that you'll protect yourself or others,but at least give me option to utilize my right to self-defense. Put the criminals on the defense instead of the offense!! Let them think twice about their actions!.................What if a teacher or other person had a weapon and saved some or all of the children? What then? Would they still call for a ban on guns? Think about it! Long and hard!!