Want your mind blown? Newtown rejects funding for armed school security

This is a discussion on Want your mind blown? Newtown rejects funding for armed school security within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; My comprehension level just cannot fathom the insanity of some people. Newtown budget with extra school security rejected | WTNH.com Connecticut [RANT]Okay, so let me ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30
Like Tree35Likes

Thread: Want your mind blown? Newtown rejects funding for armed school security

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array SpringerXD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    1,897

    Want your mind blown? Newtown rejects funding for armed school security

    My comprehension level just cannot fathom the insanity of some people.

    Newtown budget with extra school security rejected | WTNH.com Connecticut

    [RANT]Okay, so let me make sure I have this right. They want security, but they're not willing to pay for it even after what happened, yet many of them are yelling for gun control which would have done zilch to stop what happened. So what exactly would keep everyone safe? A larger "Gun Free Zone" sign? An "assault" weapons ban? No, but I'll tell you: what would stop this garbage is allowing legally-authorized citizens, including teachers, to carry in the schools. No extra money spent, no extra bureaucracy, and the security blanket of the 2nd Amendment which is already in place.[/RANT]
    Jeanlouise and 84160 like this.
    "I practice the ancient art of Klik Pao."

    -miklcolt45

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,552
    Before you get your panties in a wad, they did not vote against school security. They voted down the town and school budgets which happens to include more security. So your title is very misleading. Any increase of 4.7- 5.25 percent in a budget is most likely going to be voted down no matter what was in it.
    Tzadik likes this.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Taurahe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Indianapolis IN
    Posts
    2,693
    IMO..... the people of Newton played the game that politicians, anti's, the media etc wanted them to play, but now that it is old news everyone has moved on, leaving Newton holding the ball on an empty court. The reality hsas set in that while it sounded good at the time, they were used as a whipping post to inflame america as means to further a political agenda, and nothing more. I am sure they want more security, we all do. But who has to pay for it in the end? We do. And is the american way, we will clamor for more, but when we have to pay for it through taxes etc..... the wallets get locked down like prison riot. We want our cake and we want to eat it to. The folks of Newton are coming to realize that it doesnt work that way.
    ”God grants Liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.”
    ~Daniel Webster

    Your points are shallow... my points are Hollow....

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array SpringerXD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Before you get your panties in a wad, they did not vote against school security. They voted down the town and school budgets which happens to include more security. So your title is very misleading. Any increase of 4.7- 5.25 percent in a budget is most likely going to be voted down no matter what was in it.
    I understand all of that, and it's not my point. My point is that they saw 20 children murdered four months ago. Regardless of how the budget is configured or any other details, they need security in their schools, just as all schools need security. So you would think that in light of what has happened, they would find a way to get armed guards or some other solution in place as of yesterday. Make it a separate agenda item, write a new ordinance, or whatever it takes.

    And just for the record, my "panties" are in no wad.
    "I practice the ancient art of Klik Pao."

    -miklcolt45

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,161
    ... they did not vote against school security. They voted down the town and school budgets which happens to include more security.
    Perhaps they'll think a bit harder about budgets, next time around. There are pros/cons to all decisions. Having no armed folk at a location dramatically raises the odds that no armed folk will be there when S H's TF. Duh, but that's the way it is. Perhaps they (and thousands of other school districts) will realize this game they're playing, trading off security for whatever, praying that legislation can somehow magically cause all violent assailants to evaporate before they ever appear.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  7. #6
    Member Array 8th ID's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    488
    Priorities, priorities....

    IMO, the main problem with those who are against armed security in school comes down to fear of the arms. 'They' have little or no experience with any weapon, and they just do not understand that there are millions of people outside the military and law enforcement who are trained, and can safely deploy a firearm.
    SOLD my guns.
    Proud owner of a 12lb. Chinese pug that is DANGEROUS and is soon to be registered!

  8. #7
    Member Array carracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Id.
    Posts
    403
    "If it saved just one child", wouldn't it be worth that extra money?

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    The residents of Newton and the state are in for bigger cutbacks through the loss of tax revenues if the gun manufacturers carry out their threats to relocate. Florida, Texas and Arizona have shown much interest to have them relocate to our states, most have offered tax incentives to do so.

    I have lost faith in our city, county, state and federal officials, the majority have proven to be self serving and are deaf to their constituents desires. I have stated this many times but Palm Beach County Florida counties school board, county commissioners and voters saw the need in 1972 to have a school police department and continue to have one today. Why was this done? The desire to have our kids attend their schooling in a safe environment void of the likes of the Sandy Hook incident. The costs of our school police department is a very small cost and has proven to be a very successful in providing a safe environment for our kids.

    Bottom line: The residents want more security in the schools but want others to foot the bill. I am sure the town and state are presently pursuing a federal school grant program that will cover the cost of security that will have little or no impact on the present town and state annual budgets. They want it free like the $2.2 billion obamaphone program.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array Glock2201's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,226
    Does this mean Obama will stop using families that lost children in the shooting as props when he does his speeches about the need for stricter gun control?
    CIBMike likes this.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array pittypat21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Glock2201 View Post
    Does this mean Obama will stop using families that lost children in the shooting as props when he does his speeches about the need for stricter gun control?
    Oh didn't you hear? He said he's not using them as props.

    He said that right before he turned to hug the crying Newtown parents that were standing next to him.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
    -General James Mattis, USMC

  12. #11
    Distinguished Member Array SpringerXD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    1,897
    I have one question. If the Newtown parents who lost children could go back in time and have an armed guard in that school, what would their price limit be?

    Yeah, that's what I thought.
    "I practice the ancient art of Klik Pao."

    -miklcolt45

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array Exacto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,487
    Sheep are sheep, they are not very bright.
    Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunder bolt...... Sun Tzu.

    The supreme art of war is to defeat the enemy without fighting........ Sun Tzu.

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array Glock2201's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,226
    Quote Originally Posted by pittypat21 View Post
    Oh didn't you hear? He said he's not using them as props.

    He said that right before he turned to hug the crying Newtown parents that were standing next to him.
    Sorry my bad, I will try very hard to not make that mistake again. I thought having them was a prop to show Congress how they let them down but I guess I was wrong.

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,161
    Quote Originally Posted by carracer View Post
    "If it saved just one child", wouldn't it be worth that extra money?
    One would think so. And yet, many, many school districts choose instead to have no effective defenses, hoping a door and windows will stop violent intrusion.

    I can understand why those temporary "trailer" set-ups are without much security at all, while new buildings are being erected, but why on earth any school building built in the last 40yrs hasn't had many security features installed is beyond me. And why no armed security and/or armed staff exists at most (all) schools is beyond me. The costs are fair for armed security, sure. But for simply allowing armed staff to lawfully exist on campus, there's really only the training and procedural costs of getting such folks up to speed and retaining their knowledge. If it saves one child ...

    At practically zero cost, too, they could simply take down the "No Guns/Weapons" (criminal empowerment zone) signage. That'd be a good start.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  16. #15
    Senior Member Array SCXDm9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,173
    From the cited article: money for....unarmed security guards in each of Newtown's public and private schools."

    I would have voted against it too!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Ransom likes this.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

did newton vote no to armed security guards

,

newtown rejects security

,

when did they start letting security guards carry guns

,

why did newton parents reject armed guards

Click on a term to search for related topics.