Thursday, April 4, 2013

NRA Invades the National Press Club with Weapons, Restrictions To Promote Taxpayer Funded Armed Guards in Schools

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
What they are promoting is what would, in funding costs, amount to an armed national militia, in our schools.

Now, of course, they could call for an expansion of police departments where officers face years of training and hopefully special anti-bias aka sensitivity training so they can do their job in an equitable manner.  There are also other constraints on real police officers, like checks and balances to make try to make sure that the officers are not playing out grudges.

And BTW, real Police officers are 90% unionized, meaning highly trained employees earning good pay.

The NRA says no to that.

I kid you not, one Republican suggested earlier that some retired cop would love to sit around eating donuts and guarding a school.  Where do I start explaining what is wrong with that?  First of all cops are often retired in their early 50s for a good reason.  Yes, they may still be active, and "in shape", but "in shape" at a certain age is not as quick or as strong as it was ten years ago. Being very fit as younger folks can get, and older ones can't quite reach easily (thereby being tempted to use supplements which can create danger for users and those around them from health risks to irrationality)  helps the officers use less lethal solutions to encounters such as running down a suspect and pinning them down, instead of shooting them.

So who's guarding your kid at school, a donut eating overweight guy with a gun?  Even if he or she, as a cop received sensitivity training, the constraints of advancing age and all that donut eating will severely limit their ability to avoid using what Sharron Angle called "2nd amendment remedies".  Even worse, Asa Hutchinson seems to suggest hiring the NRA's creepy militia posers as guards at schools.  Yeah, just what we need is a bunch of even less sensitive,  less trained militarists, with 40 hours of training getting paid to guard schools. And requiring x number of teachers to pack heat ensures increasing teaching by people for whom guns are more important than young minds.

Our children have to compete in these days for employment on a Global Scale.  That marketplace of jobs doesn't want your kid learning gun carrying and strong arming lessons.  They want him or her to know how to communicate effectively in a calm, and very specific manner.  And, in an environment of  possible gun and other violent threats, children don't learn well at all.  That has been documented time and time again in urban ghettos.   We should remove the threat of violence from those areas, not force it on everyone's  children.

If you want to let your children grow up with the same threat of gun violence popping up as those in the inner cities have, that, at least is a form of equalizing experience within the United States.  But it also means education gains in the US altogether will continue to decline in the world marketplace of future well-paid employees.

But gun sellers, and privatized militia employers who will likely contract with schools for placement of the armed guards will be raking in the dough and probably upping Wayne La Pierre's already $1 million a year salary (that's more than 99.94% of Americans make) for the great idea of how to make the American taxpayer foot the bill for a program to protect their children from the weapons their complacent gun loving members of Congress have allowed to flood our cities and towns. 

Gun favoring candidates are also usually taking campaign donations from the NRA which is the lobbying organization representing gun manufacturers and dealers and from the manufacturers and gun dealers themselves.   You can do the math there.

If this taxpayer funded poorly trained school militia scheme is not what you want to see in your community tell your Copngressional representatives tell them about it, as well your state legislative members.   To write a letter to those folks (it should be your own words to have the biggest impact against the messages they get from big money donors, but insure them you will not support a vote for more guns in schools as opposed to more gun safety for everyone, since most mass shootings in public places do not occur in schools, and better gun restrictions would cover every location.

See here to  Tell Your Congressmembers How You Feel Directly.

A shorter URL for this post is

What the NRA considers a dangerous weapon.