richardhutnik said:
Are you going to require teachers carry their own guns with them to school? If they don't have one, are you going to add the costs of a gun and ammo to the other expenses they have? Is a prerequisit that teachers MUST have guns before they go? And if there are substitutes, do they need to carry them also? And the point of "gun free schools" which is to be blamed for this mess by the NRA, is that it was to keep guns out of the hands of students. And here is the NRA's approach to guns in schools: http://wtvr.com/2012/12/21/bonus-read-nras-complete-statement-on-conn-school-shooting/ It looks like the NRA coming up with a solution that would be implemented and funded with federal grants. Idea of the NRA training people, and armed individuals patrolling the playgrounds, looks like the direction they have. So, you up for armed individuals connected with the NRA patrolling the playgrounds, perhaps getting federal funding to do so? |
you asked this stupid question already. and it was adressed already.
noone, no one is suggesting forcing teachers to carry a gun. no one is suggesting the students bring guns. the NRA isnt suggesting teachers or students have guns. others though are suggesting teachers at least be allowed to carry a weapon. it is their choice to do so or not. theirs not yours or mine. if they want to carry they can. if they dont fine. you nor me should or will pay for them. what kind of question is that.
the NRA's plan isnt even their plan, its bill clintons. a plan that wasnt deemed as crazy until now. its a fine plan but it is flawed. the cost would be that flaw. but if local school district and the local communty want an armed and want to pay for it they should. but the armed guard solution should be in conjunction with armed staff.
