Wanye is out of his mind

[Onward Allusion]

A day BEFORE the NRA press conference...

So I took my management team out and of course the subject of Newtown and gun control came up. The guys outright said the true issue was that the guy was a total nut case and it had zero to do with guns. The ladies weren't so sure, but everyone did agree that there were mental health issues involved in the tragedy.

The subject of how to prevent something like this came up and one thought shut EVERYONE up at the table... Why don't we protect our kids' schools like we protect our government buildings, politicians, banks, or anywhere else we want to keep the bad guys out? Everyone shut up and sat there nodding their heads in question. . .

The NRA is on the right track. The delivery could have been a hell of a lot better. It should have been delivered by a woman. A mom. . . And it should have asked hard questions that make people shut the hell up and think, including the antis...instead of ....blah blah blah...this is what we should do...

As for where the money will come from...heh, I think quite a few of us here have already pointed out the monies we spend elsewhere in other parts of the world for our supposed friends.

 

[beatledog7]

So you are fine with receiving the benefits, but everyone else can now fend for themselves because you don't want to pay your taxes/part of it?

I don't see how you get this from what I posted, but let me try and get you straightened out:

I acknowledged that it is currently impossible to NOT be on the teat in some way, but noted that getting weaned off the teat, especially at the federal level, is critical to getting this country back on its proper path. Weaning is not a cold turkey procedure--it's gradual.

I pay my taxes. I use tax-payer funded roads. I concede that there are proper uses for tax dollars. What I suggest is:

1) to shift those things that are not Constitutionally authorized off the federal funding slate either to states and communities or to the private sector.

2) to take a hard look for those things that are currently tax-payer funded at whatever level but which are not supposed to be or which could be made more effective or run more efficiently by private enterprise.

Government is almost never efficient and nearly as rarely effective. It can be this pathetic because it is never truly held accountable by anyone. Private enterprises are held accountable, and that is why they are the right place for so many things.

Recall that this whole side topic of taxpayer funding stems from people grousing about the cost of putting armed guards in the schools. I began my discussion by proposing an alternative.

 

[9MMare]

This is why the nation is in trouble. No it's not your problem right? People still refuse to make a child the priority, regardless if they are YOUR child. Sorry, but these comments make you look pretty heartless.

Why is it any different than objecting to pay for universal health care? How many people here want to do that? And how many more kid's lives would be saved by early and preventative health care? Or born mentally and physically healthier because their pregnant mothers could get pre-natal care?

Welfare is abused all the time but in the long run....it saves kid's lives. Makes their lives more bearable, keeps a family together. How many people here would just like to see that entitlement eliminated? Most probably.

It comes down the the claim of using govt $$ to pay for entitlements....which I thought most gun-owners were against? And the conservative side says that such things should be paid for by the PRIVATE sector...fundraising, grants, charities.

So I am heartless to want it handled this way? Really? I think you are still too emotional over this incident to think it through.

 

[9MMare]

It's like I've been telling people IRL for awhile.

Protecting our children from gunmen in schools isn't worth the money.

Plain and simple. People either don't care because it isn't THEIR kids, or they realize that the chances of dying to a gunmen are so slim that spending that kind of money isn't logical.

Straight and to the point.

 

[Alaska444]

Why is it any different than objecting to pay for universal health care? How many people here want to do that? And how many more kid's lives would be saved by early and preventative health care? Or born mentally and physically healthier because their pregnant mothers could get pre-natal care?

Welfare is abused all the time but in the long run....it saves kid's lives. Makes their lives more bearable, keeps a family together. How many people here would just like to see that entitlement eliminated? Most probably.

It comes down the the claim of using govt $$ to pay for entitlements....which I thought most gun-owners were against? And the conservative side says that such things should be paid for by the PRIVATE sector...fundraising, grants, charities.

So I am heartless to want it handled this way? Really? I think you are still too emotional over this incident to think it through.

It is not that large an expense for an armed security guard in every US school. At $50,000 per year for one armed security guard, that is 5 billion a year. That is what we spend in 12 hours at the Federal level.

Many towns in CA for instance deploy deputies to preempt criminal activity on school campuses which actually saves police costs in the long run. It is cost effective and funding would not only be Feds, State and county but local as well. We can afford this and why not rescind prohibition of concealed carry on schools as well. It is the gun free zone that attracts these creeps in the first place. Eliminate the gun free zone and the cowards that surrender or commit suicide when the cops arrive will be greatly reduced. We can and should do this.

 

[9MMare]

I don't see how you get this from what I posted, but let me try and get you straightened out:

I acknowledged that it is currently impossible to NOT be on the teat in some way, but noted that getting weaned off the teat, especially at the federal level, is critical to getting this country back on its proper path. Weaning is not a cold turkey procedure--it's gradual.

I pay my taxes. I use tax-payer funded roads. I concede that there are proper uses for tax dollars. What I suggest is:

1) to shift those things that are not Constitutionally authorized off the federal funding slate either to states and communities or to the private sector.

2) to take a hard look for those things that are currently tax-payer funded at whatever level but which are not supposed to be or which could be made more effective or run more efficiently by private enterprise.

Government is almost never efficient and nearly as rarely effective. It can be this pathetic because it is never truly held accountable by anyone. Private enterprises are held accountable, and that is why they are the right place for so many things.

Recall that this whole side topic of taxpayer funding stems from people grousing about the cost of putting armed guards in the schools. I began my discussion by proposing an alternative.

x2

Perpetuating a $$ -wasting and inefficient system is not the answer.

Instead of closed minds, opening them to look for solutions, including armed guards, paid for by the private sector might emerge.

 

[AirForceShooter]

Wayne is the SINGLE reason I will not join the NRA.
I belong to other pro gun organizations.

He's incompetent and a bomb thrower.
I watched his "news conference" in absolute horror.

AFS

 

[9MMare]

It is not that large an expense for an armed security guard in every US school. At $50,000 per year for one armed security guard, that is 5 billion a year. That is what we spend in 12 hours at the Federal level.

.

This was on the news, related to the current shooting: It will cost $2 million to re-fund the armed security program in the 3 high schools in a local medium-sized town. That needs to be re-funded for the coming yr and they dont have that $$. Now they'll be asking for more for the elementary schools.

That comes from the local community....our property taxes or other initiatives WE pay for or some federal funding. (currently it's locally paid for, that's why it's on the chopping block)

Speak for yourself. Feel free to volunteer your protective services and your $$ to your local schools. That is what the private sector is for.

Again the hypocrisy surprises me when I draw the parallels to the objections for health care or welfare. I dont want to pay for those either....and many here would fight tooth and nail to get out from under those financial yokes.

Edit: fixed the details for the armed security program. It wasnt for 3 individual guards.

 

[481]

I don't see how you get this from what I posted, but let me try and get you straightened out:

I acknowledged that it is currently impossible to NOT be on the teat in some way, but noted that getting weaned off the teat, especially at the federal level, is critical to getting this country back on its proper path. Weaning is not a cold turkey procedure--it's gradual.

I pay my taxes. I use tax-payer funded roads. I concede that there are proper uses for tax dollars. What I suggest is:

1) to shift those things that are not Constitutionally authorized off the federal funding slate either to states and communities or to the private sector.

2) to take a hard look for those things that are currently tax-payer funded at whatever level but which are not supposed to be or which could be made more effective or run more efficiently by private enterprise.

Government is almost never efficient and nearly as rarely effective. It can be this pathetic because it is never truly held accountable by anyone. Private enterprises are held accountable, and that is why they are the right place for so many things.

Recall that this whole side topic of taxpayer funding stems from people grousing about the cost of putting armed guards in the schools. I began my discussion by proposing an alternative.

OK, fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to explain it like that.

I do know where we could get funding for the proposed Nattional School Shield program- just divert the TENS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS we send in foreign aid to nations (North Korea, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya, etc.) that hate us and participate in some form or another in terrorism.

If it has to "wasted" why not "waste" it here on our infrastructure?

 

[gossamer]

because nothing says sanity like paranoid schizophrenia




Charles whitman never stood trial....so well never know one way or the other....although there were anomalies with his brain which may have influenced his behavior.

http://m.guardiannews.com/world/2012/aug/24/breivik-verdict-sane-21-years

Let me say this again so you understand it: Anders Brevik was ruled sane. Period. Full stop.

Nadal Hasan was ruled sane. Period. Full stop.

Ferguson was deemed sane. Period. Full stop.
Scott Evans Dekraai was ruled sane.
Nicholas Troy Sheley was ruled sane.
Anthony F. Barbaro was never ruled insane.
Eric Houston was deemed sane and awaits execution (in CA).
Mitchell Scott deemed sane.
Andrew Douglas Golden sane.

I can enumerate more examples of perpetrators ruled sane.

If sane enough for the judiciary, sane enough for a military officers rank, and sane enough to legally possess a firearm isn't good enough for you then you may have too little regard for objective clininical measures of sanity for a discussion of mental health.

 

[Alaska444]

This was on the news, related to the current shooting: It will cost $2 million to re-fund the 3 armed security guards in the high schools in a local medium-sized town. That needs to be re-funded for the coming yr and they dont have that $$. Now they'll be asking for more for the elementary schools.

That comes from the local community....our property taxes or other initiatives WE pay for or some federal funding. (currently it's locally paid for, that's why it's on the chopping block)

Speak for yourself. Feel free to volunteer your protective services and your $$ to your local schools. That is what the private sector is for.

Again the hypocrisy surprises me when I draw the parallels to the objections for health care or welfare. I dont want to pay for those either....and many here would fight tooth and nail to get out from under those financial yokes.

5 billion dollars as a nation is not a lot of money compared to the horrific effects of one school shooting. Obama will probably spend that amount of money setting up a bureaucracy to take our guns away. Yes, that is one way to ensure security in schools just like we do in many federal and state buildings already.

The best solution is to allow CCW in schools by properly permitted folks especially teachers and school administrators. That wouldn't cost anything at all. The school could simply require specific security training for those that volunteer to do so. They would remain anonymous and making the gun free zone disappear would be enough.

Since they don't trust us with guns and that is not their agenda to improve security and personal protection, that will be rejected out of hand. Yes, we could accomplish the same thing without any tax money at all.

On the other hand, of all the things that we spend money on, school security has much more utility that most of our expenditures. Money well spent in my opinion. Taxes are meant to supply certain services for the common good. This is one of those worthy common good services.

 

[M-Cameron]

Let me say this again so you understand it: Anders Brevik was ruled sane. Period. Full stop.

let me say this again....there is a difference between being declared legally sane for the purpose of trial, and having a mental illness.......

not everyone who has a mental illness is going to commit mass murder......but just about everyone who commits mass murder is going to have some form of mental illness.

 

[9MMare]

I think the bigger issue in media is that the names of these murders get published, and so much attention lavished on them. So, instead of a quiet suicide, they decide to leave their "mark" just like the last guy. If we could convince the media and LE to redact the names and any identifying traits of these shooters, perhaps that'd help.

I often think about this. And agree. I also agree we'd need their cooperation (convince them) because I dont believe in suppressing freedom of the press.

I think we should make the effort to keep their names out of print, after the initial identification. Refer, if necessary, as "the OKC bomber" rather than perpetuating that POS's name. (For ex.)

 

[gossamer]

let me say this again....there is a difference between being declared legally sane for the purpose of trial, and having a mental illness.......

not everyone who has a mental illness is going to commit mass murder......but just about everyone who commits mass murder is going to have some form of mental illness.

Unlike our system of law, which is the foundation of our Republic, you are obviously not prepared to accept objective, clinical consensus as to mental capacity. This makes anything you try to bring to a discussion about mental capacity too dubious to entertain with rational thought.

So good luck with that.

 

[9MMare]

No, this is not why the nation is in trouble. It's how we fix the trouble. The concept of collectivism combined with a willingness to devolve personal accountability to "the system" is why we're in the mess we're in.

Then came this:


Parents bear the primary responsibility for the safety of their children. No matter how much I care about someone else's children--and I do care--as long as I'm not the parent of those children or officially in charge of them on a temporary basis (as a teacher or babysitter, and even then there are parental guidances that I still must follow), I'm not in a position to make decisions regarding their care. Nor is the state or community. Nor is the federal government. Except in cases where parents are demonstrably a danger to their children, we just need to back away and allow them to--no, compel them to--parent those children.

Will we see parents pulling Sally or Johnny from schools because they think a gunman is going to blow them away the next time they attend? No, we won't. A few might take such an extreme measure, but by and large as soon as the Christmas break ends, the parents who are beating the "Keep our kids safe!" and "more gun control now!" drums will send their children right back to schools that sit squarely in the same make-believe gun-free zones they sat in before Sandy Hook. Why? Because they don't really think their children are in danger; they're just leveraging Sandy Hook to push their already-in-place anti-gun agenda.

Analogy time: When a 737 crashes and they discover an at-fault design flaw, there is a call for all 737s to be grounded until they are proven free of the flaw. That means the FAA is serious about fixing the problem. Similarly, a mandated dismissal of all schools until safety measures are in place would indicate a real seriousness, and an honest belief on the part of government, that the children are in danger. Nationwide mass truancy would indicate an honest belief on the part of parents that their children are not safe at school. They claim to know what's at fault, but they decline to stop the risky activity for as long as it takes to get the fault fixed.

We will see neither a mandated dismissal nor mass truancy.

This is pretty interesting ^^^^. (The bold is mine). It's an angle I hadnt thought about. Goes along nicely with this:

Actually, according to the statistics I was able to find, more kids in the USA die every DAY in car accidents than died in CT.

 

[mnrivrat]

I admitt that I don't have the time to read all posts in this thread so bare that in mind if it makes a difference.
1.) What I did read is a lot of back seat driving. I wonder about those who have the opinion that Wyane did a terrrible job, but have offered nothing helpful to the end game. Would I do it a bit different ? Perhaps I would, and then perhaps a bunch of you would critisize whatever I thought was the way to go. One thing I do feel is that a house divided has no chance in winning this ball game. If you can't get behind the NRA, then for the sake of the cause you should at least tone down the negative. My Opinion.

2.) Perhaps more of it is in the threads than I realize, but I realy have not seen a lot of solution based sugestions. The truth may be that the only way to stop this type of tradgedy is to find the insane before they strike out in this manner. Just how do we do that with 100% certainty ? Until we have the answer to that, it seems to me we need to protect our present gun free zones. That means someone has to be armed and present.

3.) The discussion focused on insanity and the reasons why the behavior leads to this outcome should be a main topic. If it is not, then the focus will be on the gun. A lot more to it then video games I'm sure, but there is where the discussion needs to be directed. Are these people wired wrong from birth, or programed into who they become ? That's where the focus needs to be in my opinion.

 

[9MMare]

5 billion dollars as a nation is not a lot of money compared to the horrific effects of one school shooting.

The best solution is to allow CCW in schools by properly permitted folks especially teachers and school administrators.


On the other hand, of all the things that we spend money on, school security has much more utility that most of our expenditures. Money well spent in my opinion. Taxes are meant to supply certain services for the common good. This is one of those worthy common good services.

I'm glad that's not much $$ to you. It means something to me.

I agree that any teacher or school staff member should be allowed to CC if they choose.

The common good is a matter of opinion in many cases, if not all. Again, I see no difference between this and OTHER ways my tax dollars are spent to protect kids. Esp other ways that might be more effective, like detecting and helping the mentally ill and socially disenfranchised.

$5 billion, with this in mind?:

Actually, according to the statistics I was able to find, more kids in the USA die every DAY in car accidents than died in CT.

That's the best use of $5 billion, or more of a feel-good emotional response?

Dont get me wrong...this is a horrible thing and has upset anyone with a heart....but we need to regain perspective before spending billions and creating prison-like environments for the next generation. THAT also will have an effect.

 

[macadore]

Wayne may be getting ready to punt like he did in 85.

 

[Alaska444]

I'm glad that's not much $$ to you. It means something to me.

I agree that any teacher or school staff member should be allowed to CC if they choose.

The common good is a matter of opinion in many cases, if not all. Again, I see no difference between this and OTHER ways my tax dollars are spent to protect kids. Esp other ways that might be more effective, like detecting and helping the mentally ill and socially disenfranchised.

$5 billion, with this in mind?:



That's the best use of $5 billion, or more of a feel-good emotional response?

Dont get me wrong...this is a horrible thing and has upset anyone with a heart....but we need to regain perspective before spending billions and creating prison-like environments for the next generation. THAT also will have an effect.

Dear 9MMare,

Utah already has legal concealed carry in public schools and colleges for lawful permit holders. I can't recall the last time they had a mass shooting in their state. Maybe someone who lives there can shed some light, but we may already have a couple of states that understand the dangers of gun free zones.

That is at no cost to tax payers.

Unfortunately, the simple and easy solution is a politically correct nightmare that the sheople in this nation are not prepared to accept. They are already demonizing the NRA and their comments yesterday. In any case, I haven't heard of any problems in Utah schools because of this policy. That is actually a cost neutral and effective deterrent. In addition, those visiting or volunteering at the school can likewise carry while on these public school grounds.

http://utah-concealed-carry-permit.com/gunsatschool.php

When my 3 year old granddaughter starts school, I wish I could likewise carry and volunteer at her school. So far, Idaho allows you to pick up your kids with your weapon on your person, but you must not get out of the car. That is as far as it goes with public schools here. Hopefully that will change.

 

[Kiln]

I love the guys quoting studies on video games and how they make you violent. Those studies are by guys that have taken a personal vendetta against video games because they decided that they caused violence. The people behind the studies have set out to crucify video games much like gun control studies are not surprisingly biased against guns.

Liberal studies show that the mere presence of a video game makes you more likely to shoot/stab somebody in the face. Yup, PROOF. SCIENCE.

 

[crossrhodes]

Sheeple

Our country had the sheeple mentality for the last three decades.

 

[Alaska444]

Our country had the sheeple mentality for the last three decades.

Yes, it is probably longer than that actually, but we need to present a rationale and cogent argument that the Utah example of allowing concealed carry is actually the best way to go.

 

[beatledog7]

481, I'm with you 110% on scrapping foreign aid to countries whose leadership hate us because we have (still, a little) freedom!

Especially when we're borrowing the money to give to them.

 

[481]

481, I'm with you 110% on scrapping foreign aid to countries whose leadership hate us because we have (still, a little) freedom!

Especially when we're borrowing the money to give to them.

Yeah, talk about paying for the ammo to shoot yourself in the foot!

 

[morcey2]

Dear 9MMare,

Utah already has legal concealed carry in public schools and colleges for lawful permit holders. I can't recall the last time they had a mass shooting in their state. Maybe someone who lives there can shed some light, but we may already have a couple of states that understand the dangers of gun free zones.

That is at no cost to tax payers.

Unfortunately, the simple and easy solution is a politically correct nightmare that the sheople in this nation are not prepared to accept. They are already demonizing the NRA and their comments yesterday. In any case, I haven't heard of any problems in Utah schools because of this policy. That is actually a cost neutral and effective deterrent. In addition, those visiting or volunteering at the school can likewise carry while on these public school grounds.

http://utah-concealed-carry-permit.com/gunsatschool.php

When my 3 year old granddaughter starts school, I wish I could likewise carry and volunteer at her school. So far, Idaho allows you to pick up your kids with your weapon on your person, but you must not get out of the car. That is as far as it goes with public schools here. Hopefully that will change.

Being a Utah resident (other than a 3-year stint at school in Colorado) and with kids in school, it's nice to know that when I go visit the school that I don't have to unload and secure whether I'm carrying open or concealed. I don't open carry a whole lot, but often enough that it would make things very inconvenient when I go to anything at the school.

In the area I live, I know for a fact that there are several teachers and administrators in each of the schools that carry all of the time. If you trust your kids to be with the teachers for 6 hours (or more), 5 days a week, 9 months out of the year, for 12 years, I think we can trust most of them with a firearm. There are several licensed instructors that are doing free CFP classes for teachers, administrators, and custodial staff at the schools here.

Every once in a while, you'll have some principal get a wild hair, usually in the more populated areas, and put up a sign that says that firearms are verboten, but it doesn't last very long. No state, county, school-district, or local government agency is allowed to make any laws, rules, or policies that are more restrictive than state law. The big one there is policies, including employment policies for school district employees. They can suggest or request that you don't carry at school, but it can't be a condition of employment.

We have had one mass shooting at trolley square, a shopping mall, several years ago. The mall has the obligatory "no evil, nasty, mean, and scary guns allowed" signs. BTW, they have no force of law in Utah. If you are carrying and someone finds out, you must be asked to leave by someone with the authority to do so. It can't just be some schlub from the Dead Sea Salt Skin Care booth. And only if you refuse to do so will you be charged with trespassing.

I really like living in Utah.

Matt