Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | Home RSS
 
 
 

Crestview parent raises security questions

January 15, 2013

LISBON — One parent concerned about recent national events and school safety issues questioned the Crestview Board of Education Monday about the possibility of getting a security officer into the......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(42)

notSocialist

Jan-20-13 7:31 AM

"And people like you better hope they succeed in their fight because the 2nd is the only thing protecting your right to regurgitate every talking point on CNN. "

Excellent!

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-19-13 5:52 AM

HEADLINE: Flashback—Obama, Circa 1990s: 'I Don't Believe People Should Be Able to Own Guns'

During the 2008 presidential campaign, gun rights author and scholar John Lott recounted meeting Barack Obama for the first time while he was a lecturer at University of Chicago.

When the two met, Lott's reputation on guns preceded him, and Lott claims Obama said, "I don't believe people should be able to own guns."

Read that again, and let it soak in; Barack Obama reportedly said, "I don't think people should be able to own guns." In my correspondence with Lott, he stood by his story.

And there's little reason to doubt Lott's account, especially when you take Obama's history of anti-gun legislation into account.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-19-13 5:51 AM

cont.

1. In a 1998 questionnaire for the Illinois state legislature, Obama said he wanted to "ban the sale or transfer of all sorts of semi-automatic weapons."

2. From 1998-2001 Obama was on the board of the Joyce Foundation, the "major funder for gun-control research" at that time.

3. Obama opposes concealed carry and always has (every state but Illinois disagrees with him).

4. Obama only sees two "legitimate" purposes for guns: "hunting and target shooting." This means using guns for self defense is not legitimate. And this goes a long way in explaining Obama's past support of laws banning the use of guns for self-defense in Illinois, even in one's own home.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-19-13 5:51 AM

cont.

But all these things and more are simply symptoms of a bigger issue—namely, that Obama doesn't think people should be able to own guns in the first place.

Lott believes Obama's lip service to the Second Amendment is simply part of an overarching Democrat strategy set forth by pollster Mark Penn, which instructs Dems to say they support the Second Amendment in order get elected and then to do everything they can to chip away at it via legislation and regulation once they're in office.

breitbart.c om/Big-Government/2013/01/18/Barack-Obama-I-Don-t-Believe-People-Should-Be-Able-Own-Guns

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-18-13 4:10 PM

"After announcing 23 executive orders to broaden gun control in America earlier this week, President Obama pressed Congress to institute an "assault weapons" ban to end incidents of violence in our nation.

The problem--"assault weapons" were tied to less than .012 percent of overall deaths in America in recent years (2011). And the 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" (AWB) had a demonstrably small impact on overall crime in our country."

So much for 'all those people getting mowed down". If you're going to make a statement, bug, at least try to make one that is so easily proved false.

What was it you called me? Jerk?

Here's one for you: Liar.

breitbart.c om/Big-Government/2013/01/18/Assault-Weapons-Tied-To-Less-Than-012-Percent-Of-Deaths-In-2011

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-18-13 4:03 PM

Two-out-of-three Americans recognize that their constitutional right to own a gun was intended to ensure their freedom.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 65% of American Adults think the purpose of the Second Amendment is to make sure that people are able to protect themselves from tyranny. Only 17% disagree, while another 18% are not sure.

rasmussenreports.c om/public_content/politics/current_events/gun_control/65_see_gun_rights_as_protection_against_tyranny

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-18-13 8:30 AM

"My only concern here the people getting mowed down by these weapons "

I'm sure that's a lie, but even if not, if that is your concern you should be wanting to ban handguns, also, as rifle shootings are a tiny fraction of gun deaths in the US.

But the facts don't matter to you or your ilk.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Jan-17-13 8:37 PM

ladybug, I'm not a very big supporter of the NRA, but their interest lies in protecting the 2nd amendment. Period. And people like you better hope they succeed in their fight because the 2nd is the only thing protecting your right to regurgitate every talking point on CNN.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

GrantMingus

Jan-17-13 8:33 PM

The perfect solution to this:

Do nothing.

Unbelievable to me that that seems like such an odd ball idea. Look, what happened in Sandy Hook and all the other shootings is terrible. Using any of it for political capital on EITHER side is stupid. We need to treat this for what it is, a statistical anomaly. After Sandy Hook, President Obama asked if you could honestly tell your kids that they're safe tonight. The answer for 99.9% of people was yes, they could. We don't need armed guards in schools making it even more of a prison environment than it already is. We don't need to take guns away, all arguments supporting gun control are based in absolute nonsense. We don't need to do anything. Incidents like this are an unfortunate part of human nature. Nothing will stop it, but we have to stop pretending as if it's happening in 100 places every single day. Both sides are doing nothing but spreading fear to further an agenda. Both standing on the graves of victims.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 4:05 PM

My only concern here the people getting mowed down by these weapons

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 3:54 PM

No NS. it's people like you whose only worry is their ak47's and sticking the solution on the backs of teachers,custodians and admistaters.

There's not a*****thing funnie about any of this except listen to the NRA whine and cry ,

Their only concern is the gun manufactures and the big bucks.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 3:46 PM

And where did i say that ? jerk.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-17-13 2:36 PM

It's disturbing that you think the deaths of so many children is something to joke about, bug.

You're sick.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 8:41 AM

Of course then there's the gang violence across the country in our big cities.

Where instead of going to school the kids spend the day in drive by shootings.

The kids get bigger guns and in return the police get bigger guns.

Where does it end ??

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 8:38 AM

Look there guy Miss Jones the english teacher,

She's packing a 357 mag, under her jacket.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 8:29 AM

Know how do we cover :malls,movie theathers,college campuses, sporting events or maybe the guy who decides to wait until classes are out to open up ?

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ladybug

Jan-17-13 8:23 AM

I never thought there'd be the day you had to strip down to your socks to board a plane,Empty your pockets to enter a fed or state bldg,

Now armed guards at the schools. Guess all this gun mania is keeping things under control.

Security should be left to the professionals.Not the teacher or custodian.

Unless the district is willing to cover attorneys fees or liabilty suits stemming from a screw up.

Schools are short on money now ,but the gun boys wants armed guards in every school.

Ok let them pay for it !!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-17-13 6:49 AM

The only good thing for Miss Soto is she earned the Official Christian Free Ticket to Heaven.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-17-13 6:41 AM

Victoria Soto, the teacher who put her body between the gunman and her students, could have stopped this man right then before ANY kids died. She had the courage, unfortunately this hero didn't have the equipment.

My way, the innocent have a chance at survival. Your way, they are a maggot retirement home.

How very compassionate of you.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-17-13 6:37 AM

"An armed guard would have not likely been able to completely prevent the Sandy Hook tragedy. "

So what? They would have stopped it at sometime, most likely before the body count got to 27.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sassy46

Jan-16-13 7:52 PM

Bottom line....An armed guard in a school building is not going to stop someone who has their mind set on going in to do harm. In my opinion, the only thing a security guard or police officer in a school building is going to do is ease the fear of most children and make parents feel a bit more safe about sending their children. An armed guard would have not likely been able to completely prevent the Sandy Hook tragedy.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Phoenix

Jan-16-13 4:45 PM

Do you believe we should have an armed guard in every building, every open area? There was an armed guard at Columbine, he was unsuccessful in stopping the carnage. Should we have one in every classroom? Wouldn't it be smarter to limit magazine clip size, so mass shooters would have to reload more often and therefore be easier to subdue?

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-16-13 4:37 PM

It's also wide open. It is not an enclosed building. It is a very different scenario.

Are you trying to tell me that this jihadi wouldn't have been stopped sooner if the soldiers had their weapons?

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Phoenix

Jan-16-13 4:26 PM

"Soldiers are not allowed to carry weapons while on base at Fort Hood." True, but Fort Hood does have Base Civilian Police Force, which includes a Swat Team, definitely not a gun free zone.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

notSocialist

Jan-16-13 3:54 PM

"And about them loving having grouped unarmed victims.. look at the shootings on the military bases (Ft Hood). Kinda blows that theory out of the water doesn't it. "

No, it doesn't. Soldiers are not allowed to carry their weapons while on base at Fort Hood.

"B.My children are not fearful of police. What I don't want them to be fearful of is going to school."

If they're not fearful of police, why would they be fearful seeing a police officer at school to protect them? This doesn't make sense.

"A.I know for a fact that not all Sandy Hook parents want that. "

Maybe not every single one, but most do. Don't twist the facts to make your point, sunshine. You are famous for that.

"Fact is, there are idiots who will do this regardless. No matter if there are guards, no matter if there are teachers with guns."

Wrong.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 42 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web