Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Time to take action and protect our children’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Feb. 3 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Darrell, one question...

Who is gonna pay for it?

We are already dead last in per-pupil spending. Many of our schools don't even have AC. And you want to spend more?

Are you prepared to raise taxes? If you are then fine. If you are not, then your letter means nothing.

Nan BW
ELder, CO

We could lay-off high paid school administrators and replace them with retired people who have background appropriate for protecting our students. We could insist that school staff use resources more wisely and cut spending in that area. An extensive study on schools and success does not show that the schools with the most money to spend do the best. It is more a case of the money spent on education being used wisely for success to result.

I've taught school in enough settings to know that the waste is amazing. To keep students busy provide them with expensive equipment, materials and just plain nonsense is the philosophy all too much. That all adds up.

I think there are school staff members in virtually every school who would be willing to learn firearm use and be prepared to shoot when needed.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

How about we just do away with public schools and replace them with free public education using the internet. The cost would probably be less and the problems of physical buildings, transportation, food preparation, class size, teachers pay and protection security would go away.

Parents could choose the style, philosophy, source, even the teacher. Or even make a blanket choice of Federal general, State general, Mormon or what ever.

Students could work individually in their own homes or join with the neighbor’s kids for some or all of the classes. The interface would be interactive so that the participation of the student is recorded and questions allowed.

The teachers would be well paid experts under constant surveillance and with a staff of assistants. The availability of teaching aids unlimited and up to date.

Books, available from the internet in many forms including video, audio, and even text.

etc. etc. etc.

Tulip
West Jordan, UT

@real maverick-
Good question. Besides all the waste mentioned by previous posts, I know Utah politicians would love to tap into our natural resources. That could bring billions to education and other state programs. Raising taxes always seems to be the first reaction when clearly there are other alternatives. We really need to think outside the box and kudos to our state legislators who are trying to do just that!

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

Darrell, what about shopping malls and movie theaters? What about churches, mosques and synagogues? Are we going to arm every entrance to every public place in America? Before we do that let's try, at least try to prevent. As Americans, we cut corners. Soon we'll have teachers and rent a cops armed that are less qualified than the students. It stands to reason we should first do the ounce of prevention bit before making wholesale changes to our society. Shouldn't we make it difficult for the terrorists of all ilks to acquire rather than cower in our homes waiting for them to strike. Let's do common sense prevention before we overreact.

one old man
Ogden, UT

This is a problem that has taken over 200 years to develop. Solving it will require an enormous amount of wisdom and compromise.

Letters like this one, and comments that do nothing but vomit repetitious nonsense from both sides will do nothing toward finding that solution.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

Protecting our children doesn't have to cost a lot of money. One district in (I believe Oklahoma) is going to be arming volunteer employees who are already working in the schools. They will be provided with training. In Utah many teachers already carry a gun.

Yes the presidents children do need and do deserve armed protection. But no the presidents children are not more important than the rest of Americas children. Our children deserve the best possible protection too. Notice the president's children's school is not protected with a gun free zone? Why? Such a zone would be ignored by criminals, only good people would adhere to the law and

The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

I've never seen a press release issued bragging about gun free zones. I am pretty sure that our politicians allow concealed carry in our schools in Utah. I have never been in a bank where I have seen an armed guard. Neither of the credit unions I go to have armed guards. The letter writer is just making things up.

The funny thing is, the gun show, cross roads of the west, does not allow concealed carry or loaded weapons at their shows. They don't trust gun toting people. The people selling these guns don't trust the people buying those guns.

William Gronberg
Payson, UT

Here is the last paragraph from Mr. Paskett's letter:

"This is the time to take decisive action in protecting our most precious asset: our children."

But for many citizens, do NOT legislate any new limits on the major and most efficient tool of choice that has been designed and engineered to crush holes through living flesh.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "But for many citizens, do NOT legislate any new limits on the major and most efficient tool of choice that has been designed and engineered to crush holes through living flesh."

Only the citizens that have -- unlike liberals -- retained the power of logical thought.

Unfortunately.

"Legislative limits" [nice try at camouflaging the term "gun-control laws," btw], will only affect those who are disposed to comply with those "legislative limits."

Belief in the discredited liberal dogma that those violating current "legislative limits" and wreaking violence against our children, might somehow be deterred by brave, new "legislative limits," when they have clearly demonstrated a disposition not to comply with those "legislative limits" already in-place is closely akin to belief in unicorns.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

Or better yet --

Let's just put our kids up in schools with big concrete walls, gates, locks and barricades ---
so all the gun toting 2nd amendment general public can run about restriction free,
instead of and at the expense of our children's freedom.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

procuradorfiscal, it seems like you are having a rough time with the term "legislative limits". The rest of us understand that clearly this means gun control laws.

Why is it that for some people it seems that every argument boils down to "liberals"?

Look, there are plenty of conservatives that have supported legislative limits on guns. For example Ronald Reagan and the NRA.

Sorry don't mean to bother you in your bubble. Go on with your rant.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: ". . . there are plenty of conservatives that have supported legislative limits on guns . . . . Go on with your rant."

Thanks, I will.

No true conservative supports liberal "legislative limits" on essential American freedoms, including those guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Anyone suggesting that the right to keep and bear those arms that would be useful to a well-regulated militia is advocating surrender of the right upon which all the others are based. Once liberals feel they can place "legislative limits," at their unfettered whim, on whatever they want, whenever they want -- American freedom is dead.

It's only that nagging thought in the back of their tiny, closed minds -- that real people may have, not only the inclination, but the actual power to choose organized insurrection, over forced compliance with their brave new freedom-sapping "legislative limits" -- that keeps liberals and liberal regimes in check.

William Gronberg
Payson, UT

Only the citizens that have -- unlike liberals -- retained the power of logical thought.

Wow, a portion of the citizens of the Republic have a monopoly on logic. If you start with a false premise then the finest logic will very often lead you to a false conclusion.

Words words: Is it this, that or perhaps something else?
Is it “legislative limits” or “gun control”? Is it jail or security center? Taxes or theft? Family Home Evening or a family fight that starts and ends with prayer? Was it the draft or citizen duty? Etc, etc..

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

"that real people may have, not only the inclination, but the actual power to choose organized insurrection"

Ha, no nagging thought in the back of my little closed mind at all. I'm very confident that any citizen that chooses organized insurrection needs to be rounded up and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And thank goodness the country I love, the United States of America has the ability and the will to do this. Thank goodness my country that I love will be kept safe from those that think they are above the law, from those that would overthrow her.

airnaut
Everett, 00

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

It's only that nagging thought in the back of their tiny, closed minds -- that real people may have, not only the inclination, but the actual power to choose organized insurrection, over forced compliance with their brave new freedom-sapping "legislative limits" -- that keeps liberals and liberal regimes in check.

8:44 p.m. Feb. 4, 2013

===========

When you and your tiny, closed minds loose the right to VOTE,
I'll support your armed insurrection.

Meanwhile - It's my sworn Constittional duty:

per Article 2, section § 332.
Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, ...
or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State or Territory by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

..to keep guys like you in check.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

airnaut, well said.

The thing with some people today is that they think they are following in the footsteps of the great minds that fought the British Empire and founded our government. They think they actually have something in common with these people. The thing they don't understand is that those that fought against the British Empire had very legitimate complaints, not the least being taxation without representation.

These great thinkers were not fighting just because they did not get their way and were pouting. For the modern tea partiers to think they have anything in common with the founders of this country is an insult to the founders legacy.

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

One old Man. The truth is sir that the right does not want to find any solutioo that does not result in more guns being sold. Until that changes there will be no wise solution found.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments