Comments about ‘Critics say NRA solution to school shootings expensive, unproductive’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Dec. 21 2012 2:05 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
one old man
Ogden, UT

Most frightening of all, the NRA is calling for "armed VOLUNTEERS" to protect our schools.

I can see it now. A flock of volunteer wannabe Rambo militiamen parading past the Kindergarten kids with their weaponry on display for all to see.

Does NRA insanity know no bounds?

Obviously not.

Tremonton, UT

Makes perfect sense to me! LaPierre's logic is compelling.

We spend untold millions of dollars on all kinds of armed security for money, for courts, for sporting events. And we spend untold millions on all kinds of education programs, buildings, fancy athletic stadiums. For teachers, teachers assistants, tutors, administrators, and countless employees at schools.

And yet, the thought of an armed police officer at elementary or secondary schools is "too costly" and "offensive?"

No, it's not. Makes perfect sense to me. I think it's a good idea... If the local school board supports it....not to be mandated by the feds.

It's also perfectly predictible that Libs would go ape-crazy over this. Which in my mind, helps validate that it's a good approach.

Salt Lake City, UT

My home county in Maryland had a sheriffs' deputy at each high school. I'm okay with something like that. However... blaming virtual guns (in video games and movies) while ignoring real guns, and not suggesting a single piece of regulation at all that could possibly, no matter how small, have any sort of role in helping prevent shootings (mass school shootings or other ones), shows that the NRA has no interest in doing anything other than lobbying on behalf of not gun owners, but gun manufacturers.

Bountiful, UT

I agree the NRA solution is expensive (but effective). A much less expensive solution and even more effective would be to certify willing teachers to carry concealed guns (pay them an extra $350 per year). This way for less than the cost of a policeman, you can have several certified willing teachers each capable of doing the same thing.

I am going to contact my representative and see if he is willing to sponsor a bill to have this implimented in Utah.


cjb; I like it.

Bountiful, UT

What about parks? What about ice skating rinks? What about libraries? Video arcades? Every fast food place in existence (ie, where kids hang out, ala McDonalds Play Land)?

I think we have the answer to the unemployment problem, and the least likely economic think tank suggested it.

cjb: I think you're onto something, but hopefully those teachers get better training handling firearms than is required for the Utah State conceal carry weapons permit. And grade school students will definitely need training to *not* spontaneously hug teachers, which could be fatal.

The real solution to all this is to have everyone wear military grade body armor all the time, which won't infringe on the 2nd Amendment, but will be brutal for the rite of passage for teenage boys who go to the pool in summer to learn more about girls.

salt lake city, UT

"Stupid is as stupid does" F. Gump. Is there a more appropiate response to the NRA's solutions?

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

A parent in Newtown (though not from one of the families of the victims) said he didn't want children to go to school in "fortresses."

I couldn't agree more.

Look around at the faces of young kids in your family, neighborhood, in stores, parks, etc. The great majority of those faces are filled (at least much of the time) with wonder and delight about life.

Are we now going to present some "deadly dangerous, shoot-to-kill" version of life to them and destroy their embracintg-of-life spirits completely? To me, that would kill them just about as much as if their physical bodies were killed.

We must find a better solution to this horrendous problem in our country. And it must be something life-affirming--not just physical life, but spiritual life.

As Einstein said (I have to paraphrase it here), we can't solve a problem using the very thing that created that problem.

DN Subscriber 2

"Arming our schools, arming our teachers, is that really the society we want to live in?"

No, Ms Martindale, that is NOT the society we want to live in. But, in the real world, where there are actually evil people, and crazy people, we do not have the option of choosing the society we live in. We must find practical, cost effective ways of minimizing real threats against our schools and children.

Armed security is the ONLY option presented so far that actually would have stopped the Connecticut killer. Or, stands a chance of stopping a homicidal maniac entering another school in the future.

We can debate the cost-effectiveness of full time certified cops vs. volunteer teachers with concealed carry permits at no cost. Teachers have a vested self interest in protecting themselves, and their classes, so this is not some meaningless job like debate coach, but a big responsibility.

One key part is that the exact number and location of security should never be revealed. Keep the bad guys guessing- just like "who is the air marshal on a flight?"

"A bad guy with a gun IS only stopped by a good guy with a gun."

Centerville, UT

Maybe we could make a law that says you can only have 10 rounds our less in you gun at one time. That way when someone starts blasting away at kids we can count the number of bullets in his gun to determine if he has a blatant disrespect for the law. Hey - Wiki-Answers says that there are about 100,000 deaths per year that are related to Alcohol. That's way more than gun related death. Lets ban alcohol to get the biggest bang for our new law buck!


The NRA can pick up the tab

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

I saw in another article on the site that many are tired of the old adage that "Guns don't kill, people do." Well that is the honest truth. A gun can not pull the trigger itself. It can't not load its own chambers until someone pulls the trigger. Many school districts across the country have already began having security guards in their schools to prevent exactly what happened in Conneticut. However, an AR-15 is a weapon gear to kill regardless where the bullet hits. It is a very unique weapon in that since. Howeve, the best military assualt weapon is the Russian made AK-47 which can fire even an AR-15 bullet.

I don't disagree that maybe high capacity clips aren't necessary or that maybe an assualt weapon could be banned. A few years ago in a bank robbery the robbers had a better arsenal than their law enforcement counterparts. Therefore, several officers were killed or wounded. I don't disagree that getting a gun maybe should be harder to get than a glass of beer but when you start infringing on the Constitution then all hands are off.

Don't disarm the public.

Elk River, MN

This doesn't seem like a well thought out response from the NRA. There's a much better one. Try something like this. "Look, last week, we learned that teachers are brave and that they love their students. Encourage teachers to take concealed carry classes and modify the law to allow them to protect themselves while at work. Any coward attempting to prey upon an unarmed school would then know there's a very good chance those teachers are going to be armed - and he's not going there. And the teachers love those kids. They're not going to run away." This is a much simpler and less costly solution.

I lived in Israel for several years. Every class had an armed teacher with a semi-automatic rifle always nearby. I don't think we should do that. But, it demonstrated that: teachers were good at keeping kids safe and that having a gun nearby didn't cause harm.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Here's the problem with the concealed weapon for teachers. All you have to do is get a child a little too unruly and starts to threaten the teacher. The teacher grabs their weapon and fires killing the child. Who is liable? The school district and the state would become liable in this circumstance. Too much pressure on the teacher. A viability but one that can backfire.

Sure one old man wants to take away everyone's weapon. His solution is the same as all liberals. Take the weapons away and then and only then the criminals have the weapons. Just as when alcohol was banned in the United States you have bootleggers who made it rich, just look at the Kennedy's. That is what you will have if you ban certain weapons.

Though this is a costly alternative it is more viable than banning any weapons. Listen to the liberals and we will as a public will be disarmed. We'll then be at the mercy of a socialist government which is where we are headed if the liberals stay in power.

Salt Lake City, UT

Bill, the difference between gun and alcohol bans should be obvious. (People can't make guns in their bathtubs.

The curious thing is, in your first post you said that maybe assault weapons could be banned, but then in your next you say, bootlegging "is what you will have if you ban certain weapons."

You argue against yourself. Oh well.

Some of you people seem to think that these killers would not be willing to go into an area if they think there would be people with guns there. Even if this is true, they could just go to other places that probably won't have armed people. Such as church or the like. (No, not many people actually carry.)

But what makes you think these killers are worried that somebody might shoot at them? Most of them seem to wear body armor, like they are planning on getting shot at. The killer who shot Gabby Giffords, killed 6 people, and injured 12 others, in Tucson, Arizona (which I assume has lenient carry laws) didn't seem too worried about people shooting at him. He might have assumed a federal judge and a congresswoman would have security guards.

Ivins, UT

From One Ol Man to another. Silly comments that stretch an idea to the absurd is not helpful.
There are, in most cases, teachers who would stand up to an armed intrudere in most schools if they had the training and the equipment to do so, even at the risk of losing out in a gun battle to save a student or a classrtoom full from mayhem. Pay them extra also.

Make it legal, State by State, for the districts to identify such people and interview them to see if they can qualify for Conceal Carry. Then, under the direction of local law enforcement, get them trained and armed appropriately. This training is out there and waiting to be had. I suggest that at least two of these teachers be on hand at all times while students are present, even if there is a police presence. Students, of course, would not know who was armed among the faculty but would understand that there was protection in the classrooms available if called upon in a sudden emergency. Name a better way folks in our American Liberal Society to take care of this problem. Please, No feel good stuff however.


This is pure insanity. These people (NRA) are basically advocating turning us into a police state so that a few people can own assault weapons and huge ammo caches.
I don't have anything against somebody that wants to go hunting, but you don't need an M16 to hunt.
Another thing is that with the passage of time.. things just change. Just as President Obama pointed out that we have fewer horses and bayonets these days, we also have less need, in the interest of protection) for an armed populace...we certainly don't need your average J. Doe in possession of military weaponry. What we need is not more guns...what we need is a change in the public behavior.
At this time of year we should be kind of remembering somebody who taught that we should love our neighbor...not shoot him.

Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

The comments made by Wayne LaPierre are more two-fold: (1) to remove the NRA from further criticism as a gun lobby promoting the expansion of gun sales through an advertising program based on the paranoid fear of some "bad guy" coming through your windows at home, and (2) suggesting an absurd plan to have armed security people (either minimum wage or volunteers) at schools until fiscal conservatives determine that it costs too much and is more a problem than a real solution.

This latter suggestion should increase gun sales significantly, tying in nicely with the NRA's primary purpose of serving it's industry.


Not a good idea, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg is just as bad. When asked on TV, he said that we need to get rid of assault weapons. That guns that you have to pull the trigger each shot were OK, but those that you pulled the trigger once for multiple shots had to go. He was informed by the interviewer that he was talking about automatic weapons that were against the law. The hand guns and assault rifles that the public used were semi automatic, and like most hunting guns sold today, you had to pull the trigger multiple times. He was upset over being corrected, and attacked hunters.

Putting officers in each school, is a waste of time, and those like Bloomberg, that don't understand guns need to become informed. Columbine happened during the last assault weapon ban. Lets find out why people are giving up, and feel a need to take others with them.

Pragmatic One
Mesa, AZ

Everyone is focusing on the gun. The gun, on a table in a locked room is harmless. Picked up by a well trained individual it becomes a tool. Picked up by a sadistic criminal or mentally ill person it becomes a killing machine.

We need two things here. 1-There is no need for the kind of rifle that was used in Newtown to be sold to the Public. It is a tool for the Military and Law Enforcement and should be used by those groups exclusively. 2-We need to seriously look at our background screening here. Selling guns to a family with KNOWN mental disorders in the home. Allowing that parent to take a mentally ill child target shooting to perfect his abilities? Dr's, Educators, anyone with knowledge should have been raising alarm bells long ago. If a family wants to increase the abilities of a mentally ill child then enroll them in an art class.

My opinion is that if a more comprehensive screening process had been in effect then this entire nightmare could have been avoided. Guns don't kill, people do, and people failed in this situation.

to comment

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