It is impossible for the police to be at the scene of every crime while it is happening.
Occasionally a criminal will linger, Law enforcement will conduct a sting or they simply happen upon an assault in progress but most of the time they are not there WHILE it is happening! It lacks reason to expect the police to protect everyone at every moment.
You know who is always at the scene of an assault… THE VICTIM!
We know that anyone can be a victim so if we, the potential victim, used some of the tools that law enforcement uses to defend we would essentially have a protector on the scene when any attempted assaulted occurs! That protector would be US… aided by that tool… a firearm!
The dem and the repubs are the same in the end you taxes go up
I see they agree enforcing existing laws will “help.” Who told law enforcement not to enforce existing gun laws? If no one did and police are enforcing existing gun laws then there is nothing the U.S. Hospice, nee congress, can do to stop it with laws. Its all smoke and mirrors, a sham.
What is so hard for lawmakers to understand? Criminals DO NOT obey the law, no matter how many laws there are or what they say. The only people that obey the laws are law abiding citzens. More gun laws or stricter ones are only goin to affect those of us that follow the law. Hence weaken us little by little of our ability to defend ourselves from the thugs that prey on us. More gun laws WILL NOT solve the problem.
If one were really serious about solving the problem, instead of imposing their anti-gun idiological beliefs on the rest of us, they would take a serious look, and listen, to gangster rap music and many video games. That would be where to start. That is what is contributing to our youth growing up numb to real human life. That would have far more affect than more laws written for the criminals to ignore.
HR2640 by C. McCarthy, signed in 2008 was big deal in strengthening NICS background check for “Mental Health” issues. One of those “midnight” votes. Did that stop anything? Maybe. Remember the Newtown shooter tried to buy his own weapon and was turned down. Doesn’t prove it always works nor does it address “unintended consequences”.
I am in total agreement with you on the compromise definition. As to “closing the loophole” or a “large clip ban” (ugh makes me sick just to write those words), good luck with enforcing that.
Article on “black market” guns in US and around the world.
http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian
This is republicans caving to our sovereignty as a nation to the tyrant in chief, and his henchmen and women…. AKA Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder…to the UN and a world court. If they do this, and the republicans DO this in he form of ‘compromise’, then civil war will be upon us and may God help us all. We are a half a breath away from our complete and total destruction as a sovereign nation, and the UN, world courts, and Agenda 21 will be here to fill in bloody spaces.
I have to agree with Mr. Sharrow. Do something to put an end to the gangster (c)rap “music” and the shoot-em-up video games for a start. More laws, stricter laws are NOT the answer. They’re playing the games and listening to the “music” that’s telling them that it’s OK to shoot someone for whatever reason. If you kill them – oh well – you can just start the scene over and like magic they’ll be back to life again – just like on your computer!! I was having a verbal disagreement with someone a while back. He said to me, “What you gonna do- pull out your gun and shoot me?” I wanted to ask him – Is that your answer to everything? If someone doesn’t agree with you – shoot them. I’m sorry but I believe that disagreements have other ways of being handled than just eliminating the opposition.
When the only tool available is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. The Congress is an ineffective, incompetent pack of self interested turds. The “fiscal cliff” is the result of years of this incompetence and more recently the result of there inability to address the problems. If anyone thinks a few laws are going to solve this, think again. When the mental defectives were “mainstreamed” all those years ago, the problem started. When they started getting elected to Congress we were screwed.
It did not work with prohibition. Not only did crime get worse, but it became organized. Since liquor was no longer legally available, the public turned to gangsters who invented the bootlegging industry. It is an old bumper sticker philosophy but it is very true: “Guns don’t kill people, people do.“ The person that holds the gun, whether in self-defense or with malicious intent, makes the conscious decision to shoot.
Not the inanimate gun.
In Illinois you have to apply for a FOID card to purchase bullets. If you do not pass the back ground check the applicant is denied. It is only good for so long. Once it has expired you have to go through the process again.
Active-Shooter Situations:
Arming School Personnel?
James J. Scanlon – NASTA
Law Enforcement Professionals:
The discussion concerning active shooter situations continues and we need to keep it productive and on-topic. Like many of you, I have been engaged in discussions surrounding the evil and horrific events at Sandy Hook. Some of that discussion involves the controversial option of arming teachers and other qualified concealed-carry permit holders. Since I have been involved in the on-going and evolving conversation, I felt a need to further explain my stance on the subject. Some public figures and media outlets have attempted to hijack the narrative on the subject and offer nonsensical solutions to a problem that requires immediate common sense solutions. Those of us in the law enforcement community must take control of the “narrative” and reinforce the real issues and viable options associated with this issue. Our kids are being murdered in elementary schools! We have no choice but to be heard.
Law enforcement professionals have done a pretty good job over the past 14 years in training and preparing for the response to an active shooter situation. As a former police officer and co-owner of North American SWAT Training Association, I have been directly involved in this training and preparation for thousands of officers, medics and educators throughout the United States since 1999. In many cases, responding officers and educators have “limited” the number of casualties. This comprehensive approach to training and preparation must continue and be improved upon.
Historically, a homicidal / suicidal active shooter stops killing innocent people only when he/she is confronted by a responsible person carrying a gun. I have researched every active shooter situation dating back to Whitman’s Texas Tower Incident back in 1966 and this fact appears to hold true in most all situations. Therefore, we must cause this confrontation to take place within seconds of when an active shooter starts his/her rampage. The only way to assure this immediate confrontation is to have a responsible and armed person at scene when this situation begins. Many folks – some well-intentioned – are focusing on gun control and mental health issues as they may apply to solving the active shooter issue. I’m all for attempting to identify, disarm and institutionalize all future active shooters. Unfortunately, we all realize that this solution has not worked in the past and is not likely to work in the future. For better or worse, our society will not normally lock away a “potentially” dangerous person until they commit a horrendous act. As law enforcement professionals, we need to provide the public with “an effective controlled response” to the worst issue facing us as a society. Our kids are being murdered in their elementary schools! We have a mandate to keep the narrative focused on solutions that are relevant and will actually solve the problem.
Like you, I would like to hand-pick those individuals who will be chosen for this assignment. I would select an experienced, tactically trained, on-duty police officer. I would have them in every school in the United States (Pre-school – College). We have police officers in many of our high schools and middle schools. Very few schools districts place police officers in their pre-schools and elementary schools. I’m not convinced that we have enough sworn personnel or resources to accomplish that task. If this isn’t possible, we must identify additional options. We have no choice – our kids are being murdered in their elementary schools!
Another option: Recruit off-duty and retired police officers to fill the enormous need (paid and/or volunteer). How many active and retired officers, former military personnel and other qualified gun owners already volunteer in schools attended by their kids, grandkids, nieces and nephews? I would gladly volunteer for the assignment. As in any system that we implement, a serious selection, training and policy procedure process would be required.
Another option: If the first two options can’t be accomplished, it doesn’t diminish our mandate to save our children. Arming responsible teachers, who are proficient in the use of firearms, must be considered. It has worked successfully in some schools districts throughout Texas, Utah and other states. The Harrold School District in Texas has an excellent plan which includes all of the selection, training and policy / procedures that make it a workable program. Law enforcement would need to assist educators in establishing a safe and workable plan.
Given our experience training educators in our NASTA QUAD – Response to Active Shooter Programs since 1999, we know that there are many responsible, qualified and capable teachers who could fill a valuable void when and if they are needed. Our NASTA QUAD Training Program for Educators would include the following.
• A serious selection process which involves law enforcement and school district administrators
• Basic state concealed-carry permit holder training and certification
• Advanced concealed-carry / QUAD Training specific to the role of the educator and the school environment.
• Specification of what type of weapon, ammunition and holster to be carried.
• Policy / procedure concerning how the weapon will be carried, when it will and when it will not be displayed and/or deployed.
This program would involve classroom, range and scenario training.
Like most officers, I want to be there when an active shooter situation erupts. If I can’t be there, I want a fellow officer to confront the shooter. If we can’t be there in the first 30-90 seconds, I want someone else armed and prepared to end the situation. When the lives of our children are at stake, we can’t afford to take any solution “off the table”.
James J. Scanlon
General Partner
North American SWAT Training Association (NASTA)
http://www.nasta.ws
nasta@netwalk.com
614-419-4890
James,
A very good commentary! I think this is a good outline from which legislation should be crafted.
“In Illinois you have to apply for a FOID card to purchase bullets. If you do not pass the back ground check the applicant is denied. It is only good for so long. Once it has expired you have to go through the process again.”
I wonder if the criminal applies for the card and purchases ammunition this way or if he buys from the underground? Again a law that is only followed by “the law abiding”. At some point there are no more “Law Abiding”
Incredible! Could the Republican Leaders please just try to hear what their constituents are saying… “We don’t blame the high capacity magazines for the tragedies in this country committed by the mentally ill and criminally insane!” So, please don’t pass legislation restricting any weapons or magazines from your constituents. We already have laws banning guns from felons and the diagnosed (potentially dangerous) mentally ill. If we could enforce those laws to prevent tragedies, don’t you think that we would? We couldn’t enforce taking any weapons or magazines from people unless we expanded search and seizure laws to peoples homes to an extent that no one would want.
Sorry, I have had enough. I will not give any more. They will make me a criminal with their bans, but I must protect my rights and my home. I will not be disarmed under any circumstance. I saw what they did in New Orleans with Katrina. A badge does not make it right, no amount of might makes it right. This is illegal to begin with.
I hear people talking about civil war, and these people are not gun owners. they are buying though.
Rrepublicans might fold ! really. Big surprise there, the conservatives across the nation have no representation what-so-ever
The day after the Conn. school shooting the “REPUBLICAN PARTY” CANCELLED THEIR WEEKLY RADIO ADDRESS ! the spineless republicans folded on that day when they (boehner?) did that !
I get so disgusted with the republican party they have no moral compass.
The email format for government email servers is not correct in the emails shown. I suspect this image is not really from government workers.
The email address have been redacted to protect the sources.
Congress should ban high capacity gas tanks that hold more than 60 miles of fuel. Anything larger than that could allow someone running from the police to be able to drive too far away without refueling.
A good start would be to have term limits for Congress. Dianne Feinstein introduced the first “Assault Weapons Ban” in 1994… 18 years ago. It didn’t make any difference and it won’t make any difference now. So the real question is, why is she, and several others, making a career out of Congress? A President can’t spend more than 8 years in his Office, why should Senators spend a lifetime in their’s?
If any new law is passed that involves anything other than background checks or mental health records, I will never again vote for a single Republican.
I live in a town with no police force, I am entitled to the best available tools to protect my family with, the same tools the hypocrites in Congress use daily for their own protection. This includes “high capacity” magazines, just who is a Senator from across the country to decide that my family is only worth a limited amount of protection from a gang of home invaders?
Republicans take note, remember what happened to the Dems iafter 1994…
To Mr. Scanion:
You make the most valid, common sense, and logical point I have seen in many, many posts over many forums. Great work and I hope (and pray) that our lawmakers see the sense in this prior to destroying the country.
I wouldn’t post a sign stating that my home is a “gun free” zone in front of my own house because that would invite criminals in. Why should we have such signs at a public place, such a public school, to invite criminals in? We should have armed guards or school staff to deter criminals from attacking children.