'A well regulated media, being necessary to the security of a failed administration, the right to bear endless gun stories shall not be infringed.'

the recent stampede to buy every assault rifle in sight was caused by the media alone. Take some responsibility Bill.

This is sad that our children will need to be watched as if they were terrorists. We've put this on ourselves. Blame is everywhere... parents, bullying, lack of money and education, stupid people procreating, etc...

Very unfortunate.... :(

@william,

2150 of those are NOT homicides, the majority are suicides with maybe 1000 or 2000 being accidents. The only thing threatning domestic tranquility is the repeat criminals who get laughable sentences.

I'm glad to see this protection for the children, although I'm also sad to see that it has become necessary.

More needs to be done however. Security doors for the classrooms, safe rooms and other measures.

These are police carrying the rifles, not scholastic personnel.

AG99, counselors cannot stop an assault by getting a shooter to get in touch with his feelings or think from his special place of peace.

AG99

Guns instead of school counselors.

Remember your counselor from high school?....nuff said.....

This is what the lack of reasonable gun legislation in this country has brought us to

There are literally thousands of laws on the books already, and they have helped how? This is no more then Knee jerk policy, backed by media induced hysteria.

That school security guards should even need them in the first place is a national disgrace.

THAT young lady is a fact.

That's right. Someone standing over me with a high powered assault weapon has always made me feel safer. It should make some poor children feel just dandy.

For you gun nuts,...That's sarcasm.

Scooter: Yes, there are lots of gun laws on the books and they haven't helped much. That should tell us we don't have the right laws. We resist background checks and waiting periods for all gun purchases, mandatory safety training, gun registration so we can find out where the guns are coming from and force people to be accountable for them, and heaven forbid we should require mental evaluations before allowing just anyone to buy them.

But no, we can't possibly have such draconian measures put in place here in America, the land of the holy Second Amendment. We'd rather arm our school guards to the teeth than do that.

(And okay, you may have a point about the counselors, but maybe they're better now?)

To further improve our children's security is to have them all wear the same outfits so the can easily identified in the case of an armed attack, escort them between classes with armed guards and put a barbed wire fence around the campus. Of course all in the name of enhanced security.

Then as a side benefit we will not need to waste time teaching them about concentration camps because they will be experiencing them first hand.

(And okay, you may have a point about the counselors, but maybe they're better now?)

Not around here, they went the way of the real "teachers" and the dodo bird. Course they were pretty much inept and useless to begin with.

But no, we can't possibly have such draconian measures put in place here in America, the land of the holy Second Amendment

For good reason.

We'd rather arm our school guards to the teeth than do that.

Which is indeed reactionary at best. But it falls into the media induced hysteria, and as long as they keep on trying to push this agenda, common sense dictates that it will ONLY get worse.

AG99,

"That school security guards should even need them in the first place is a national disgrace."

Yes, and more than that, our gun violence is an international disgrace as well. I listen to BBC World News, and they have a lot of stories about gun violence in the U.S. and attempts to regulate guns in the United States. I'm sure other foreign news media also cover it. So the whole world is watching our national disgrace.

The NRA Directors must be having a wet dream now!

welcome back to the wild, wild west, where everyone is packing !!!!

Stupid, astoundingly stupid.

This overtly armed presence will lead to a higher dropout rate.

So the whole world is watching our national disgrace.

And should some get the idea that we are all armed psychopaths perhaps it will make them re-think a few things, that would be a help, not a hindrance. Yet again it falls on media induced hysteria. NOT real life.

@Don,

Pease define what a "gun nut" is. I have no idea, seriously.

RamFla

The NRA Directors must be having a wet dream now!

And of course you overlook, Barrys speech and the mass media part in the FACT that NRA membership and gun sells soar every time they try to spin their agenda. How convenient.... But you keep spewing the lib NRA this, and NRA that, talking points, it will only blow up on you in the end. As i have stated before the more they push the agenda the more common sense dictates that it will only get worse.

How come the schools that had rifle teams never had these issues? I saw one comment that says this isnt the 60's and 70's anymore, you are right. so what has changed? Guns, no. Its a society/psychology issue, not the firearms. Here in the south, we have almost no mass murders, because we shoot them first. The kids are rasied and educated on them from an early age. Do we have gun crime? Yes but there is not way to stop that, no more than kids at an early age trying alcohol. Instead of blaming guns because people (anti gun people) want to take that right away from the gun owners (Constitution clearly states people have the right to own military grade weapons, when it was written, the musket WAS military grade. They knew we would need this right down the road,n and would only be needed when it was needed, ie tyranny. anything legal for the government but not for us is tyranny.) Do I agree with some common sense laws like waiting periods and extensive background checks? Yes. Do I agree with the anti gun people about banning guns, NO. No idea if you guys have noticed this but your Saviour, Obama, is guilty of war crimes. Many women and children have been killed overseas by his drones, and now he wants 20k of them by 2020 in our skies. Im sorry, You can believe this non sense, or you guys can educate yourselfs on firearms, and the fact that an AR15 was not recovered from him, but was left in the shooters vehicle. AR15 is not a military weapon, it is a hunting weapon. The .223 is a hunting round, designed for varmit rifles. 30 round clips are not hi capacity, and the 100 round drums fail constantly. People say gun nuts are uneducated, but education is quite powerful for those of us pro gun, because we do try to show respect to firearms (albeit yes we have our few idiots. everyone does), but to punish millions, because of a few idiots? Do you know how many gun crimes were commited because our government sold guns to the mexican drug cartels? Many, but there is no outcry over that, and that was an illegal transfer of weapons. Instead lets focus on the fact that a mother TRIED to get her son mental help but he would of had to get arrested for it, in order to get help... Common sense right there folks. its the human mind, not the guns.

@Mickey, what about Britian's disgrace to protect its people from the massive increase in violent home invasions after guns were banned? Ban guns save 20 people form mass murder, but condemn 80 more from home invasion... good trade off.

Next up, 50 Caliber machine gun emplacements before each entrance and portable grenade launchers carried by the custodians.

How absolutely ridiculous.

I agree that the media gets a good part of the credit for the current gun hysteria but let us not forget the contributions of the NRA. They have been spreading their anti-government paranoia for years. The reason gun regulations that are already in place haven't had the desired effect is because anyone can simply go over into the next state where the gun control regulations are lax or nonexistent and buy all the guns they want. Where do you think the gangs and criminals get their guns?? Semi-automatic weapons in schools.... I would pull my kid out of there in a heartbeat. Security is one thing but this was clearly the idea of some cowboy wannabes on their school council. It's insane and disgusting and unnecessary.

BTW, how much did they have to increase the school's liability insurance now that they have assault weapons on the grounds?

@Mickey, what about Britian's disgrace to protect its people from the massive increase in violent home invasions after guns were banned? Ban guns save 20 people form mass murder,

Uhhh Ssimmons, the UK had 67 gun homicides last year, so their population is approximately one fifth of ours yet their gun homicides are approximately 1/150th, go figure.

Exactly who are these top school safety experts? What are the requirements for such an occupation? Must one be an NRA member? Where does one apply for such a job? One school has had such a rifle program for two years. How many times, in those two years, has the rifle program prevented a school killing? None? Then why is it used as justification for initiating a second rifle program?

All of this (and much more) in the name of capitalist greedy gun manufacturers and their blind followers. I am ashamed of what is happening in my country. Name another country in the world where young children attend schools that most resemble prisons.

I find it troubling that the police feel the need for these types of weapons to protect schools. I do not buy that they could not have stopped a shooter like the one in CT with a handgun. A round from a 9mm or .40 cal handgun will kill you just as quickly as a round from one of these semi-automatic assault rifles but of course neither one will go through body armor. I also worry about innocent kids getting killed if the police ever use one of these rifles in a school. The rounds from these rifles do have more penetrating power than a hand gun and I worry about "collateral damage" from a round going through something and hitting an innocent kid. As for spending the money on these rifles when they had cut the school counselors, I think that people have a point. I think that a school counselor is just as likely, if not more likely to prevent another tragedy than a police officer armed with an assault rifle in the school. The idea is to give the kids a counselor to talk to that can help them or get them the help they need before it gets to the point where they are showing up at the school armed to the teeth. The issue with these mass shootings, whether in a school or elsewhere, is as much about availability of mental health services as anything else. A good counselor that the kids feel they can talk to is far more important in preventing these tragedies than having armed police in the schools. Also, since the officers will not be carrying these weapons with them, the odds on them stopping a shooter go down considerably. The weapons will be kept either locked in the officers patrol car out in the parking lot or in a gun safe in the school building (presumably in the office). This means that if a shooter did come into the school they would have the opportunity to take out the officer as well as shoot many kids long before the officer could ever get to this rifle. I just do not think that this program sounds like a very good idea at all.

And Canada had less gun homicides than the UK and they have guns, go figure.

These guns will save lives either directly by stopping a shooter or indirectly making a student think out a rampage. A+ to this Sherrif and he paid for it through finger printing fees which is a criminals cost and bonus money.

Here is the example of a good use of an Assualt Rifle for all you whiney pu$$ys out there. You may thank many when you kid is saved later.........

Honestly people they spent $14,000 on the guns. How many counselors do you think that is going to bring back?! Lets think here guys. I like that they bought these. It isn't like they are walking the school halls with them out. So many dramatic people here. The officers simply have these weapons available to them if they become needed. Currently our school security is what lock the doors and hope the bad guys stay out? We need some serious reform regarding our plans to keep kids safe.

It's LA folks. Isn't that the same city where the Hispanic students brazingly took down the American flag and put up the Mexican flag? You're not dealing with ordinary Americans in LA school district. All kinds of gangs in the schools. No reason why security guards should be out-gunned.

It is very sad that our nation has come to this....

The sickest thing is that the NRA says its “crazy people” that are causing the problems with guns, but they are against waiting periods and background searches designed to keep guns out of the hands of mentally handicapped people. The word is spelled …H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E…..

Sam-3519426

Last year Canada had 2.13 gun related deaths per 100,000 people England had only 0.25 per 100,000 and the US had 10.92 gun related deaths per 100,000. You got to stop listening to the NRA lies.

Oh my goodness, here comes the hand-wringing and the anguished, high-pitched keening from the left.

Let those tears flow, liberals...Oh, and welcome to the reality of the world you live in. Notice not a single candy-coated rainbow or unicorn. Imagine that.

First of all, all guns could be considered assault weapons as could a shovel if I hit you in the head with one. The term is ridiculous & it's used to scare/confuse people who don't have any knowledge about guns.

Secondly, an AR-15 (as pictured in this article) is nothing more than a black semi-auto rifle.

The only difference between these two:

1. Black, plastic/metal, detachable magazine fed semi-auto AR-15 rifle

2. Wooden stocked, detachable magazine fed semi-auto hunting rifle

is the way they look. That's it. They both function the same way. They both have the same rate of fire.

I don't think the school police officers need these AR-15s either, but not for the same reason as most of you.

I don't think they need them because the odds of a shooting spree at a school is extremely remote, it is a small fraction of 1%. The same as your odds of getting killed by a gun (all types combined) in the U.S. You have a greater chance of getting struck by lightening. Though the fear mongering media makes people think otherwise.

BTW, Feinstein's draconian gun legislation isn't going to go anywhere. It will get shot down in flames (no pun intended).

My God, are we ever going to grow up?

And by "we" I mean the human species...regardless of country?

I think we've evolved about as far as we're going to.

The biggest gift we could give this planet and all other living things - is to anihilate ourselves. And we seem to be on the fast track to doing just that.

@ AG99 -

Scooter: Yes, there are lots of gun laws on the books and they haven't helped much. That should tell us we don't have the right laws. We resist background checks and waiting periods for all gun purchases, mandatory safety training, gun registration so we can find out where the guns are coming from and force people to be accountable for them, and heaven forbid we should require mental evaluations before allowing just anyone to buy them.

Keep in mind that this story takes place in California. The gun laws in CA are quite different than in most of the rest of the country. 1st the CA DOJ does the background check. CA has a substantial waiting period in effect after you pay for the gun but before you can take possession of it. In CA all gun purchases must go through a background check and waiting period even all gun shows purchases and purchases between private parties. (Yes private parties are required to go through an FFL holder for the sale.) CA has an assault weapon's ban. All assault weapons sold in CA today must be stamped "For Law Enforcement Only" and can not be sold to the public. Preban sales between private parties are OK I believe. They have a 10 round magazine restriction.

So basically CA has all the gun laws you have asked for and still the school district bought aassaultweapons for it's officers so they aren't out gunned. All those nifty restrictions didn't do a damned thing. Just like the ones Biden wwantswon't do a damned thing. Why waste the time messing with these laws on the federal level when they've already proved to be worthless?

the recent stampede to buy every assault rifle in sight was caused by the media alone.

No, it was caused by the hysteria of the anti gun crowd and the announcement of Joe Biden that Obama was willing to use his Executive Order privilege to restrict gun ownership.

Obama never made clear what his agenda and objective was concerning guns and many of the anti gun fools were calling for a complete ban on any gun sales and even confiscating all guns. While on the fact of it that may seem an impossibility and unrealistic, it was immediately followed by the posting of all gun owner's names in a New York newspaper.

Since responsible gun owners who have legally purchased their firearms are registered in this country, confiscating their guns via an Executive Order was not that far fetched based on the past moves of this president and his end runs around Congress.

At this point, there are probably thousands of guns hidden around the homes of heretofore "open" American citizens.

Don

Last year Canada had 2.13 gun related deaths per 100,000 people England had only 0.25 per 100,000 and the US had 10.92 gun related deaths per 100,000. You got to stop listening to the NRA lies.

Stop posting stats that include suicides and accidents. Who cares how a person dies? Would you feel better if people were stabbed to death vs being shot to death? Dead is dead.

Compare homicide rates, compare suicide rates. Ignore method.

In 2010 the homicide rate fell to 1.62 for every 100,000 population in Canada. The UK had a rate of 1.2 and the US was 4.7. Switzerland beat them all with .7 per 100k. Oh, and Mexico with very strict gun laws had a rate of 22.7 per 100k.

El Paso (Texas) had a homicide rate of around .77 in 2010 (Juarez right across the border had 1,600 compared to 5 in El Paso). New York City had a rate of 6.56 murders per 100,000.

Damn school bought all the small pistol primers too.

HEADLINE: "School brings in high-powered assault weapons"

Gosh, what could go worong?

@ screminmimi

Since responsible gun owners who have legally purchased their firearms are registered in this country,

That's not correct. The state I live in doesn't register gun sales & we also don't have waiting periods to buy guns.

In most states the FBI NICS background check is conducted on all buyers of guns through licensed gun dealers but it is not a registry.

Some states have their own background check system because they have chosen not to use NICS. Some states use their state system for handguns & the FBI NICS for rifles (could be the other way around I forget).

I don't know what the states that use their own system/background check do with their info but during the FBI NICS check they do not record the model/serial # of gun & they are required to destroy/delete all of the info collected during the check within 24 hours (see highlighted part below).

The privacy and security of the information in the NICS is of great importance. In October 1998, the Attorney General published regulations on the privacy and security of NICS information, including the proper and official use of this information. Data stored in the NICS is documented federal data and access to that information is restricted to agencies authorized by the FBI. Extensive measures are taken to ensure the security and integrity of the system information and agency use. The NICS is not to be used to establish a federal firearm registry; information about an inquiry resulting in an allowed transfer is destroyed in accordance with NICS regulations. Current destruction of NICS records became effective when a final rule was published by the Department of Justice in The Federal Register, outlining the following changes. Per Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 25.9(b)(1), (2), and (3), the NICS Section must destroy all identifying information on allowed transactions prior to the start of the next NICS operational day. If a potential purchaser is delayed or denied a firearm and successfully appeals the decision, the NICS Section cannot retain a record of the overturned appeal. If the record is not able to be updated, the purchaser continues to be denied or delayed, and if that individual appeals the decision, the documentation must be resubmitted on every subsequent purchase. For this reason, the Voluntary Appeal File (VAF) has been established. This process permits applicants to request that the NICS maintain information about themselves in the VAF to prevent future denials or extended delays of a firearm transfer. (See VAF Section below.)

A .223 semi-automatic rifle is NOT high-powered. A 30.06 hunting rifle is more powerful. If the police want to use these patrol rifles, there is nothing any of you can say about it.

Joe,

You left out the US intentional homicide rate , 4.8.

Canada has about 1 gun for every 3 people, or about 10 million guns. Very few or these are handguns as they are highly restricted. Illegal handguns from the US enable a large portion of the gun murders.

The high murder rate in Mexico is largely due to the drug trade. High demand for illegal drugs in the US ensures high profits for gangs. Gang warfare over this business kills thousands per year. If America legalized drugs, the death rate due to gangs would drop significantly in Mexico as wellas in the US.

I agree Joe; you made my point better than I did. I was saying that you were 43 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the United States than you would in the United Kingdom. Then you come up with statistics that state that you would be 62 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the United States with a gun than in the UK with their strict gun laws. Talk about overkill. Thanks Joe!

To all who routinely bash the media, the media are the only reason we know anything at all about what is happening across the country and around the world! Stop attacking the free press. It may not be perfect and it may not always be unbiased, but it IS essential. It is up to the reader to be intelligent enough to accept, reject, or challenge what is reported. What, pray tell, would take the place of the media you are so quick to criticize?

As for guns saving us from tyranny...it is about time we woke to the fact that we live under the tyranny so many with guns create. We are only as safe as the least stable, proficient, responsible, intelligent gun owner in our vicinity at any given moment.

I love all who reference their second amendment right to bear arms. What about the Declaration of Independence? What about THE RIGHT TO THE PURSUIT OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS? Living in a society that must have armed, and not just lightly armed, but heavily armed and highly trained defense forces so our kids can attend school safely isn't likely what Jefferson had in mind when he wrote of the right to pursue "life" (more than 100,000 murdered in the last ten years by guns, not including other ways of committing the act) "liberty" (how free is a society that depends on armed citizens to keep families from being murdered?) "happiness" (being unable to attend school/go to the mall/movies/political rallies/church, without heavily armed personnel to protect us is NOT a happy OR free situation)!

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are supposedly unalienable rights, well, I for one, believe the unrestricted right to bear military grade arms infringes on my right to live free of the oppression imparted by the power these guns put in the hands of idiots, psychopaths, fools, everyday people who don't respond well to anyone who challenges their ideals and people under emotional duress!

Mental health evaluation, gun registration, training and testing before a license is issued that entitles ownership, are all reasonable efforts and ought not be summarily rejected by those whose paranoia drives them to live in fear of the government. Just because they are fearful, is no reason the rest of society should be put at elevated risk of violent death by high velocity projectiles!

"Gosh, what could go worong?"

They could get so excited about flinging turds at the wall that they could screw up, but people tend to act responsibly in spite of the loons flittering about.

@ Don & you other gun grabbers

According to the FBI Uniform Crime report for 2011:

12,664 murders in the U.S.

Out of the total above 8,583 were murders by firearms, broken down as follows:

6,220 committed by handguns

323 committed by rifles

356 committed by shotguns

1,684 committed by unknown type of firearms

1,694 committed by knives or cutting instruments

1,659 committed by other weapons

728 committed by hands/fists/feet etc..

Out of 315 million people in the U.S. means your odds of getting murdered by a firearm is a small fraction of 1%. The odds are even smaller if you only consider murders committed with rifles.

The extremely small chance, a fraction of 1%, of getting murdered by gun is a risk I'm willing to live with in order to keep my personal freedoms.

Gneisenau: It's true California has very restrictive gun laws, but surrounding states do not. It's no good regulating guns in one area when someone can simply drive across the state line and get a gun in Arizona. These laws will work, if they work, only if they are applied equally across the country.

Oneslackr -

Thank you for correcting me. But most states do have either a public or private law enforcement registry. At any rate, the hysteria of the anti gun crowd has driven the sales of guns to an all time high and has driven otherwise ordinary citizens to hide both their purchases and their ownership of firearms.

The black market for firearms is thriving even more prolifically than the legal sales.

Was raised around guns, went to school where students drove trucks with rifles and shotguns mounted in the windows, and we had an ROTC program.... guns everywhere. Not one single instance of a shooting, ever.

The guns didn't change. The people have. We are looking in the wrong place for a solution.

Misdirection. Smoke and mirrors.

A .223 semi-automatic rifle is NOT high-powered. A 30.06 hunting rifle is more powerful. If the police want to use these patrol rifles, there is nothing any of you can say about it.

OK, yes, a 30.06 is "more powerful." But that's just a typical 'straw-man' argument which is used so often in these discussions about guns. A rocket-propelled grenade is more powerful than a 30.06 and a Cobra Attack Helicopter is more powerful than a rocket-propelled grenade. It's all utterly meaningless distraction.

How about having an HONEST discussion about these things, and stop the dissembling and diversion. Anyone can do a simple search and find the same facts that I did in less than 1-minute. Truth has relevance.

.

[Source for the following: Wikipedia]

The AR-15 is a civilian, semi-automatic version of the military M16. the .223 is a version of the military 5.56×45mm NATO round used in the M16

The 5.56×45mm NATO (official NATO nomenclature 5.56 NATO) is a rifle cartridge developed in the United States and originally chambered in the M16 rifle. Under STANAG 4172, it is a standard cartridge for NATO forces as well as many non-NATO countries.^[2] It is derived from, but not identical to, the .223 Remington cartridge. When the bullet impacts at high velocity and yaws^[3] in tissue, fragmentation creates a rapid transfer of energy which can result in dramatic wounding effects

The .223 Remington is a cartridge with almost the same external dimensions as the 5.56×45mm NATO military cartridge. The name is commonly pronounced either two-two-three or two-twenty-three. It is loaded with a 0.224-inch (5.7 mm) diameter jacketed bullet, with weights ranging from 40 to 90 grains (2.6 to 5.8 g), though the most common loading by far is 55 grains (3.6 g).

While the external case dimensions are very similar, the .223 Remington and 5.56x45mm differ in both maximum pressure and chamber shape. The maximum and mean pressures for some varieties of the 5.56 mm (different cartridge designations have different standards) exceed the SAAMI maxima for the .223 Remington, and the methods for measuring pressures differ between NATO and SAAMI.^[2] The 5.56 mm chamber specification has also changed since its adoption, as the current military loading (NATO SS-109 or US M855) uses longer, heavier bullets than the original loading. This has resulted in a lengthening of the throat in the 5.56 mm chamber. Thus, while .223 Remington ammunition can be safely fired in a 5.56 mm chambered gun, firing 5.56 mm ammunition in a .223 Remington chamber may produce pressures in excess of even the 5.56 mm specifications due to the shorter throat.

The .223/5.56x45 was developed to fit the action length of the new M16 service rifle. The .223/5.56mm quickly became popular as a civilian cartridge because of the availability of brass, and the chambering of commercial varmint rifles in that caliber. Shortly after military acceptance of the M16, the semi-automatic version, the AR-15 became available, making the .223 cartridge even more popular.

.

As of January 2013, after political discussion regarding assault weapons bans, there is a shortage of .223/5.56 ammo in the United States.

Oneslackr,

and when you take those figures and post them against the 300,000,000+ guns in civilian hands, the percentage of dying by gun of any type in this country go into the ten thousandths of a percent.

sighber,

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are supposedly unalienable rights, well, I for one, believe the unrestricted right to bear military grade arms infringes on my right to live free of the oppression imparted by the power these guns put in the hands of idiots, psychopaths, fools, everyday people who don't respond well to anyone who challenges their ideals and people under emotional duress!

Move to China, there you will have your life, you can pursue all the happiness a capitalist economy allows you, no citizens have any guns military grade or otherwise, the only one with the guns are the government.

GO for it. (what is the one thing missing? LIBERTY!)

Liberty, freedom if you will, is in short supply there. But they have everything else you claim as inalienable, so it fits exactly what you claim to want.....

GO THERE!

I don't see what all of the fuss is about. I'm pretty sure not every school in this district has an armed guard or an officer with this particular type of rifle. The whole point is for this to act as a deterrent. We do the same thing on airplanes now with armed air marshals. Not every airplane has one but the point is that the wannabe hijacker doesn't know if the plane he or she is on has an armed air marshal aboard or not and that deters them from hijacking a plane. Same thing with these schools. The article doesn't say that every assault rifle will be checked out each day by each officer at each school. And there is a point to that. You don't have to have every school with an assault rifle-armed officer every day. As long as the wannabe mass shooter doesn't know whether or not a particular school has an armed officer is a big enough deterrent to get them to go somewhere else instead, thereby protecting the children which is the whole point.

@Joe-1015959

"Stop posting stats that include suicides and accidents. Who cares how a person dies?..."

Well, Joe, since you asked ...I care.

I think you might be surprised to learn that most human beings care how a person dies. And most human beings feel that way to many are dying by guns. That's the point.

@ screminmimi

Yes, you're correct many states do register but I just wanted to point out that it isn't universal/nationwide.

I agree with what you posted above.

Guns were extremely easy to purchase prior to the Gun Control Act of 1968. You could order them by mail & have them sent directly to your house without any kind of checks/registration etc...Yet people weren't running around committing these mass killings as often as they are now.

People are the problem, certainly not the guns (i.e. inanimate objects) owned by law abiding citizens.

Bottom line is that if you're willing to murder someone, mass killing or not, then you have mental issues (other than killing someone legally in self defense/war/law enforcement).

People should keep in mind that according to FBI stats crime & violent crime (which includes murder) has been declining in the U.S. for the last 20 years. It's not as dangerous out there now as it was back in 1993.

Robert in Oregon,

That is not exactly correct, but I'm not going to nit pick with you. 5.56x45 NATO is capable of penetrating 3/8ths inch homogenous steel at 200 meters, and any body armor made at 150 meters including the high tech ceramic armor. In medium to short range engagements the current 5.56x45 Nato is equally as deadly as .308 Winchester (7.62x51 Nato) due to round velocity & bullet mass.

Most rifles today are made to fire 5.56x45 Nato and will chamber and fire .223 Remington without any problem whatsoever and the reverse is also true, the manufacturers make it that way to avoid lawsuits.

Two years ago the military upgraded their M-855 (5.56x45 Nato) ball ammo to M-855A1. What do you think happened to all that surplus M-855 ball ammo? it was sold on the surplus market.

And your right, there is NONE now commercially available, surplus or not......

How many of you have stood in a European subway station or train station and seen the paramilitary walking around with sub-machine guns? You know why they are there? Europe has dealt with criminals and terrorists for decades who were intent on killing other people. People who are basically unarmed and defenseless due to guns restrictions. What's that you say? You don't want to live in a country like that. Then face the fact that gun bans restrict personal self-defense.

@sighbr - I have no problems with the free press- except when they use their freedom of speech to interfere with my rights. That's where their rights end. The list of legal gun owners published by the Journal News, while derived from public information, was as irresponsible as any gun-toting killer. There has already been one burglary of a residence on that list. I sincerely hope the local DA has the courage to take them to court over aiding and abetting the commission of a crime as a result of their irresponsible reporting.

@ AG99 -

It's true California has very restrictive gun laws, but surrounding states do not. It's no good regulating guns in one area when someone can simply drive across the state line and get a gun in Arizona. These laws will work, if they work, only if they are applied equally across the country.

But it's already illegal to buy a gun in a state you don't live in. Any gun you buy out of your resident state must be shipped to a FFL dealer in your state. If the gun is illegal to sell you in your state, then you're still screwed because the FFL dealer in your state will not give it to you. If you try to bring an illegal gun into your state you are illegal again. Anyone doing it is breaking laws all over the place. What did all those laws help? Why pass laws that don't do anything useful? We have enough useless laws. That's why people today have little respect for our laws. To many are stupid, have no bite or are either not enforced or inconsistently enforced.

Besides, the Assault weapons ban and magazine restriction didn't do anything the last time it was a federal ban, why do you expect it will do anything now?

@ Gneisenau

100% correct. Nice to see a few people posting actual facts.

Gneisenau: Have you read my posts? I don't advocate banning anything. It's not the guns that are the problem per se, but the people we allow to have them. If I can drive across to Arizona or Nevada or wherever and buy an unregistered gun from a private party, I've just circumvented whatever laws there are. We need background checks and waiting periods on all gun sales across the country, commercial and private. All guns need to be registered so if you sell yours to someone else and it's used in a crime, there's a record of it. Freedom needs to be tempered with accountability.

I see that the disgraceful, immature and petulant "collapsing" (silencing) of comments which are not fully supportive of guns ownership has already begun in this "discussion" thread. By the end of the day every comment supportive of guns-regulation/guns control will have been "collapsed" (silenced).

This effort to mute those who have dissenting opinions is somewhat cowardly, don't you think?

Are you ardent advocates of guns afraid of mere words? Well, I guess that explains a lot, doesn't it?

Williamofrites #1.2

You say "What part of 30,000 annual gun deaths falls into the "insure domestic tranquility" part of the constitution"

There are 30,575 suicides every year, 18,272 homicides every year but here is the clincher 32,000 die every year from the wrong medication let’s focused on the real issue. That is the issue of doctors over prescribing pain medication and getting people hook on pain pills so that they end up using heroin because it is cheaper. You all think everything would be so rosy if we gave up our guns. Do you think criminals will give up their guns? WAIT A SECOND they are not supposed to have them in the first place. So how is that law working out for us in the USA right now? Our own government sells guns to the drug cartels. We cannot keep the guns out of the hand of criminals but you want them taken away for law bidding citizens. That is crazy. Doctors kill 40,102 people every year by surgery and other misdiagnosis. I say we get all these people off all these damn medications that ruin their lives and have the quit seeing a doctor if you want to be safe. By the way tobacco kills 430,700 a year and we still allow that product to be sold. Alcohol kills 110,640 a year and we still allow that to be sold as well it seems people killing people is the least of our worries maybe we should get rid of alcohol, tobacco and medications since those items kill thirty four times as many people as murder does and most murders are done with a blunt object not a gun. So again on a grand scale you, fail, get rid of the items I suggested and then you will have you domestic tranquility. They should ban dumb ass people from voting or people that want something for nothing. That would change things also.

You know maybe Obama shares in the blame here. With his chant of Hope and Change! Nothing has changed and people feel helpless I would guess that is why the suicide rate is so high. If he would actual work on the economy instead of trying to be a news reporter and what I mean by that is every story that comes out know a days he has a comment about it. Look you job Mr. President is not to give us your opinion on anything it is to govern the United States of America no wonder you cannot seem to get anything turned around you have to comment and fight about everyone’s opinion a true failure are you. You are a disgrace to our great nation. When you are always apologizing for America even if what you are apologizing for has nothing to do with what happened. Like in Benghazi you said it was because of a video and apologized for it, our nation was built on the first amendment and you apologize for it. Take care of the real issues like why our taxes have gone up so much since you have been in office or why my medical insurance doubled again even though you said it wouldn’t. You are nothing but the COMMANDER AND LIER.

The AR-15, M16 and AK47 are NOT high powered assault weapons. All 3 of them are chambered for relatively low powered rounds. As far as I know, not on single armed force on the planet uses a high powered assault rifle as a standard issue weapon. A few snipers might get a 50 BMG or .338 Lapua but they are not standard. What I can't understand is why would they pay $14,000 for a rifle that can be had for less than $1000?

"Robert in Oregon, That is not exactly correct, but I'm not going to nit pick with you. ...

"And your right, there is NONE now commercially available, surplus or not......"

Well, I appreciate that; I honestly do.

A lot of Americans - even many gun owners such as myself - feel that we shouldn't be nitpicking and arguing over the minutia; which after-all is often just as subjective as are the specific supportive sources from which we choose to derive our data.

Rather it seems more meaningful to focus on the larger questions, and see if we can't agree to set aside our individual preconditions, and sit together at the table and have a mature and civil discussion about some of the questions confronting us and collectively try to find consensus on some solutions. Examples :

Q: Do we have a problem in America with undiagnosed and/or untreated mental illness?

Well, it appears that perhaps we do, and most agree we should have a rational conversation about what to do about the problem.

Q: Do we have a problem in America with almost omnipresent TV and Movie violence; and could this ubiquitous violence be affecting our sensitivity to real violence?

Well, it appears that perhaps we do, and most agree we should have a rational conversation about what to do about the problem.

Q: Do we have a problem in America with graphic violence in video games, many of which are being played by young people for whom their creators say they were not intended and may be being desensitized to real violence and/or influenced to act out?

Well, it appears that perhaps we do, and most agree that we should have a rational conversation about what to do about it.

Q: Do we have a problem in America with too many undiagnosed and/or untreated mentally ill persons, and persons desensitized by omnipresent TV and Movie violence, and young people desensitized by violent video games and possibly influenced to act out, ... and is it a problem that some of the individuals who fall into these categories have extremely easy, virtually unregulated access to the more than 300 million privately owned guns in America of all descriptions and lethality?

Well, this is where it all falls apart. If we acknowledge all of the various peripheral, contributory problems in America, we can have rational discussions. But when anyone even mentions guns - even in the related context of these other American issues we are confronting - a significant number of Americans simply get up and leave the table. How will we ever address America's problems if we can't even have rational conversations, with everyone sitting at the table?

@Harold-1168474

The AR-15, M16 and AK47 are NOT high powered assault weapons. All 3 of them are chambered for relatively low powered rounds. As far as I know, not on single armed force on the planet uses a high powered assault rifle as a standard issue weapon. A few snipers might get a 50 BMG or .338 Lapua but they are not standard. What I can't understand is why would they pay $14,000 for a rifle that can be had for less than $1000?

No, they paid $14,000 for 14 of them.

Caption below the photo: "One of the 14 Colt LE6940 semiautomatic rifles purchased by the Fontana Unified School District to help provide security for the school."

From the text of the article: "Fontana school police Chief Billy Green said he used money from fingerprinting fees to purchase the guns for $14,000"

It's estimated that there are 3 guns for every man, woman and child in the U.S., and there are approx. 350,000,000 people here, so do the math.

The proliferation of firearms in this country is written into the history books, and there's nothing anyone can do about it at this point. Confiscation is a tough-sounding argument from idiots like Cuomo, but in reality it would start a civil war we'd never recover from because we aren't willingly giving up our guns under any circumstances.

Eradication of the 2nd Amendment and a complete ban on all firearms across this country would do absolutely nothing as there are so many weapons out there today, that the ostensibly positive effects of such a ban wouldn't be felt for a hundred years, if even then.

Ban ammo? Sure, just like we banned alcohol and just like we banned drugs, right? Yes, it'll be more expensive, but our guns will stay loaded regardless.

Do you see where I'm going here? There is no solution other than to pull together as a society, do a better job of identifying behavioral problems, stepping up as parents and taking our responsibilities seriously, and fighting fire with fire by placing armed guards in our schools to protect the smallest among us who can't protect themselves.

You liberals with your ridiculous, "Stop stating your opinions, state facts! State Facts!" Okay, how about this as a test of your conviction, fact-mongers: Nowhere in the constitution is it written that gay marriage is a civil right, it's simply your opinion that it should be. As such, you need to drop your opinionated argument until such time as you have actual facts to support it?

Goose, meet gander...

!

@Carryingconcealed

"Okay, how about this as a test of your conviction, fact-mongers: Nowhere in the constitution is it written that gay marriage is a civil right, it's simply your opinion that it should be. As such, you need to drop your opinionated argument until such time as you have actual facts to support it?

Goose, meet gander..."

Nowhere in the constituti0on is it written that STRAIGHT (1 male + 1 female) marriage is a civil right. It's simply your opinion that it should be. As such, you need to drop your opinionated argument until such time as you have actual facts to support it?

Dumb, meet dumber ...

.

See, two can play your idiotic arguments and distractions game.

Why don't you try REALLY, REALLY hard to concentrate, and stay on topic. Making straw-man arguments will lose you every debate you enter into. So you would be better server - if your intent is to persuade - to stay on topic and try REALLY, REALLY hard to make intelligent points about the issue at hand, rather than changing the subject.

Ed

The high murder rate in Mexico is largely due to the drug trade. High demand for illegal drugs in the US ensures high profits for gangs. Gang warfare over this business kills thousands per year. If America legalized drugs, the death rate due to gangs would drop significantly in Mexico as wellas in the US.

Yes, I agree. I figured that prohibition would have taught everybody that if you outlaw something that people want it will only force it underground and give another profit center to organized crime. When beer and liquor were no longer legally available, the public turned to gangsters who readily took on the bootlegging industry and supplied them with liquor. On account of the industry being so profitable, more gangsters became involved in the money-making business. This led to competition and crime rates spiraled out of control. Homicide rates rose every from 1920 till prohibition was repealed in 1933.

Don

Joe; you made my point better than I did. I was saying that you were 43 times more likely to be killed with a gun in the United States than you would in the United Kingdom.

And so when you look at Japan which has a suicide rate of almost double what the US has you are ok with that because they don't kill themselves with guns. Suicide is good with Don as long as you don't use a gun... check.

And your hole 43 times number is just nonsense. It is like saying UK roads are safer because fewer people are killed by pickup trucks. It might make you feel better knowing that pickup trucks kill fewer people in the UK but if just as many are killed by hatchbacks then it hardly matters.

Do you think that as a person in the UK lays bleeding to death from having their head bashed in by a brick they will be at peace knowing they were not shot?

People still die in the UK from suicide, they just don't shoot themselves. Fewer of them do die in homicides but it is nowhere near your farcical 43 number.

Robert in Oregon: It is completely irrelevant whether any of a hundred other things you want to bring up are, or are not, written into the Constitution. What matters is that gay marriage is not, and that's why I used it as an example. <Heavy sighhhh!>

Look, I know this is difficult for you liberals to understand what with your naive little brains shoved so far up your arse, and I'm keenly and appallingly aware (embarrassed for you actually) that using phrases like "straw-man argument" and "slippery slope" and numerous other rote utterings serve to give you a false sense of intellectual superiority, but I stand by my statement that although I concede that the average liberal (qualified as the few who actually have a job and pay taxes) has more education than the average Conservative, which is why it's so difficult to reconcile that with the fact that you act and sound so completely ignorant, naive and uninformed every time you open your soup-coolers.

I haven't lost this so-called "debate" with you, partner, but when you can't grasp the importance and relevance of what it is I'm trying to teach you, I can understand how saying that is really all you have left in the way of trying to save face.

One more time, though: when it comes to gun control you libbies are fond of saying that all of us gun crazies are ignoring the facts (whatever those are) and just screaming for our guns, while you ostensibly level-headed and oh so intelligent libs are proving your point with facts from Wikipedia entries that, interestingly enough, you probably entered in Wikipedia in the first place, but that's another topic.

The point here is that you refuse to debate someone's opinion, irrespective of how informed that opinion may be, and cling to your exaggerated, manipulated and suspect facts like a buoy in the middle of an ocean. So if that's the way you want to play it then all I'm saying is apply that same narrow-minded mentality to everything, including gay marriage which I presented as an example.

If you still don't get it let me know and I'll try writing slower next time.

Robert

OK, yes, a 30.06 is "more powerful." But that's just a typical 'straw-man' argument which is used so often in these discussions about guns.

Actually when the anti-gun media and politicians refer to "assault rifles" as high powered military style assault rifles they are implying that they are in fact high powered.

Take a look at rifle cartridges

Link

And their muzzle energy

Link

The 223/5.56 is one of the LEAST powerful rifle cartridges available. Calling them high powered is little more than a lie.

Eagilman

That is not exactly correct, but I'm not going to nit pick with you. 5.56x45 NATO is capable of penetrating 3/8ths inch homogenous steel at 200 meters, and any body armor made at 150 meters including the high tech ceramic armor.

100% total BS ! Level III plates will stop 5.56 steel core rounds.

You can watch a video if you don't believe me.

Link

The video only shows a Level III plate but they now make Level IV.

In medium to short range engagements the current 5.56x45 Nato is equally as deadly as .308 Winchester (7.62x51 Nato) due to round velocity & bullet mass.

Deadly... sure... equally ... hardly.

5.56x45 NATO bullet

weight 62 grain (4 grams)

3100 ft/sec

Kinetic energy 1,700 Joules.

7.62 x51 NATO bullet

weight 150 grain (9.7 grams)

2,800 ft/sec

Kinetic energy 3,504 Joules

Joe, why don't you go re-write the wiki article I linked to in that post, why don't you re-write their sources while you are at it....

Egilman

Nowhere in the article does it say:

5.56x45 NATO is capable of penetrating 3/8ths inch homogenous steel at 200 meters, and any body armor made at 150 meters including the high tech ceramic armor.

Nor does it compare the lethality of 5.56 NATO vs 7.62 NATO.

Maybe you were thinking of a different source?

Joe,

From the link I supplied, 5.56 NATO

This;

For general issue, the U.S. military adopted the M855A1 round in 2010 to replace the M855. The primary reason was pressure to use non-lead bullets. The bullet is made of a copper alloy slug with a steel penetrator, reducing lead contamination to the environment. The M855A1 offers several improvements other than being lead-free. It is slightly more accurate and has an increased penetrating capability. The round can better penetrate brick, concrete, and masonry walls, as well as body armor and sheet metal. (I clicked through and read the source material to this claim for confirmation, and they talked about most body armor, not all)

And this;

The M855A1 was able to penetrate ³⁄₈ inches (9.5 mm) of steel plate at 300 meters. The round even penetrated concrete masonry units, similar to cinder blocks, at 75 meters from an M16 and at 50 meters from an M4, which the M855 could not do at those ranges.

Far away and above the .223 Remington round....

and, as far as the .308 Winchester (7.62x51 Nato) ;

In June 2010, the United States Army announced it began shipping its new 5.56 mm cartridge, the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round, to active combat zones. During testing, the M855A1 performed better than current 7.62×51mm NATO ball ammunition against certain types of targets (particularly hardened steel), blurring the performance differences that previously separated the two cartridges.

All from that single article, and following the footnotes to the documents behind the statements is revealing also, it is a well documented article...

I'm not making wild claims, just repeating and informing from the research I've done myself. For standard rifle rounds over long ranges, nothing tops the standard .308 except for the match grades of .30-06 Springfield or 7.92x57 Mauser, Big Bore game rifle and .50 BMG stands in it's own class.

@ AG99 -

Gneisenau: Have you read my posts? I don't advocate banning anything. It's not the guns that are the problem per se, but the people we allow to have them. If I can drive across to Arizona or Nevada or wherever and buy an unregistered gun from a private party, I've just circumvented whatever laws there are. We need background checks and waiting periods on all gun sales across the country, commercial and private. All guns need to be registered so if you sell yours to someone else and it's used in a crime, there's a record of it. Freedom needs to be tempered with accountability.

OK, sorry. It's a "Button" topic for me. Generally I agree with your posts. I've up checked quite a few of them. I don't necessarily have a problem with background checks all around. In fact I didn't realize until recently that it wasn't in fact the law now. I guess I lived in CA so long that their laws get a little muddled with Federal laws.

I also don't have a problem with cross checks for mental health. I draw the line at requiring mental examinations to own a gun or permabans for anyone who's visited a mental health professional. (Not saying you want that either.) I also draw the line at registration. (I believe it's just too easy to misuse that list.) I draw the line at taggants in the propellant (At least any time soon.) I draw the line at smart guns. (Again at least any time soon.) I see no evidence that waiting periods help. I don't think CA and really prove any positives with it and I think someone facing a new threat has the right to arm themselves quickly before it's too late. I have no problems with stricter punishments for gun related crimes in theory. I also have no problem with them firming up and better enforcement of exist laws, including making it harder to plead a gun related crime (Again in theory.)

I also believe that we need a reasonable (And I realize using that word is going to open a can of worms.) Federal CCW permit that's valid in all states and cities. Think of all the background checks you'll get from that one alone. But the present administration has no desire to throw us a bone. They are only interested in making it harder for us to have access to weapons.

What I refuse to accept is the deck being stacked against the law abiding person in favor of the criminal. Most of the gun laws I see being proposed do just that.

Ed,

I also went through the sources and in none of them could I find references to the 5.56 penetrating level III or IV plates. I understand that 5.56 with steel core will penetrate Kevlar. I was specifically responding to your comment about ceramic plates.

I did read that the new NATO round was doing very well in tests vs hard targets. I read through one of your sources and the testing for M855A1 was being tested on mild steel (SAE 1060) where as you mentioned homogenous or RHA steel plate (Current US Mil Spec SAE 4340) which are rather different.

Honestly it was your statement that 5.56 will penetrate level III and IV ceramic plates that kind of set me off.

Last, they were comparing the 5.56 M855A1 to a 7.62 M80. The M80 is your typical ball ammo with a lead core. In order to be a fair test they would have used a M61 or M993.

Anyway, those were my points and I have made them.

Joe,

I wasn't trying to argue, just get some real facts out there, I"m sure there are a lot more data points that can be mined for good info.

but the original point was that the .223 remington fired in an AR-15 is nothing but a glorified .22 is wrong and compared to a 5.56x45 it is woefully underpowered. There is no problem getting .223 rounds, but there are no 5.56 available at this point.

Good points all on both sides, I hope it at least makes people think about it before going off.

Peace....

And thanks for keeping it civil....

Corny B-rated movie called: Truancy Vengeance: Strike of the School Cops

Paul Blart: Hall Monitor

It really is sad. The CT shooter only had 4 pistols with him according to MSNBC. The AR-15 and shotgun were removed from the trunk of the car. But with the silence from the government and law officials over the tragedy, it is no wonder people are paranoid. But that is the socialist left agenda on course to make the people afraid of anything and believe the government is their God and saviour.

I would pull my children out of school and home school them in ths day and time. The government is going overboard with the skewed scoring, trying to make everyone feel equal and just stay in charge. The new socicalist government has already put our students at least 2 years behind on knowledge due to the changes in "feel-good" schooling.

Having the AR-15's or whatever locked in the cop cars if needed is probably a good idea in any situation, but they do not need to be carried around inside or outside the schools. Pistol armed and uniformed officers should be more than enough to deter the insane and the idiots. In my opinion.

Where on MSNBC are you getting that the AR-15 was left in the trunk? I heard some confused reports early on, where no one was really sure, but the final findings were it was an AR-15 IN the school.

Last time I checked, "socialist lefties" were always being bashed for being "wimps," "soft on crime," "bleeding hearts," etc. I see lots of things by the far Right ginning up fear about the government coming to get me, people trying to take my guns, sharia law infiltrating our court system, the "war on Christmas" and other psychotic-break fantasies.

Blaming the "socialist government" for our schools falling behind the rest of the world is dubious, at best. Look for a map of the most right-leaning sections of the country, and cross-match that to lowest test scores. Now do the reverse, looking for left-leaning areas and highest test scores.

I'll agree with AR-15's locked up in a patrol car outside is about as close one needs to get to my kid's classroom. Firearms that shoot armor piercing rounds with bullets that tumble so they can blow out a huge exit wound do not belong in schools. Period.

What did the "Little Schoolhouse on the Prarie" have? Winchester 73s chambered for 44-40s.

Keep them Injuns out!

sullyness

Google or Bing "AGENDA: Grinding America Down". They are selling it on Amazon, but there is also a free full version of the movie on VIMEO. You might have to scroll down past where they advertise the trailer advertisement. That is a recent movie by a congressman and other highly respected people here in America and overseas in the U.K. It is almost 90 minutes long, but did explain a few things that had really been bothering me regarding society now and the future. Have a great day!

Well, if you're a guidance counselor willing to work for $14,000 per year, by all means...

Do you two remember your high school counselor and all the good he/she did?

Yeah, Scooter, I'm with you. I'm still trying to remember the name of my high school counselor.

The majority of school conselors are burnt out teachers with enough seniority to force their way into the job but not enough seniority to retire. These counselors have proven GROSSLY inefficient at identifying the at risk kids much less intervening before they act. The armed guards reduce the risk of having the counselors do an equally inefficient job of consoling the survivors of the next attack, regardless of the type of weapon utilized.

Having said that, I believe it would be prudent to severely restrict high capacity weapons availability. If I can't defend my family with multiple 10 round magazines then either I'm a horrible shot - and am not qualified to have a weapon - or I've pissed off WAY too many people.

Fortunately, I didn't need counseling...some kids seriously do. Some teachers suck, some counselors suck, some gun owners suck. Not all...some. That is what we should be working on...not emulating the violence problem with more guns and pretending that will lower the violence levels.

We don't need to practice becoming inured or "used" to more guns everywhere. Part of what keeps many people from ever becoming junkies is their fear of needles. Do you seriously think it would be a good idea to try to reduce use of injectable drugs by having people get used to seeing needles everywhere?

The money for the purchase of the firearms came from funds generated by the Sheriff's office fingerprinting program of criminals. The Fontana area of the Los Angeles basin is replete with petty criminals. I wouldn't expect the program is in place to emulate the violence outside the school grounds, its intent is to provide some measure of insurance should the need arise to protect the students.

Some guy, We'll make you the the person who is going in to talk with the next gunman, let us know how you makeout.

Some guy, We'll make you the the person who is going in to talk with the next gunman, let us know how you makeout.

Sorry, but I don't kiss-and-tell.

@ohwow

These counselors have proven GROSSLY inefficient at identifying the at risk kids much less intervening before they act.

You and many people have this misconception that guidence councilors are still in the schools as a therapist. In most modern school districts, all a guidance councilor does is place you in classes, and point you towards college. All the rest is now done by school psychologists. Every district in America either has at least 1, or can contract one when needed. The school psychologist's job is to test and place low-functioning and at risk kids into appropriate programs, and get mental, speech, other services on a per case basis. You seldomly hear about them(1 was killed in Newtown), but they are working behind the scenes to try to prevent these tragedies. In Obama's $150 million executive order that gives schools more money for resource officers, also gives more money for school psychologists. Maybe we'll finally be able to identify the nuts before it becomes a real problem! Just wanted to clear up the common misconception between school psychologists and counselors. (My wife is a school psychologists, and they also make much better money than the guidance councilors!)

My kids are in HS now and have great GCs. They have been very involved in my children's school life and in college searches. Counselors have their own training and are not burned out teachers. You need to see life in a high school now, not years ago. Counseling would help a lot more than a guy and a gun. This is just stupid.

The $14K they spent on the guns would pay a counselor about 0.2 FTE (20% of annual salary). Thus, with that $14K, the school district could have hired 1 counselor for their 40 something schools for 1 day a week. In my estimates, that counselor could have spent 1 day at each campus in the district throghout the entire school year. Makes sense to me????

It is better than none and a gun

The kids are safe is what happens. I'd take that chance.

If the shooter never shows up, it is a good thing, regardless of anything else.

Rocket launchers and tanks are too expensive for the average nut to afford. Have you priced those lately?

May I ask, as a mere spectator to these terrible murders and their aftermath; how exactly does arming police/anyone with high power weapons make kids safe?

Yes
high power weapons could be used against an identified target, yes they can potentially overcome an individual wearing body armour, but by that time its likely to be after the event and a little like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Armed police clearly aren’t a deterrent to a deranged, armed individual/group. The only beneficiary I can see is the arms dealer who sells the guns and ammunition.

What if the shooter shows up in a spaceship and fires laser beams at the children... or something else equally unrealistic and hyperbolic.

excellent response ohwow...you may have a cookie...........

lisa-3322183

The kids are safe is what happens. I'd take that chance.

Sorry Young lady, that bird wont fly. do a per kappa study on shootings and innocent bystanders accidentally shot by the P.D. versus any other group.

Tramp, my response was in reply to "what if the shooter never shows up". I don't disagree with your point. IF the guns are a deterant to not allowing guns at their school by students/others, I would do it.

Lisa, I think they mean hopefully we never have to use the guns. Nobody likes the way it is today but only a fool would be unprepared.

It would be a wonderful world if this never happens. But we don't live in la la land. It does take extreme measures at times to get extreme results. I don't like it as much as the next guy. However, do what we have to do to keep protecting our children.

In fairness, they haven't started rewriting the curriculum or detaining student agitators just yet, but yes, it is starting to look like Northern Ireland during the Troubles out there. We'll have the National Guard posted on the streets in another 10 yrs at this rate.

But the lib media is held totally unaccountable for creating this whole circus to begin with right? Have you bothered to ask yourself why?

The "lib media" makes a circus out of anything they can. It's called advertising dollars. If we click on it, they will sensationalize it. I suppose that makes it our fault.

It's ironic to see a comparison to northern Ireland being made here since the possession of assault weapons was prohibited during the time when killings by hoodlums wielding those weapons were rampant there.

AG99

You have something there AG, so it becomes..agenda...or money..."hey i know lets go with both".

ohwow

another great point...another cookie....

EarlyOut, Not a police state and you don't need a gun. That might be YOU cowaring under a table when your home is invaded but i'll blow them right out the door they pushed in if it ever happens to me. The bottom line is there are two many scumbags walking the streets that are in and out of jail. They never punish them with the laxed laws we have or plea bargin down to a slap on the hand and they turn right around and commit another crime. In turn the government wants to bust the ass of honest citizens and make it sound like WE are the criminals. Hell that's alot cheaper then fixing the real problem.

Correct Allen. I know from personal experience about revolving door felons. The twice convicted felon was arrested with a firearm in his possession, released on bond and went on to commit 6 more felonies including one that resulted in death. The DA told me they had to let him go on bond for the firearm offense because the law didn't allow him to be held without bond on that charge, despite being a convicted felon.

In this case, it seems to be the police using this as an excuse to acquire more toys. Pretty sure the NRA didn't suggest arming anyone in schools with military style rifles.

A trained officer's 14-17 round 9mm or .40 sidearm is sufficient for stopping a shooter. No idea why the article mentioned "body armor" - a) a rifle still doesn't help and b) a bullet proof vest does nothing to protect the head, legs, arms, etc. The idea should be to stop the shooter, not to ensure immediate death.

But considering the majority of LEOs are NRA supporters, perhaps that is what was meant by the original poster's suggestion the NRA was behind this.

In the end, I view it as more over reaction - kind of like we needed cockpit doors to be secured after 9/11 but we ended up with naked scanners, people groping our kids, old people being harassed, and long lines of people taking their shoes off.

Welcome to the police state.

Caused in whole by the mass media hysteria and swallowed in its entirety by liberals and other un or ill informed lemmings.

Cmon IA.Scooter - do you really think this is only done because of "Liberals"...like the NRA, that bastion of liberal thought?

It's both sides working together - the fact that they are called 'liberals' and 'conservatives' just gives the masses sides to pick and argue with each other on, while they ruin the country.

Sadie,

and us independants......? oh yeah i remember now, we only try to think rather then swear allegiance to any particular, party, race, religion, etc.

BTW you do realise " liberal thought " is a decease right? But fear not.. i hear tell its treatable.........:)

IA - I'm actually a non-party registered voter.

I swear no allegiance to any one side.

In case you didn't notice, I said both sides were the issue...but go look at your posts here, where you consistently harp on the liberal side without saying anything of the other side...which of course, you did yet again in your response to me.

You independents think, really? Even with the stark differences between the two candidates of the last presidential election, many of you people couldn't make up your mind! Good grief, I'd call that brain death, not thought!

Please pay attention to the things happening around you. Per the last election, it's not liberal thought that seems to be on the endangered list right now.

The point is that many on the far left are using recent events to push their agenda which is why the narrative becomes "our children are being mowed down in school by machine gun killers"

I really hope most people have enough sense to realize an isolated tragic event is just that.

I agree DB. They may not be protecting students from mass shootings. They are probably trying to protect them from gangs and drug dealers. And the article said that the guns were purchased BEFORE the Sandy Hook tregedy. Sad to think that some areas of the US are war zones though...

And sadder still when you realize that the worst of those war zones are in places like Chicago, Washington DC, Detroit, and other places where the honest Citizens have been denied the tools to defend themselves by their masters, er, leaders, through restrictive and Unconstitutional "Gun Control" (people control) laws.

Mike, chicago doesn't have a gun problem that city needs to go to war with the gangs and get there city back. It's not john Q citizen standing on the street corner shooting people.

Wow, I guess that is why we need to ban guns because it isn't the guns in the hands of criminals that are a problem, it is the guns in the hands of law abiding citizens that are a problem. If we don't let law abiding citizens have guns, the criminals will have no need for guns and they will just hand them in.

Sadly... kids in Ireland have been thru this for years... Israel.... Gaza..... Somalia.... many others too....

I met a lady years ago from Ireland... she told me how spoiled we are because we don't have such tight security and invasions of our privacy. She told me it wasn't unusual to see armed police at theaters, schools, shopping stores and the like. She said she couldn't carry a big purse or backpack like we can here because it was always subject to "inspection" when going in somewhere.... so she didn't carry one. \

We are only catching up with the rest of the world....... our open door immigration policy doesn't help either.......

According to the article, the officers will keep the weapons locked in their cars or in a safe while on duty, returning them to the police station afterwards. How useless is that?

"They're not walking around telling kids, 'Hurry up and get to class' with a gun around their neck," the chief said.

Reread the article.

It's called a deterrent Ag. You get more "bang for your buck" by not actually having all the officers having the guns checked out every day and one at every school. The whole idea is that the wannabe shooter doesn't know which particular school on which particular day might have an armed officer ready to take them down. Kind of like the way air marshals work with airplanes. There's not one on every flight, but the wannabe hijacker just doesn't know do they. There's always that chance they picked the wrong flight, so it helps to deter them from hijacking the plane.

Anilof: The air marshal doesn't keep his weapon locked in the cargo hold during the flight. If the guard isn't carrying the weapon, he isn't much of a deterrent.

Paul, the Irish lady is right. We are spoiled by the lack of armed paramiitary on the streets. I've personally seen the warrantless inspections on subways and train stations. That's because europe has dealt with high crime and terrorism for decades and since citizens can't own firearms legally, the police and paramilitary have military the ability to search your possessions without cause, just to ensure you aren't committing a crime.

Yeah... like who pays for this? Kids already have to show up for school bringing their own toilet paper and kleenex.

Sorry, they use all the money to protect our president. It seems like it costs $100,000 for him to just fart, much less travel somewhere.

the school probably purchased these for around 800-900 per rifle. so you are looking at less than 14 grand. im sure the district spends more on the book mobile and since hardly any kids there speak english much less read books this is relatively a good deal. i would have picked the ruger mini 14 but thats just me.

Uncle Henry - okay, so I guess the training and the guards are free, as will be the administrative costs to manage the program and inventory.

I-don't-think-so.

As to the Mini 14 vs. AR-15s.... but the AR-15s look so mean and they are "assault weapons"

warrren

The semiautomatic rifles look like they belong in a war zone instead of a suburban public school, but officials in this Los Angeles-area city say the high-powered weapons now in the hands of school police could prevent a massacre.

They are NOT machine guns & they are NOT the rifles the Military uses. Some of you people(including the writer) need to educate yourselfs before making a fool of yourselves. By the way, they are NOT high powered either. Unless they paid extra & got .308 caliber.

@Hoke

I'm aware of what you mentioned but this is enough to scare the hell out of me.

Bullets go through walls !! There has to be a more effective weapon for close-in situations.

That .308 is a joke in a school. It can and does go through a person. So does a 5.56 and a 7.56. Give it a break gun nuts. This is about as stupid as trying to teach a pig to talk. All it does is waste time and annoy the pig.

I think this definitely sets a bad precedent, along with the LA school officers.

I noted in the article that it said it probably wouldn't stop the carnage. If that's so, then why the rifles. It won't make the kids safer, instead it will probably make them feel less safe.

As for guidance counselors, mine were good, although I really didn't want them. I knew what I wanted and just didn't bother to listen to them. However, so many other children got good advice and were able to talk about their fears they more than made their salaries worth the price.

Don't bother with aswers, gun nuts or non-gun nuts. Nothing you say, on either side, is worth a bag of crap.

And in about 15 minutes, I can make that AR-15, or any other rifle, into a fully automatic. I have the knowledge and it's even findable, using whatever search engine a person uses, on the 'Net.

Actually Jackie and the rest the ONLY effective way to stop an active shooter is to shoot back. This has been proven over and over. These rifles are a better tool to use for suppressing an active shooter than the handguns already carried by these officers. In a crowded hallway I want a precision weapon that can incapacitate with the first well placed shot from the other end of the corridor regardless of body armor (which neither the Aurora or New Town shooter wore BTW) or level of inebriation. Shotguns are out due to the potential of collateral damage, the only other weapon that I could think of that fits the requirement is an MP5/10 and those are insanely expensive, and less precise than the AR15.

Mike, Jackieboy doesn't want to hear about stopping a shooter. He'll turn a semi auto into a full auto as fast as magiver then he will talk to his counselor. It's all under control.

Mental Health services are always under funded..... even "Cadillac" insurance policies don't cover much....but contraception is covered right?

Our priorities suck in this country..............

WilliamOfRites, Yeah they saved millions on restructuring guidance services and how many millions did we save closing all the state hospitals? And yet the gun grabbers still don't see that it's a gun problem.

Don't suppose some of those gang guns are simply returning from their vacation in Mexico?

oriris, NO all those gang guns were bought at a gun store complete with background checks and fingerprinting.

Exactly. It's just prole fodder. The term "assault rifle" is misused as part of an agenda.

What kind of "rifle" could not be used in an "assault"

What kind of "weapon" could not be used in an "assault?"

"Assault weapon"

"Tuna fish"

"Point in time"

"Rate of speed"

It would appear that the firearm-challenged crowd has joined either the literacy-challenged crowd or the "department of redundancy department."

"The plane landed safely isn't news" my old journalism prof used to say and neither is a thorough explanation of the weapons...... it is boring....

I am amazed at how ignorant we are about things we scream loudest about......

If a FULLY AUTO machine gun fires 800 rounds per minute (wow that's scary) it would empty an average 30 round "clip" in 2.3seconds of fire......... so "spraying" an entire room is not possible without reloading.....that's about 3 seconds of down time for someone with a concealed carry to drop the shooter. Additionally... no one mentions that a "fully auto" AR shoots in 3 round bursts...... each trigger pull fires 3 rounds.......Not 800 rounds continuously...

But... ignorance is bliss...................

@ Paul

You're correct.

However, one slight correction. You meant to say the military M-16 can do the things you mentioned above, since the civilian AR platform is semi-automatic only. Don't want to confuse the gun grabbers even more (not that they really care about facts, they only care about their anti-gun/anti-constitution agenda). LOL

But that's not they way those scary guns work in the movies and on the TV!

I really do wonder how much different the debate would be if everyone knew wtf they were talking about. Between the misrepresentation of the functional capabilities of the weapons to the misleading statistics I don't see how we can have a legitimate discussion/debate.

Because - "GUNS!"

Our babies are not expendable. Go there and protect them, NOW!!!

Perhaps, just perhaps, if we, oh, I don't know, maybe helped people who were obviously sick long before they ever went over the edge, we wouldn't need this police state that we're turning in to.

But that wouldn't be profitable. And that's all that really counts in America today - money.

So, yes, "our babies" are expendable if the price is right.

@noise...

Perhaps, just perhaps, if we, oh, I don't know, maybe helped people who were obviously sick long before they ever went over the edge, we wouldn't need this police state that we're turning in to.

That is a completely ridiculous statement. I'll tell you what I'll do. If you go out and identify each and every person who is "obviously" sick, remember, don't miss a one, I'll buy into your theory. The problem is compounded by the fact that the obvious ones aren't the only problem. Ask any psychologist if they can spot every person that might go off without notice and when they stop laughing they'll tell you 'NO." Profit has nothing to do with it. It's simply not doable.

digital,

Do both. Problems often require more than a single method to form a solution.

To my post,

You have no idea what violence prediction psychologists' research shows, so I will tell you:

It is difficult to predict who has the potential for violence. As the recent slaughter of family members shows, those living with assailants cannot tell.

What psychologists do know, which should be evident even to gun advocates, is what is necessary for a violent act is a weapon. There is no more readily available and effective weapon for killing as a gun, such as the one(s) you own which put you and your family at muh increased risk of violent death from your gun(s).

The students at Fontana High School (school the media is covering), has over 4000 students and is heavily saturated with gangs. As a person familiar with this school I can understand why counseling was probably cut. When a large portion of your school contains violent delinquents it is not a question of helping a student or two who is "obviously sick". If I had to be there everyday (as a student, teacher, etc), I would feel much more safer with armed police, than a counseling program. Don't believe me? Go spend a day at Fontana High then tell me your opinion.

L.A has reduced its violence significantly due to excellent gang intervention programs and now gun buybacks. Still, many, such as yourself, are vulnerable to the fear-mongering gun profiteers.

If you want to feel safe and are knowledgable about your odds of dying by gun, don't stay at home if yo or anyone owns a gun. You are much safer at Fontana High.

Notice that the places that have armed security guards in the schools are also heavily Democrat and have strict anti-gun regulations?

@Kamaaina,

You have no idea what violence prediction psychologists' research shows, so I will tell you:

You do not know me so please don't pretend to know what I do or don't know.

It is difficult to predict who has the potential for violence. As the recent slaughter of family members shows, those living with assailants cannot tell.

If you read my post again (with your eyes open this time) you will see that I said exactly the same thing.

There is no more readily available and effective weapon for killing as a gun, such as the one(s) you own which put you and your family at muh (sic) increased risk of violent death from your gun(s).

Where did I say that I own guns?

Please work on your reading comprehension skills before responding to my posts or anyone else's for that matter.

Kamaaina; "L.A has reduced its violence significantly due to excellent gang intervention programs and now gun buybacks."

What world are you living in again? Sure isn't the "real" one.

Personally, I always thought "gun control" was being able to hit what you were aiming at.

these are police, not guards, and police already wear body armor.

So, you think school children have the maturity, experience, education and wisdom to form security policies?

I don't, and quoting the children in the news story serves no purpose in the solution to the problem of violence.

inMYday,

I do not think all teenagers do, nor all adults. The young have always been quick to point the folly, typically driven by fear or profit, of American society. The Vietnam War protests and early identification of the military-industrial complex (still around, now selling guns to schools), need for population control, excesses of corporations and threats to the environment, for instance, were well-articulated by our young decades ago.

Imagine the problems we would have avoided as a nation and world and society we could have built if we listened to our young 40 years ago, instead of intimidating and silencing them with bullets and death at Kent State.

Kamaaina,

The students have sense? The cost of the rifle purchase was 14K, and a one time purchase. The cost of a SINGLE counsellor per year (a recurring cost)? The 14K is but a drop in the bucket in comparison. Besides, in this instance, the major security issues (spelled g-a-n-g v-i-o-l-e-n-c-e) existed long before the counsellors were stripped from the schools. Oh, BTW, the gang-bangers we're talking about here are students.

It's a sad fact, I'll admit, but a fact none the less; School security is necessary and potential violent acts committed by/against our students are a reality. Let's make it as difficult as possible to hurt the innocent ones.

R.L. Gumby, That 14K wouldn't cover the benifits let alone the wages of a counselor. Those guns will never have to be replaced.

well we don't need 12 packs or Cadillac's or corvette's either ! guns,cars,beer, calories,politicians or most anything else needs human intervention to do anything !!!!! WRONG HUMAN WRONG OUT COME . are we really created equal ? I HOPE NOT

Yes, gang violence is one type of violence occurring in the US, but not typically in schools-more likely street corners, front yard drive by shootings, parks.

The violence in schools has been a variant of family gun deaths with the shooter using family guns and illegally purchased/stolen weapons to kill family members, innocents and ultimately have himself killed or kill himself. This is entirely different from gang violence and involves gun from the home. The same guns bought from fear or expectation for protection that are rarely needed for real, rather than imagined, outside threats, but greatly increase the odds of the gun owner or his family's death. With the rapidly growing family death/massacre twist, many non-family deaths as well.

@ Kamaaina

with the shooter using family guns and illegally purchased/stolen weapons

Not in all recent mass shootings:

VA TECH shooter - Purchased guns legally

Arizona shooter (Gabby Giffords) - Purchased guns legally

Aurora shooter - Purchased gun legally

All had a history of known mental issues before the shootings happened yet they fell through the cracks. People in their lives knew about these issues but didn't act on them or weren't able to get help for them.

They were able to purchase their guns, because there isn't a way to verify a history of mental illness/treatment when the background checks are done. These shootings could have been prevented.

Out of the recent high profile shootings it was only Sandy Hook were easy access to guns at home made it easy for the killer to acquire firearms. Lanza's mother was stupid to have guns around a mentally ill son.

There are 85 - 100 million gun owners with 270 - 300 million firearms in the U.S. If it was so dangerous & deadly to own guns then they would be stacking up dead bodies on the street like wood.

If gun owners were so dangerous how is it that any of you gun grabbers are still alive?

But please keep talking about your paranoia of inanimate objects. There is a specific term for people like you who fear guns - Hoplophobe

Steve, I hear you but i bet you never give it a second thought when you walk in a bank and a guard stands there with a gun on his side.

economykiller

But guns are so ICKY & they smell funny. Thum of these thilly thuckers just don't want those instruments of death within a hundred miles. Unless some bad guy shows up & then they wonder where the help is . Then want to blame gun owners 2 thousand miles away & the NRA. Yep it's all because of the NRA.

Seems the "bad guys" increasingly killig of late are the one's are living with gun owners.

Those are the ones we hear about. We don't hear about the gang killings in cities like Chicago since people really don't care about gangbangers killing other gangbangers. Do some research and you will find that there are many more killings that aren't being reported because they don't have the same impact as a child killing their family or a person shooting up a school or a theater. Do you really think that those are the only killings going on in the country?

The .223 was actually developed to wound & not kill. A wounded Soldier would need to be carried off the Battle Field by two or three other soldiers for Medical treatment. So one wound would take 3 to 4 people off the battle field. Also like you said, the smaller ammunition the more a soldier could carry.

Even some of the earlier military ammo was a smaller caliber than the .223 or 5.56.

Amanda,

Smart kid...really? The rifles are kept in a secure lock-box or in a gun-locked rack (in the officer's patrol car) when not actually being deployed. And where does this "smart kid" think the lock-box is located? In the hallway next to the drinking fountain? I guess common sense isn't.

And how many kids meanwhile will be killed by the time the cop on duty gets to that "secure lock-box or in a gun-locked rack (in the officer's patrol car) when not actually being deployed"?

James Henriquez;

I welcome you to try to take my rifle from me. I promise I will only strike with 1/8th force so as not to break anything or cause lasting injury.

I would think these weapons would be carried by the patrolling officers, not kept locked away somewhere.

Generally speaking, attempting to remove a weapon from an officer is an open invitation to a major league @ss-stomping - best case, or being shot with a secondary weapon - worst case.

And if these folks are going to be carrying heavier firepower in schools, I'm sure they are going to take on some additional training, including: "Do not approach within arm's reach of the on-duty officer."

He's not a smart kid, he's just parroting the nonsense he hears from gun-phobic adults in the news media. The Left always defaults to cowardice; they'd much rather hide and hope the gunman shoots somebody else than actually attempt to fight back, or even allow anybody else to fight back on their behalf. They always assume resistance will merely bring down additional pain. They'd make great, docile subjects for a tyrannical overlord.

A locked gun is a useless gun when it is actually needed. Anyone who has ever needed to unlock a gun in a home invasion will tell you that. Can you imagine a homeowner yelling "Wait a minute" at the criminal breaking in while the homeowner is unlocking their gunsafe?