Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
docyabut2

Ron Paul rips NRA plan for officers in every

72 posts in this topic

Retiring Republican Rep. Ron Paul pushed back Monday against the National Rifle Association's call for installing armed officers in every school, warning that the move could create a TSA-style maze of checkpoints and surveillance cameras -- with limited effect.

"School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America," Paul said in a written statement.

Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras,

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/24/ron-paul-rips-nra-plan-for-officers-in-every-school/#ixzz2G3nfJrZZ

Yet we have surveillance cameras at just about every street light corners catching people running red lights for safety. I never got one driving , but my hubby and kids, really wrack them up on our cars,over a thousand dollars.:)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Ron Paul on this. The way forward is to listen to Ron Paul and I've never understood the mentality of some of his (former?) fans that we're somehow entering into a post-Ron Paul era. Ron Paul will be even more relevant because if it was even humanly possible to make him even more independent from the will of his own political party or any special interest group, now that he's out of government, he could be. He's going to be more relevant and influential than ever if we stop listening to the voices out there trying to diminish him.

It's our Orwellian and Draconian demagogues, who love to lather themselves in the fear of the day, so they can propagate it and justify it with their rhetoric, are the biggest threat to our nation today, probably right after its dying financial health. "Terrorists" living in holes in the ground in Afghanistan are surely the least of our problems.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read hes retiring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armed officers in every school?! Holy moses, how many would that need?! I love the logic of the NRA; rather than even consider any alteration to their precious right to bear Arms, this is a more sensible suggestion?!?!

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too agree with Ron Paul on this. The proposal would certainly put us on a slippery slope.

If the official story were true, then the NRA proposal might be a reasonable thing. After all, most schools have School Resource Officers, as they call them here in Florida, so arming them properly would not be difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So according to Ron Paul, we can give nukes to Iran, but we can't put police officers in schools?

double-facepalm.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So according to Ron Paul, we can give nukes to Iran, but we can't put police officers in schools?

double-facepalm.jpg

Do you really expect to be taken seriously when you state that RP wants to give nukes to Iran? I mean, REALLY? :no:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really expect to be taken seriously when you state that RP wants to give nukes to Iran? I mean, REALLY? :no:

Well let me re-phrase: He's not opposed to it. In one of the Republican debates he basically asked: Why shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nukes in order to defend itself against Israel? Yet apparently we in the US shouldn't be allowed to defend our school children from crazed gunmen.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well let me re-phrase: He's not opposed to it. In one of the Republican debates he basically asked: Why shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nukes in order to defend itself against Israel? Yet apparently we in the US shouldn't be allowed to defend our school children from crazed gunmen.

well said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let me re-phrase: He's not opposed to it. In one of the Republican debates he basically asked: Why shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nukes in order to defend itself against Israel? Yet apparently we in the US shouldn't be allowed to defend our school children from crazed gunmen.

These shootings at schools do not happen everyday or often enough to justify setting up a police style surveilance system in public schools. Those who emotionally trade their freedoms for somebody else's version of safety end up with neither. RP understands this as should any individual who embraces liberty.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These shootings at schools do not happen everyday or often enough to justify setting up a police style surveilance system in public schools. Those who emotionally trade their freedoms for somebody else's version of safety end up with neither. RP understands this as should any individual who embraces liberty.

Would you say the same of all the security after 9/11? Statistically you are not likely to be a victim of a terrorist attack, but how many attacks are too many? Homeland Security can be over the top, but I think have thwarted a sufficient number of terrorist attacks to claim a successful record. I see putting cops in schools as similar to putting air marshalls on planes. Minimally it's a deterrent of all sorts of crimes, and maximally if a shooting does occur it might save lives.

Why do kids need so much freedom anyway? Since when are schools not supposed to keep a close on eye what the kids are doing? They will have their whole lives ahead of them in which they will be free to make bad decisions. For the first few years at least they can learn to sit down and shut up and follow rules like civilized human beings.

Edited by Order66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you say the same of all the security after 9/11? Statistically you are not likely to be a victim of a terrorist attack, but how many attacks are too many? Homeland Security can be over the top, but I think have thwarted a sufficient number of terrorist attacks to claim a successful record. I see putting cops in schools as similar to putting air marshalls on planes. Minimally it's a deterrent of all sorts of crimes, and maximally if a shooting does occur it might save lives.

Can you name how many terrorists the TSA has caught?

What does the TSA cost taxpayers per year?

Why do kids need so much freedom anyway? Since when are schools not supposed to keep a close on eye what the kids are doing? They will have their whole lives ahead of them in which they will be free to make bad decisions. For the first few years at least they can learn to sit down and shut up and follow rules like civilized human beings.

JUst curious.... What does the term Civil Liberties mean to you?

Edited by acidhead
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These shootings at schools do not happen everyday or often enough to justify setting up a police style surveilance system in public schools. Those who emotionally trade their freedoms for somebody else's version of safety end up with neither. RP understands this as should any individual who embraces liberty.

I agree that TSA like security would undermine our traditional values.

On top of this, putting TSA like security in schools is only an invitation towards a slippery slope where the average citizen becomes too easily accomadated to security provided by the state. We can't rely on government for security, only the protection of our liberty and thus ability to provide ourselves our own security.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you name how many terrorists the TSA has caught?

I don't have an exact number, but often enough in the news I hear about terror plots foiled. As a taxpayer I'm satisfied that there is due diligence on the part of DHS. The biggest complaint I hear about the TSA is that they harass too many people which at least tells me they are doing what they are paid to do.

What does the TSA cost taxpayers per year?

I don't know, but if it is a genuine public safety issue, then it isn't justified merely by cost. How much do firefighters cost the taxpayers? It's not a profitable enterprise but somebody has to do it.

JUst curious.... What does the term Civil Liberties mean to you?

Well if you ask the ACLU it means threats lawsuits anytime someone exercises freedom or religion within 100 miles of a school or city hall. If you ask someone who is being shot at by a crazed killer, it probably means 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really not up to Ron Paul or the Govenment to hire armed policemen,and have surveillance cameras, its up to the local school boards,on the tax levies to pay for it . I was just saying ,Yet the cities have surveillance cameras at just about every street light corner catching people running red lights for safety, why not the city pay for the surveillance cameras and a armed policeman at the schools for the safety.

Edited by docyabut2
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So according to Ron Paul, we can give nukes to Iran, but we can't put police officers in schools?

double-facepalm.jpg

You're not giving anything to Iran and actually, they have the same if not more Rights to own nukes than Israel does.

Edited by BlackRedLittleDevil
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have an exact number, but often enough in the news I hear about terror plots foiled. As a taxpayer I'm satisfied that there is due diligence on the part of DHS. The biggest complaint I hear about the TSA is that they harass too many people which at least tells me they are doing what they are paid to do.

I don't know, but if it is a genuine public safety issue, then it isn't justified merely by cost. How much do firefighters cost the taxpayers? It's not a profitable enterprise but somebody has to do it.

Well if you ask the ACLU it means threats lawsuits anytime someone exercises freedom or religion within 100 miles of a school or city hall. If you ask someone who is being shot at by a crazed killer, it probably means 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

The question I asked was how many terrorists has the TSA has caught? The answer is zero.

It costs $8 billion per year to fund the TSA and they have never caught a terrorist. It's a complete waste of money.

Your whole last paragraph is just silly.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armed officers in every school?! Holy moses, how many would that need?!

There's just under 100,000 public schools in America. About $55,000 per school (wages, training, equiping, etc.) or $5.5 billion dollars the first year alone. About half that for every year after.

I heard that a few days ago, don't ask me the source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question I asked was how many terrorists has the TSA has caught? The answer is zero.

It costs $8 billion per year to fund the TSA and they have never caught a terrorist. It's a complete waste of money.

Your whole last paragraph is just silly.

Trick question, now pull a quarter out of my ear.

There's just under 100,000 public schools in America. About $55,000 per school (wages, training, equiping, etc.) or $5.5 billion dollars the first year alone. About half that for every year after.

I heard that a few days ago, don't ask me the source.

Obama's family spent 1.4 billion tax dollars on vacations in 2011, but he will fight this NRA plan to the death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama's family spent 1.4 billion tax dollars on vacations in 2011, but he will fight this NRA plan to the death.

He spent no more on vacation than Bush, the habitual vacationer, or Clinton. And of course he'll fight the NRA and their radical 'plan' of arming teachers.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The facts speak for themselves... you can choose to ignore it or you can choose to accept whatever BS is put before you... it's your choice.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think if its good enough for obamas kids to be in sidwell where there are 11 armed guards non ss by the way , why does he not think our kids do not deserve the same treatment . O that's right we are to scared to do anything for ourselves so we let the nanny state decide . All schools are gun free zones and guess what criminals don't follow laws so giving up rights for false security is senile.The elites brainwash us into believing its better to be disarmed what good it did all over the world crime rates were lower before the all banned guns. Take in account population difference of all countries

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think if its good enough for obamas kids to be in sidwell where there are 11 armed guards non ss by the way , why does he not think our kids do not deserve the same treatment . O that's right we are to scared to do anything for ourselves so we let the nanny state decide . All schools are gun free zones and guess what criminals don't follow laws so giving up rights for false security is senile.The elites brainwash us into believing its better to be disarmed what good it did all over the world crime rates were lower before the all banned guns. Take in account population difference of all countries

Oh great, so lets arm schools, classrooms, restaurants, movie theaters, car washes, drugstores, walmarts, gas stations. The NRA solution is plainly ludicrous and impossible to do.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From an outside perspective- this could so turn into a self destruct of the the US. It is pretty scary to watch.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do kids need so much freedom anyway? Since when are schools not supposed to keep a close on eye what the kids are doing? They will have their whole lives ahead of them in which they will be free to make bad decisions. For the first few years at least they can learn to sit down and shut up and follow rules like civilized human beings.

Holy Mother of God, so keeping kids under firm discipline would need armed officers?!??!?!?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.