On Saturday I wrote how the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre called for an armed police officer in every school in the country. On Sunday, LaPierre went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and defended that call.
“If it’s crazy to call for putting police and armed security in our schools to protect our children, then call me crazy,” National Rifle Association Chief Executive Wayne LaPierre told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Several liberals attacked LaPierre’s proposal simply because all they have on their minds is more gun control.
Congressman Chris Murphy, Newtown, Connecticut’s district tweeted:
Walking out of another funeral and was handed the NRA transcript. The most revolting, tone deaf statement I’ve ever seen.
— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) December 21, 2012
The Daily Mail reports,
New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg who is an outspoken gun-control advocate called the statement, ‘a shameful evasion of the crisis facing our country.’
‘Instead of offering solutions to a problem they have helped create, they offered a paranoid, dystopian vision of a more dangerous and violent America where everyone is armed and no place is safe,’ he said. ‘Enough. As a country, we must rise above special interest politics.’
The New York Post headlined LaPierre as “Gun Nut! NRA loon in bizarre rant over Newtown.”
Even some Republicans made comments about the proposal.
‘I don’t even know where to begin,’ Steele said on MSNBC after the NRA’s statement. ‘As a supporter of the Second Amendment and a supporter of the NRA, even though I’m not a member of the NRA, I just found it very haunting and very disturbing that our country now that are talking about arming our teachers and our principals in classrooms. I do not believe that’s where the American people want to go.’
Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey said, ‘In general I don’t think that the solution to safety in schools is putting an armed guard because for it to be really effective in my view, from a law enforcement perspective, you have to have an armed guard at every classroom,’ he said. ‘Because if you just have an armed guard at the front door then what if this guy had gone around to the side door? There’s many doors in and out of schools.’
However, with all of this LaPierre was unwavering in his proposal. “I think that is the one thing that we can do immediately that will immediately make our children safe,” he said.
Lapierre called Senator Dianne Feinstein’s “assault weapons ban” a “phony piece of legislation” that is “built on lies.” He also stated that he does not think it will pass.He also scoffed at the idea that a reimplementation of the ban would do anything to prevent more shootings. “It’s not going to make any kid safer,” he said. “We’ve got to get to the real problems, the real causes, and that’s what the NRA is trying to do.”
When host David Gregory showed LaPierre a high capacity magazine with 30 rounds in it, he then asked him if he though that outlawing such magazines might help.
“I don’t believe that’s going to make one difference,” LaPierre said. “There are so many different ways to evade that even if you had that. You had that for 10 years when Dianne Feinstein passed that ban in ’94. It was on the books; Columbine occurred right in the middle of it. It didn’t make any difference.”
On all of these comments about the weapons ban bill and the high capacity magazines I am in full agreement with the NRA vice president. As for my own comments with regards to LaPierre’s proposal, allow me to clarify. I appreciated the desire to find a remedy to the problem without more gun control. LaPierre did include arming school officials, which I think is the very best idea. Why should they lose their Second Amendment rights simply because they walk into a public school? He also said that volunteers, who are retired military and police could help out. I’m all for that. But calling on Congress will simply expand government.
Many have said if we reallocate resources that things could be covered. Let me ask you to think clearly here. When has Congress implemented something of the magnitude of what is being called for and not want to fund it? When have they not wanted to control it? Furthermore, if local departments want to do that, they can. As I stated in my previous article, a police officer from my own church covers a small elementary school during the week and he has his weapon, but even he told me this week that it would be much better to allow teachers to carry, provided they have obtained their concealed weapon permit. He said then those that would attempt to come in would never know who had a weapon and would be less likely to enter knowing that. I agree.
In addition, if local departments were to, as some suggested, reallocate resources, such as moving police officers of the highways from writing tickets and things like that, then I ask you, do you really think the local and state governments are just going to let that money that they were collecting in tickets go without adding to the police force to recoup that money? If you do, you really need to wake up, because that wouldn’t happen.
Additionally, commenters said that many people are out of work and this could open jobs for police officers. Well, again, police officers are funded by taxpayers. It is a job, there is not doubt, but it is not a “producing” job. In other words, more police officers mean more taxes, which means bigger government. This is what I don’t understand about so much support given to the idea.
While I agree that it would add a certain bit of protection to the school, I think the best route would be to simply allow school officials to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Dr. Ignatius Piazza at FrontSight.com has offered to train teachers, who are allowed to carry their firearms at school, to use their weapons for free, including getting them a concealed carry permit. The NRA also has the ability to train as well.
GOA President Larry Pratt, in an interview with Anthony Wile at the Daily Bell, back in 2010 was asked what he though about how the NRA handles things in terms of government:
Wile: Is [the NRA] a helpful organization [in the freedom fight]?
Pratt: The National Rifle Association approaches politics and the government as a given. That leads to working within the system rather than saying we see the system [itself as] a problem, that the system represents a number of threats to our liberty and that the system needs to be brought under control … [that] the system [itself] needs to corrected and changed.
Wile: Some critics have charged that the NRA is set up as part of a Hegelian dialectic intended to move gun control toward gun confiscation. What do you think?
Pratt: Well, as I was saying earlier, they have this view that they can somehow get along in the system….
It is hard for people to come to grips with the idea that your government is not really working for your best interest. If you are able to come to that realization, you will take hopefully appropriate action.
The NRA hasn’t come to that realization and so they are comfortable working within a system which is essentially leading us into bondage….
Wile: Why does the NRA so often compromise with Congress — thus allowing legislation which has whittled away Second Amendment rights?
Pratt: Theirs … is the view that they want to work within the system.
This training, the firearms, and the ammunition would come at no extra expense to taxpayers, which means the only thing government has to do is shrink by simply removing the “Gun Free Zones” of public schools. Before people become all emotional like Piers Morgan did with that suggestion, remember that parents apparently trust school officials enough to leave your kids with them for eight hours a day (which in my opinion, I would think people would rather teach their own children, rather than have state employees do it.) Why would it be unthinkable that there would be a problem where potentially every classroom had the ability to be defended, not just one door with a police officer?
I completely agree with Mr. LaPierre’s point that he made when he said, “You want one more law on top of 20,000 laws, when most of the federal gun laws we don’t even enforce?”
One thing we know for sure and that is that gun bans and more gun control will not make anyone safer, not children and not adults. So the debate should be on whether or not we want more government intervention in the matter or whether we would rather that citizens be allowed to exercise their Second Amendment rights, including on the campus of public schools.
Watch the interview below:
Additionally LaPierre will be working with Congressman Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) for legislative efforts to add police officers to every school.
UPDATE: Looks like several news people, including NBC’s David Gregory, may have violated current guns laws on national television.
Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter.
You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.
Check out Freedom Outpost’s Polls on LockerDome on LockerDome