newtown residents vote down proposal that would increase money for school security???

[89sandman]

find it odd they have no problem speaking out to take away your gun rights but aren't willing to pay for protection for the kids they say are in such danger unless tougher gun laws are passed?

 

[Scott]

Seems like backward thinking.

 

[TIM]

why?

if you are talking about wasting money, This is probbaly the biggest waste of money. yes it will make you feel good. But what are the odds of getting killed at school. .0000001%?

 

[Scott]

I guess if piece of mind is protection, they voted it down.

Having an SRO is piece of mind, but it's really a lot more than that. It's a physical presence that DOES make a difference. When our SRO was cut two years ago, we had all sorts of things shwoing up...from drugs, fights, bullying to thefts. Blatant thefts caught on camera. There have been FAR more noticeable occurances of these.

When the deputy's car was parked out front (having a very random schedule), there was rarely a problem in the buildings. Statistically, it's very easy to correlate his presence to a limited # of problems and then the subsequent rise in them after his departure.

 

[polaris dude]

why?

if you are talking about wasting money, This is probbaly the biggest waste of money. yes it will make you feel good. But what are the odds of getting killed at school. .0000001%?

If this is true, then why ban guns?

 

[mold]

If this is true, then why ban guns?

WHY INDEED????

 

[Scott]

No reason to ban those things.

I did notice that after Newtown, they were blaming the "means" (guns).

After Boston Marathon, they are blaming the "motivation" (perpetrator) instead of his means.

About time they got something kind of right.

 

[AZ800]

What ever fits the agenda.
Why vote for more security. What are the odd of lightning striking twice in the same place??

 

[Vern]

No reason to ban those things.

I did notice that after Newtown, they were blaming the "means" (guns).

After Boston Marathon, they are blaming the "motivation" (perpetrator) instead of his means.

About time they got something kind of right.

that's just cuz bombs are already illegal, what they gonna do ban pressure cookers? if it woulda been a shooting that monkey in the white house woulda been all over it.

 

[XXL]

If this is true, then why ban guns?

Because the Democrats want to, they are the most elite, foreward thinking group of people the planet earth has ever seen(the ones not on welfare anyways, and probably a few of those too), they know better than we do. We are backwards and non-progressive.

 

[Scott]

that's just cuz bombs are already illegal, what they gonna do ban pressure cookers? if it woulda been a shooting that monkey in the white house woulda been all over it.

Shows that 'bomb-control' works.

 

[mold]

Because the Democrats want to, they are the most elite, foreward thinking group of people the planet earth has ever seen(the ones not on welfare anyways, and probably a few of those too), they know better than we do. We are backwards and non-progressive.

I agree with everything you are saying in principle except for the elite part. No where on the planet is there a larger group of individuals that think there chit doesn't stink than in the Republican Party.