Never forget! Democrats don’t want police at schools

First off I blame the shooter and only the shooter but the lack of logic in policies that democrats push does make one wonder

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/25/nolte-never-forget-democrats-want-remove-cops-schools/

 

That's what Shelby County does. A policeman on every campus, more than one on the big ones, and the school locks after classes start and you don't get on campus without being buzzed in and going through the metal detector. That's been the policy for years, it's not a problem and no school shootings.

If you actually want to solve the problem, that's how you solve it. But, the folks politicking this have no desire to actually solve it. There is big big money is political fights, there is little money in solutions. They have no compunction about fundraising off the still warm bodies of dead students. Give them no more attention than their fiendish ghoulishness deserves.

 

Progressive Democrats only had to put police officers in schools because the teachers were not allowed to discipline students or use any physical force, so the students became uncontrollable.

So then after they put police officers in schools, they could blame excessive use of police force.
(see this thread: Police coming into schools, arresting children for misbehavior )

When that of course did not address the issue (Why would it have?), some of the schools began tossing out the police officer. Some of these schools then fell into chaos.

 

when they (the politicians) are afraid They put up fences?

 

I have been a long time advocate of harming armed security at schools; however, after much debate and discussion I am not sure how effective it ultimately will be. This is a complicated issue but at minimum there are 2 things everyone supporting this idea should consider:

1. Will having armed police at schools deter the shooter? If you are a shooter that wants to shoot children will the presence of police or security in a school make them think "I should not do this and I will totally forget about the idea of shooting kids" or will he think "where can I go shoot children that does not have armed security or police? Maybe a soccer or baseball game or at the playground". If the answer is the latter we haven't really solved the problem of protecting our kids. We just moved the target somewhere else.

2. Are we prepared to pay higher taxes in order to hire and staff the extra police or security. There are almost 150,000 schools in America. If we place 1.5 man power at each one with an average wage of 80K that is an extra 150,000 X 1.5 X 80000 = 18,000,000,000 just to cover the extra labor cost. Throw in the extra cost of capital and you are probably close to $30B more tax revenue that needs to be collected. The is about an extra $300 per year per household if everything is divided evenly. That is a sizeable chunk of change and depending on how you answered the first question it may lead to little change.

 

"Never forget! Democrats don’t want police at schools"

republicans would never fund that

 

allowing teachers to discipline children, yeah, even republican parents would not approve of that, get real

if police were putting knees on children's necks after they were handcuffed, and it was on video, and they died, you betcha the public would be upset

 

Of course it's worth the cost. And it's not just armed security, it's also a locked perimeter with entries covered with metal detectors. This is common for concerts and sporting events and it works.

Once school starts, you have to be buzzed in through the metal detector after being identified. Why would anyone that actually cares about this issue be against security that is as strong as concerts, ball games, court rooms, airports and so on?

That's the problem, the folks that are politicking this have no real interest in actual solutions, they want the issue even though it comes with a body count. It's fiendish and ghoulish of them and it's certainly not convincing.

 

You answered the second question without answering the first. I am in full agreement with you if you believe the answer to the first question is the shooter will simply say it is not a good idea and walk away and live a productive life. IMO the cost is worth it but don't you think many of the people that are complaining about high taxes and inflation may reject the idea.

 

I suggest teachers in full military regalia, military police outside every classroom, and you can pop Trumps border wall on the perimeter. Then and only then will America's children be safe.

 

So the parents and family environment played no part whatsoever in the aforementioned discipline issues? The children's problems are entirely due to the fact corporal punishment was banned? And your evidence supporting this claim is....?

 

You're out of touch with reality. In many Progressive Democrat schools, teachers were not allowed to TOUCH the students in any way.

 

Considering you guys are now accusing teachers of being pedophile groomers I'd say that was the right thing to do.

 

So what? Unless the subject requires physical interaction (physical education) 'touching isn't part of the job spec and even in those few cases it should ordinarily be in public/supervised. The POINT is that children with behavioral issues by and large grow up in households or environments that cause/permit these behaviors. With the exception of issues around bullying and exclusion discipline and conduct issues do not originate in the school environment. So again wheres your evidence that teachers having the ability to use corporal punishment would be a cure all for this issue.

 

where is the Republican bill funding the addition of police at each school?

 

I did. Once classes start, the fenced exterior is locked and you have to be buzzed in through the metal detector. Do you think they are going to buzz in someone carrying a long rifle? This has been the procedure in Shelby County at every school for decades, and no shootings. Of course it's worth the cost. The Left doesn't want to solve this, they want the issue and the fundraising. During the moonshot, NASA had all the funding they ever wanted until they landed on the moon, after that it was a real scramble and it was widely noticed. Often the worst thing these folks can do, is succeed. So understand that as you watch these vultures immediately run for the cameras while the bodies are still warm. This isn't impossible to solve.

Do you think Courtrooms or Airports are ready to trade universal background checks for their locked perimeters, armed security and metal detectors? Hell no. They have no fear of the firearms in the possession of law abiding citizens, their security is sensibly focused on preventing criminals from bringing guns onto their premises.

They are ridiculous and their policy "remedies" are dishonest and it's time to stop indulging them.

 

I still am not sure you did? You seem to be focusing on the part where just as I believe that the shooter would be deterred from shooting up a school. I think all of the extra precautions you mentioned will work for the school. The argument contrary to it is that people that want to shoot and kill kids will simply find another place like playgrounds, soccer practice etc... The thinking is you can throw out huge spending to put out the fire in one spot only to have the fire start somewhere else. It is like an endless cycled. Do we start putting armed security at playgrounds? Sports fields? etc... If it cost $30B or more given your heavy infrastructure cost too to protect the schools, how much more will it cost to protect the parks and other areas children congregate. I don't think this is just a democrat issue. I have always been a fiscal conservative and to increase spending by the numbers we are looking at would be extremely difficult to accept unless the results were very high. I believe this spending would virtually eliminate school shootings, (although nothing is perfect), but I worried that these crazy people that want to shoot children will just find another place to do it. The ultimate goal is not to prevent school shootings. It is to prevent mass shooting of children period. So if these crazy mass murders just move to another venue all of that money was for nothing because the shootings will still exist, they have just been moved to another location.

 

you would let these groomers touch MY child. no way!

much better to arm the groomers er teachers, er whatever.

 

Your #2 will be the biggest hindrance. In my area of rural PA, there are all kinds of folks upset that property taxes pay for schools. They don't really ever suggest alternate methods of funding them, just express their disdain that they have to pay taxes. Because why should they? They don't have kids in the schools they say, why should they have to pay for them. These types of folks already think the schools get too much money and are upset that they have to contribute to the educational costs. They're not going to be in favor of paying more on top of the likely tax increases that will already need to be made to deal with the inflation. They're content blaming the culture, the parents, and the liberals for what the kids do and for everything else and that's where it ends for them. They don't think even one inch beyond that.

 

When I attended school in the late 80s and through the 90s in my rural Pennsylvanian small town, our school still had corporal punishment rules on the books. They never used them, not even once, in the entire time I went there, and that was 22-37 years ago. Long before the progressive boogeymen allegedly took over all the schools.

 

Lol…Texas cops were too afraid to go in and take down the mass murderer. What a bunch of cowards.

 

They don't do anything but run and hide.

 

In the same garbage can as their bill funding additional resources to handle all of the unaborted babies they claim they want running around.

 

Indeed, Texas cops are a bunch of cowards who let the mass murderer kill the children rather than doing their duty and confronting him.

 

But..........then you go on to blame Dems. It's so transparent, did you think we wouldn't notice what you did..........and why?

“Police shouldn't be in schools,” said Senator Murphy in a statement. “There are plenty of better ways to ensure that our schools are safe places to learn, and Congress needs to understand how police in schools ends up with the wrong kids getting arrested for minor disciplinary actions and resources being drained from more effective programs.”

Systemic racism is a major problem in policing and Murphy pointed that out in regard to police in schools. He went on, “we know that Black and Latino kids are disproportionately affected, as they are referred and arrested at drastically higher rates than their white peers. If we are going to begin to tackle systemic racism in this country, we must start by addressing the racial inequities in our education system, and getting police out of classrooms is a necessary first step.”

Over the last few months, school districts have made this call themselves. Minneapolis Public Schools was one of the first to do so in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd. Other districts across the country have joined them, including in Charlottesville, Denver, Portland, and more.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/wesley...to-get-police-out-of-schools/?sh=229dd778cc97