Howard Fischer/Capitol Media Services
Attorney General Tom Horne.
Current users sign in here.
Searched for "the Clinton ban did reduce the number of mass murders" (without the quotes). The very first response came to the following conclusion: "It's possible that the federal assault weapon ban did some good -- but if it did, the effect was so subtle that even at a national level, statisticians couldn't measure it over a 24 month period and honestly say, 'Yes, it seems to be helping.' " Senator Feinstein's updated assault weapons bill will ban rifles with thumbhole stocks. This is not an attempt to reduce crime. I don't even know what to call it. The Rifle Fashion Police?
Whenever I hear someone say "You don't NEED" to own this or that, it's a red flag. It tells me that the speaker wants to restrict my freedoms by enforced government regulation. First it would be you don't need a 30 round magazine, then you don't need a rifle with a pistol grip, then you don't need hollow point bullets, and finally, you don't need a gun at all. Gun control is not about guns - it's about control.
"The other side of the argument" is the wrong side for the majority of Americans. Sure, everyone wants to lower the number of shooting deaths, but disarming law abiding citizens is not the right response. Locking up the homicidal maniacs and providing protection for the vulnerable areas of society would be an excellent start.
Sorry Deddzone, I did not mean to name call. I only consider tour stance a liberal stance. The country is moving toward destruction at the hands of the PC left.
Ah yes, the name calling and the inability to see the other side of the argument. Gee Slabside, that has nearly destroyed the Republican party that i use to belong to. I'm an Independent and I don't really care if you don't believe anything that is said to you---it matters not, as the country will move forward. Nothing will ever be rightwing enough to make some happy---tough. Cheers!
Forgive me Deddzone if I do not believe you are not a lib and conceal carry. If you agree with the Clinton ban then in my book you are one of the left. Regulating firearms is not the answer. When you libs pass regulations you swing a wide rope that will encompass more than high capacity mags and scary looking rifles.The gun didn't pull it's own trigger in the classroom shooting, a nutcase did. I know many gun owners and believe me, they do not think like you.
Slabside, I'm not liberal and I carry concealed. That's the problem for the NRA and those who think more guns are the only answer. One-sided thinking gets us no where. Many gun owners want a changes to the gun laws.
The Clinton ban did reduce the number of mass murders. Come on. We do not need a gun that sprays bullets and wipes out a classroom of kids in less than 30 seconds. Want to own one? Join the military or police and do some good service.
As I said, "well regulated Militia" is about to ring true. Regulate it, as I'll show up and pass no problem.
Changing gun laws, banning magazines, rifles... and none of this is a knee jerk reaction is it? Banning these items will not make them go away. The 1994 Clinton ban did nothing. Kids being shot by teachers...teachers being shot by cops, yeah yeah. This same hysteria was shrieked by the left when concealed carry permits were legalized. We heard the same "blood in the streets" nonsense when firearm concealed carry was legalized in bars and restaurants.This country is civilized because citizens are legally able to defend themselves. We need to enforce the laws already on the books.
Slabside, a lot of knee-jerk reactions will occur--such as considering to arm 200 teachers. I don't find any of it funny or hysterical and question why any sane person would.
What happens when we learn the hard way when an armed teacher shoots one of their own students--by accident of course. Or the police show up and shoot a teacher with a gun thinking they are the bad guy/gal? Think about it. It's time to think and not just react.
I'm thinking it's time to change the gun laws. The 2nd amendment begins with "A well regulated Militia..." That's not quite the case now , is it? But it could soon be and I'm fine with it. I'll show up to be properly trained and mentally screened--because it's the right thing to do.
Many people, including a large number of gun owners, are fine with changing gun laws. Why? We value human life more than high-powered guns and high-capacity magazines.
Time to stop the "waving your gun in people's faces" and realize we are at a national turning point where a civizilized country does NOT let this happen.
I just read that Ohio is considering arming teachers and over 200 teachers received firearm training in Utah. This will make the hoplophobes hysterical. [beam]
OK Willie, You made your point... no armed teachers, principals or guards at schools because they can't stop bad people. What do you propose?
I'm a pro-gun Liberal. Not anti-gun at all.
But, there were armed people at the site of the Giffords shooting in Tuscon and not one of them fired a shot.
This morning we get news that an UNARMED man was taken into a police station in New Jersey and took a gun away from a cop and shot 3 cops with one possible fatality before they killed him.
A whole building full or armed trained men couldn't stop an UNARMED man from getting a gun away from one of them and shooting 3 of them.
Imagine if he had walked through the door carrying an AK-47 shooting from the moment the door opened!
The presence of armed people will NOT stop a shooter who is willing to die or even who WANTS to die. Death by cop is a long known occurrence.
In order for armed people to protect kids in schools there would have to be one armed person in each classroom and in each hallway.
One lone armed person would probably be worse than none. People would feel safe and they wouldn't be. One semi-trained person might well not be able to pull the trigger when needed. Just like the people in Tuscon that were armed. They never even drew their guns.
What needs to stop is the idea that we can somehow wish this away, or just ignore it until it disappears. The American response to every school shooting is "head, meet sand." Nothing changes, and we all try to think about something else until the next school shooting, and nothing changes after that, and so it goes. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. We have to stop the continuing school shootings, and we know very well how to do that. Will we have the courage to defend our children from the next crazed killer, or will we end up with our heads in the sand again?
I own guns. No assault weapons. But I do think we are losing our minds thinking everyone must be armed to protect from this threat and that threat. What sort of nation are we becoming where we must arm the masses to feel safe?
I don't for a second think anyone wants to see a child die gunned down at school. We are beginning to look like parts of the Middle East where we point and say "Gee, I hope some day they stop acting crazy and stop killing each other."
Seriously, this is NOT how America acts. Blame, hate and kill. It has to stop.
All it really takes is training. Law enforcement officers in Arizona go through an annual "judgmental shooting" scenario where they are presented with a situation and they have to decide what to do. If they shoot and they weren't supposed to, or they don't shoot and they WERE supposed to, it indicates their judgment is flawed and their ability to carry a gun is revoked. You'd be surprised at how fast your finger goes to the trigger when you see muzzle flashes and hear gunshots, even on the movie screen. I have no doubt that the same reaction would happen in a real shooting. Anyone carrying a gun in school would need to demonstrate correct judgment or their ability would be revoked as well.
What I keep hearing in this debate from the anti-gun crowd is basically "I would rather see my child die than see a teacher carrying a gun." But what they're really saying is "I would rather see YOUR child die than see a teacher carrying a gun," and that is where many parents are going to lose interest in the gun control argument. Someone armed and trained needs to be in the school right now, today, to protect those kids, before the next copycat spree killer completes his plans. And do you think Al Qaeda hasn't been paying careful attention to this topic?
Arizona---The Meth lab of Democracy. Here we go with another rightwing nut idea. Clearly we need to keep voting these people O-u-T of office.
This is part is just insane: Horne said he's convinced that training, conducted with a computer screen and fake electronic gun, is sufficient to ensure student safety."
A plasitc gun and a computer program against an assault rifle carried by a mentally unstable individual is dumb, dumb, dumb.
But this is Arizona.....
You're one of those who talks the talk and I doubt if you could walk the walk. All you do is sit at your computer and spew baloney. I wouldn't be a victim to you in a million years. I have actually been there have you? I doubt it. You are just another of the right wing talking points, just like Rush, who spew it but can't back it up. By the way, it's caca del toro, victim
@ Irons 1, "It takes an individual with determination and nerve to point a weapon at a human being."El Toro Manure. It's called self preservation. Irons, you will always be a victim. I won't.
While there are some positive comments, the liberals are out in force on this article. No more gun laws. Enforce the ones on the books.
Slabside, the SRO's we had at Dobson were experienced officers, not fresh out of the academy types. They had had previous experience with hostage situations/crowd shooting situations.
Why is having the principal armed "a good place to start"? Do you have kids in school? Would you prefer an experienced officer to a principal in a shooting situation? I assume you would, so why aren't you raising a stink about how much the leg cut from police in schools, 9 million in the last two years, 20 million in the last five?
I guess it boils down to how much the legislature thinks our kids' lives are worth. I guess we'll see next month.
And while my kids are out of high school, we still have one in college, where the kids are even more vulnerable than in high school. But I'm not in favor of professors coming to class armed or kids with concealed weapons in their packbacks.
It takes an individual with determination and nerve to point a weapon at a human being. You have to have the the type of personality that would not crack and would shoot. Many people would hesitate and, in turn, would be shot themselves. I don't know how many people, especially those who SAY they would, can really pull the trigger in time. Lots of bravado out there, not sure if many could walk the walk, instead of the MANY, who talk the talk.
Mike, your SRO started his profession with all of his training correct? Or perhaps he was an individual not unlike a school principal that required training. I think it is a good way to start. Let me guess Mike, your kids (if you have any) are out of school now yes?
I taught at a high school with an SRO, and he was armed and trained for hostage/attack situations. His presence clearly made my high school safer.
However . . .
Like the Sidwell friends security staff, the SRO was a highly-trained professional, who continuously trained for shooters in schools. Further, he had the personality that lends itself to calm in the storm. And he constantly was tested on marksmanship, especially in crowd situations.
In other words, a professional. Horne's proposal is an insult to those professionals and deceptive to boot. His trained principal/employee might be able to stop a shooter or might add to the mayhem, depending on the principal's personality and training.
No, Horne and his Republican buddies don't want to pay for professionals to be staffed in our schools, they'd rather do it on the cheap.
Slabside, if you're really serious about secure schools, why aren't you raising a stink about the leaders of the legislature saying we can't afford police officers in our schools?
As usual where firearms are involved, a rational solution is often met with irrational responses. Let's look at some of the possible solutions:
- Do nothing - Obviously this will not decrease the number of campus shootings.- Increase physical security - Access control and metal detectors won't help when the killer can just shoot out a window or steal an access card. You have to assume that there's an armed bad guy inside your school at this very moment.- Police officers in schools - If they're already assigned, that's great. If not, it will be expensive. They aren't allowed to work as law enforcement volunteers, and overtime rules would apply. We couldn't afford one in every school.- Change society - End all violence in the US by enforced pacifism. Think "Millenium Man." That may work if you want to wait hundreds of years for the result.- Put all homicidal maniacs behind bars - Not possible as long as people listen to the ACLU's whining about privacy and "deinstitutionalization." Violent goblins are allowed to roam our streets freely until the voices in their heads tell them to start shooting.- Reinstitute the Assault Weapons Ban - That worked so well at Columbine, didn't it? Eric Harris carried a carbine and thirteen 10-round magazines, a legal configuration under the Clinton ban. He fired 96 rounds with that carbine. The ban didn't work then and it won't work in the future.- Ban and confiscate all firearms - Another hundred-year wait for the solution and no guarantee there won't be millions of guns cached away. Also, there's that pesky Constitution to deal with. Firearms can't be un-invented.
Now let's consider something that is working already:
- Place armed volunteers in schools - This would be a program similar to the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) Program that puts armed pilots in cockpits. Call for volunteers. Develop a list of approved guns and ammunition that they can carry (they have to supply their own weapons). Put them through extensive firearms training (classroom and range time). Require them to requalify at the firing range and go through judgmental shooting scenarios annually like any police officer. DON'T require the weapon to be locked up in some central location that could be at the opposite end of the school from the active shooter (the purpose of the program is not to have unarmed volunteers).
The FFDO Program has been in place for ten years and has qualified thousands of armed pilots. It's time to implement a similar program in our schools. Right now, the vast majority of schools have no defense at all against an armed shooter, because school employees are disarmed by law. We need to give them the means to defend themselves and their students against the next Eric Harris or Adam Lanza. As someone said recently, "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
Yet Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, ( where the Obama daughters attend), has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak. It seems it is acceptable at some schools. These security officers are not part of the Secret Service provided for the president's daughters. All of our politicians have armed security yet our children do not rate it.Libs again showing their ignorance and double sets of standards.
doesnt hornedog have some legal issues that r on going...and he thinks his opinion means something
Just another unqualified, ethically deficient moron in our state government, the list is long. The solution is not arming teachers so they freak out in an emergency an innocents are shot by wannabes Rambos. The solution is simple, costly,but simple. A police, or highly trained security officer (only those with military or police experience should be allowed) , at every school hardened, secured entrance. The Israelies learn in the 70s, the hardway, and every school there has armed security. The cost will be high but our useless state legislature can find the money by cuting waste and pet projects. Don't let the mental midgets at the Legislature or that other moron in the Governor's office tell you they can't pay for this, they can.
This is again the far right wing trying to tell us to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain". But, just like the great Wizard of Oz, their attempts are simply part of a tremendous fraud. They are simply giving their minions simple solutions that won't work, rather than focusing on the multiple issues that need to be addressed. Unless needed, I won't waste everyone's time laying out the problems with Horne's plan (it simply proves what a complete moron this man is). Instead, let's have an honest discussion regarding the issues that need to be addressed.
First, we need to talk about a society that embraces violence and too often sees violence as the means of first resort to resolve our problems. Look at our movies, our television shows, our video games, etc... We have allowed violence to become the entertainment for our society.
Second, we need to look at our mental health care system. We need to determine what is broken and what needs to be fixed. We need to see how medicating ourselves and our children to "make" them happy is have a dramatic effect on us. It seems as though we accept the propaganda of big pharma that we simply need to take a pill to be happy.
Finally, we need to closely examine gun culture. While we should never ban guns, we do need to find the balance between providing our rights to own guns with the needs of the society to protect itself. The perfect example is access to weapons with large clip capacity. The purpose of large clip capacity is not to protect yourself or for hunting. Instead it is designed and used for two purposes. First, it allows recreational shooters the ability to fire more shots between reloading. The second is for committing mass murder. We need to decide whether the rights of the recreational shooter outweigh the needs of society to protect itself.
This guy's a moron! Worse yet, he was elected by other morons who may just agree with his warped views.This is the AG who is playing all manner of legal tricks to get out of a hit and run, while playing around with his girlfriend, in a borrowed car no less, while both were being paid with our tax dollars. Keep guns out of schools, the risk is too great.I have 3 kids in the public school system and I don't want anybody but sworn police officers carrying guns where my kids are.
Have something you want to share? Share it with us to appear online and maybe in our print edition.
Raise your caps and don your gowns: It's graduation month!
East Valley Tribune
Phone number: 480-TRIBUNE
Address: 1620 W. Fountainhead Parkway, Ste. 219
Tempe, AZ 85282
More Contact Information...
We're always interested in hearing about news in our community. Let us know what's going on!
Share your news
A Division of 10/13 Communications