Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 53% of Americans expressed their support for doing exactly what the NRA's proposing....

Posted 1 year ago on Dec. 22, 2012, 1:47 a.m. EST by outlawtumor (-162)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Lost in our objective, unbiased, and non-partisan media's zeal to mock the National Rifle Association's proposal to guard our public schools is the fact that, in a Gallup poll taken Wednesday, a majority of 53% of Americans expressed their support for doing exactly what the NRA's proposing – increasing police presence at schools.

Only 42% support an assault weapons ban.

Almost as many people (34%) thought that at least one school official in every school should carry a gun as those who favored banning the sale of assault and semi-automatic guns, while 27% felt that the news media should not print or read the names of the shooter. The news blackout of the shooter drew the highest percentage of those who thought it would be ineffective, at 40%, but the gun ban was a close second in the ineffectiveness rating at 36%.

What also becomes clear from the poll is the public’s perception that all of the solutions offered would be fruitless, as 53% was the highest positive rating of any of the remedies.

I'd love to see a poll of the elite media asking if they prefer armed or unarmed guards at their workplace.

67 Comments

67 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5854) 1 year ago

http://truth-out.org/news/item/13487-nra-calls-for-congress-to-require-armed-guards-in-every-school

A Pew Research Center survey this week found that the public’s attitudes toward gun control have shown modest change since the Connecticut shootings. Of the Americans surveyed this week, 49 percent say it is more important to control gun ownership, while 42 percent say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns.

It marks the first time since Obama took office that more Americans prioritize gun control than the right to own guns, Pew said.

Regardless, Pew found that support for gun control remains lower than before Obama took office. In April 2008, 58 percent of those surveyed said it was more important to control gun ownership. At the time, just 37 percent prioritized protecting gun rights.

© 2012 McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

The roots of the NRA;

The Real And Racist Origins of the Second Amendment

http://blackagendareport.com/content/american-history-black-history-and-right-bear-arms

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

And this matters why???

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

53% is nothing. When it gets to be around 65% then politicians might take notice of public opinion. If gun owners want armed guards in schools then they can pay for it. I'm not paying squat.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

You're paying plenty for armed protection for Obama's kids and every other politician's kids in D.C. Aren't the 99%'s kids worth the same consideration?

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

If you want money from me you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

The Government can just take what it wants,isn't that why you voted Obama in the first place?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Gallup poll on guns [ BEFORE Newtown ]

"Just your opinion, what do you think are the one or two most important things that could be done to prevent mass shootings from occurring in the United States?"

Stricter gun control laws 24%

Better mental health screening/Better mental health support 15%

More education/Teach children about violence/proper use of guns 9%

More extensive background checks for those buying guns 8%

Need stricter security measures for public gatherings* 6%

Ban handguns/bullets 5%

Americans need to be aware/speak up about possible dangers 4%

Better parenting/Hold parents accountable 4%

Allow people to carry guns for their own protection 4%

Bring God/morality back into people's lives 4%

Tougher criminal justice/sentencing 3%

Better enforcement of existing gun laws 3%

Less media coverage of shootings/Don't sensationalize 2%

Restrict sale of automatic handguns 2%

Better cooperation/communication between political parties 1%

Improve the economy/More jobs 1%

Crack down on illegal immigration 1%

Other 4%

Nothing (vol.) 11%

No opinion 12%

(vol.) = Volunteered response
Percentages total more than 100% due to multiple responses * = my note: like wayne's school guards


Did you know that there were TWO armed security guards at the Columbine school on April 20 1999?

Did you know that there was a security guard ( first killed ) at the Red Lake school on March 21, 2005 when seven people were massacred by a shooter who stole unlocked guns and had had mental health treatment.

The nra is a shill - not for gun owners - but for gun manufacturers.
wayne lapierre's annual compensation is around $1,000,000.
That buys a lot of lies.
And the nra pays lots of liars.

US annual gun deaths per 100,000 = 10.0
India annual gun deaths per 100,000 = 1.0
Japan annual gun deaths per 100,000= 0.1

[-] -1 points by voot501 (-4) 1 year ago

Didn't Obama state he wants to hire more firemen, P O L I C E and teachers?

WTF are you bitching about now?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Obama can hire no firemen, police or teachers.
You don't understand that ?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

How about a grass roots solution to keep big contractors in security from getting wasteful contracts. Maybe just have a guy or two in plain clothes as security guys on the school contract. Probably would be some pressure from state board or local police to meet certain minimum requirements. They probably already have minimum requirements for emergency communications and ...probably firearms training.

Conneticut was a high gun law state, so maybe they didn't have any guards with fire arms.

Grassroots keeps the corporation out, and keep the police from Militarizing your schools. I can see it now, two permanent patrol cars in the parking lot, 3-4 police officers, then you get the military recruiters up their all week, then you see a mix of uniforms with fire arms standing around in the public areas of the schools. Getting everyone used to being around the military and the police at all high schools.

Private school contract with security guards with guns also - prevents the problem of over trained, overly aggressive police officers, or roid rage police officers getting hired in School enviroments. If you take your older mature police officers and put them in schools 1) You just lost a valueable crime fighters who is no longer on the street or available for the whole city 2) Older officers are going to be making like $80K not including benefits($15K).

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

"Maybe just have a guy or two in plain clothes as security guys on the school contract."
there were TWO armed security guards in Columbine High School for the massacre.
I bet it would not have happened if they had three.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

In CT? Think more like 175K, and in affluent areas easily over 200.

I think we should just eliminate public education.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Just look at you getting duped into supporting the police state and big government.

Next you'll want to put armed officers in our homes to prevent home invasions?

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

Voting Obama twice is being duped,voting for Democrats is being a "big Government hack".

Why don't you and all your Leftist's friends start posting signs in your front yard,on your door,on your windows,bumper sticker your cars with "Gun Free Zone"???

After all you believe they've been so effective right??

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I am not responsible for your assumptions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjpcT90NDfs

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

You're also not honest enough to admit it either.

[-] 0 points by Shule (1696) 1 year ago

Check out Lt. Col Grossman, and his book "On Killing". He also has a "Killology" website. He is a retired military psychologist who says the U.S. public is literally being "trained" to kill through video games, movies, and a political/social atmosphere which essentially simulates the same training given to military people to get them to kill people in war. Put on top of that only a modicum of gun handling laws, we have completed the formula for making mass murders. On the morning after the latest school shootings, Lt. Col Grossman was on TV saying those parents allowing their kids to play video games and watch violent movies, and who go around singing bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, the blood is on their hands.

Armed guards would only help to propagate the culture for mass murder. Then again what else should one expect from such a culture.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

Yes I agree but we need to put blame for this where it lies - Hollywood, TV networks, gangsta rap, etc. etc. etc. There isn't a child in the US that does not daily observe a simulated murder somewhere; society doesn't care - crime is glamorized - and either does the child.

[-] 1 points by Shule (1696) 1 year ago

That is exactly what the Lt Col is saying.

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

"Armed guards would only help to propagate the culture for mass murder"

Using your logic we should then do away with the all police and security guards in every capacity.

[-] 0 points by gsw (2687) 1 year ago

If they are regular trained police officials, and not a mall cop, security guard, that would not be as objectionable to have increased police, as well as more mental health, and nurses in schools, as well. Theres high schools have cops already.

At least till we get the guns regulated like cars, licensed and insured, etc,

http://www.gallup.com/poll/159422/stop-shootings-americans-focus-police-mental-health.aspx

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there were 98,817 public schools during the 2009-2010 school year.

Read more: Number of U.S. Public Schools — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/number-us-public-schools.html#ixzz2Foz7xKQx

100,000 cops should be doable

How about a gps computer chip on each gun, so we know when one is near a school.

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

"How about a gps computer chip on each gun, so we know when one is near a school."

How about having every type of free expression first submitted to Government for approval and required editing before it's allowed to be made public?

At least till we can get all media content like video games,movies, all means of media via TV,radio,print and internet regulated like cars,licensed and even insured.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

How's that idea going with your Govt? They think nothing of starving to death half a million Iraqi children, or "responsibly" killing thousands of civilians, including women and children with drone strikes that have no legal basis.

[-] 0 points by gsw (2687) 1 year ago

If you want your literal right to bear arms, you may have a musket from 1700s that take a minute to load, like the founders had.

http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/no-more-silence-on-gun-limits/article_99027848-48e0-11e2-b1f3-0019bb2963f4.html

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/03/robert-farago/ma-global-positioning-system-locators-in-firearms-study-commission-is-hereby-established-for-the-purpose-of-making-an-investigation-and-study-relative-to-the-feasibility-of-placing-global-positionin/

Your right to guns is not absolute, like having a car, it bears responsibilities.

If your a felon, sorry. http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/no-more-silence-on-gun-limits/article_99027848-48e0-11e2-b1f3-0019bb2963f4.html

You can have a musket or an old 1 shot pistol from the 1700s, like it says in constitution, that takes a minute to load.

Tech in guns as progressed greatly, amount of deaths that can be inflicted.

Where are responsibilities to keep them locked up away so they can't be abused.

So Adam lanz had a right to bear and use guns , and that supersedes the kid's right to life?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4675939

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

You don't know what you're talking about. All laws were obeyed in Connecticut except of course by Adam. He wasn't old enough to buy a gun legally,he stole his mothers guns,he murdered his mother and many children/adults.

How many more laws do you want to enact that will take Constitutional rights and freedoms from millions of honest Americans but will not stop the next murder???

There's no logic to this thinking,this tragedy is being exploited by people like you to further the agenda of the Left to completely disarm the American people. You either know this and are good with that or you're just plain ignorant and really slow.

[-] 0 points by gsw (2687) 1 year ago

You have a right to bear a musket or sword, the arms of the times of the supreme law of the constitution. A cutting edge 1789 weapon.

It was good enough for the three musketeers.

Sounds like a conservative idea.

Constitution said you can have a musket. Go crazy.

I'd propose a voluntary trade back, a contemporary weapon for a working replica musket, a copy of the constitution, and a gold musket ball.

I like the biological loch on gun like James Bond has. Only you could shoot your gun.

Constitution doesn't say you can have arms that are created in future.

Anyway, the arms right goes to a well armed militia of the people.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Ows should have mini muskets made to show our solidarity to our leftist conservative intent, which isto restore law and order.

Australia was smart to ban these weapons, and it has reduced the carnage.

Enough is enough.

My kids and grand kids deserve to be safe and have their rights protected too.

What about rights of people killed by people with guns?

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

Again you don't understand the 2nd Amendment and are extrapolating your own agenda from your own ignorance of the subject.

Do you even know the carnage and damage a Minie black powder ball does? Probably not since you don't seem to know much about anything else on this subject.

The Minie ball:

"When it hit the human body, destruction of tissues, cartilage, vein, and bone was massive. The soft lead flattened and broke apart as it hit flesh. If a man was hit in the arm or leg, the bullet shattered the bone from 6 to 10 inches and necessity for amputation was certain. If hit in the torso, a man was usually left to die. Doctors at the time of the Civil War knew little about mending a hole in the body that the slow moving Minie ball had made. The entrance wound was the size of a man's thumb, but the exit wound was the size of a man's fist."

You need to quite getting your information from people and media that is as ignorant or more so than yourself.

[-] 0 points by gsw (2687) 1 year ago

They weren't very accurate and took time to reload.

Sounds like a good scary defensive weapon.

We must Stop arming terrorists in america.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H33u1e80WY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

You don't have to fear a ban on assault weapons. Won't pass in congress.

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

These aren't "assault weapons" they are semi-automatic rifles.

Just like like your Prius is a car not an "assault car" even though a few of them have been known to assault people. Your Prius is just a car but unfortunately not included in the Constitution as a right to own.

[-] 0 points by Shule (1696) 1 year ago

Imagine what you're kids will start thinking when the first thing they see upon entering a school is some guy dressed up in riot gear toting an automatic rifle. Certainly, its not an impression that should be put upon a youngster.

We all understand the utility of police and security guards in certain places as we do live in a violent world. So, let's not make analogies which are beyond sensible limits.

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

So you believe that politicians and money,jewels,banks,courthouses deserve armed protection,but the lives of our children are not worthy of the same consideration?

[-] 0 points by voot501 (-4) 1 year ago

Who said guards should sport an automatic rifle and riot gear?

A Sig Sauer P226 or Glock 17 will do just fine.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

no no no i they are going to stop mass shooters they need the same fire power as the shooters or even more powerful. i think they should probably be armed with typical tactical gear for army infantry. actually why don't we just put a platoon at every school and we should be good.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

No tanks? Drones?

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

i was thinking we could use this as an opportunity to get the public used to boston dynamics http://www.youtube.com/user/BostonDynamics and their newest toys. or perhaps some of these little guys outfitted with c-4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiCFtmdrvHM

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Eat your heart out Tony Stark.

[-] -1 points by voot501 (-4) 1 year ago

Only for the EPA environuts to harass farmers.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

Blame that one on Nixon, also OSHA - weapons for good placed in the hands of evil.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

So you support drones to police farmers but not to protect our children?

[-] -2 points by voot501 (-4) 1 year ago

First of all, please write complete thoughts and capitalize the beginning of sentences so people can understand what the hell you're saying.

They don't need the same guns. LEOs often don't and business is taken care of. Under two percent of gun crimes involve assault weapons. You're clearly beyond your aptitude in this debate.

[-] 3 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

1st of all who the fuck do you think you are trying to correct me? better yet what makes you think you have the authority to correct me? check this out. GO FUCK YOURSELF. is that clear? are you confused about the concepts and thoughts i am trying to convey now? do you need more clarification? 2nd of all i was making fun of stupid ass republitards like yourself who think it's a good idea to have guns in schools. please do us all a favor, secede.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

But the armed guards at Columbine were outgunned.

You don't think tanks. & drones?

[-] -1 points by voot501 (-4) 1 year ago

Only if the tanks are pointed at you. We need more fertilizer.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You want to kill me, & use my remains to help farming?

What about thefact that armed guards will not prevent a gun massacre.

It didn't at columbine, It didn't at Fort hood, It hasn't at countless shootings at police stations.

We must enact measures that will prevent the massacre in the 1st place.

What's the objection?

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

we should absolutely minimize the police state we have implemented after the fear mongering exploitation of the 9/11 attacks.

I don't want to live in a police state. I prefer freedom and liberty. So therefore let's agree to take action to stop/minimize these gun massacres by getting control of ALL the guns floating around our country.

I'd rather only responsible good guys have guns. We can turn this around! And stop it before the get to the school. And in the process we can retain the freedom we cherish.

[-] 1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 1 year ago

I can't believe you actually posted that.

"minimize the police state"

How? By giving up our Constitutional freedom to bear arms to the...Police State?

"I don't want to live in a police state. I prefer freedom and liberty."

So you no longer want the freedom and liberty to defend yourself and your family?

The Government is the ultimate "Police State" and you want the Government "getting control of ALL the guns"???

"I'd rather only responsible good guys have guns."

Is there anytime in your life when you had doubts about the Government,the police state? Like they might not be the "good guys"??

You've been doing a lot twisted thinking here and I'm not sure if you are actually really lucid at this point.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Adding police IS the govt police state I want to avoid. I have never suggested removing the freedom to defend myself, or taking guns away from anyone.

I know there are bad guys in the police. I just believe most are not. In that regard I support better civilian review boards.

The real control I'm talkin about is on the 'bad guys' who sell (lose) guns to criminals/mentally ill without background checks.

We should identify the NRA 'A' rated pols and organizer a major pressure campaign.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

You already do and police of all forms are absolutely necessary in light of our extremely high crime rates.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Sure we need police but we must constantly seek to reduce crime in order so that we might require fewer police.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

You're fucking clueless, as usual.

Nothing changes. Do you have access to a credit card?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Why you need money.? Get a job! You lazy hippie.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

LOL. I just worked 133 hours in eleven days. You're the one that needs to get a job. You spend your waking hours on this board. Unless you're a bot, that makes you a fixated fuck.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Why are you asking for my cr card number? How is that (or cursing me out) related to preventing another slaughter of 6 year olds.

Perhaps you just come here to attack, put down, and insult? Positive help for others is it's own reward. try it. It's life affirming.

Maybe you should get a list of all the NRA 'A' rated politicians and encourage letter writing pressure campaigns against them in order to pass new gun safety measures.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Hypocrite. Guns don't kill people.

Get a life.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Catchy: Guns don't kill people. Governments kill People.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Yeah I agree people (with guns) kill people!

People who sell guns to criminals kill people.!

Gun makers who lose track of thousands of guns annually kill people!

People who defend irresponsible gun owner/seller/maker behavior kill people.

We should identify the NRA 'A' rated pols and organizer a major pressure campaign.

You with us?

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Try a pressure campaign against your congress and govt.

They are the largest supporters (insider traders) in the world for gun production.

"An anthropologist proposed a game to these African children. He put a basket of fruit by a tree & said whoever gets to it 1st can have all the fruit. They all held hands & ran together. They all won! The baffled anthropologist asked why they did that. They replied, "How can 1 of us be happy if the rest of us are sad?’"

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Cool.

Of course the pols I was referring to is my (and your) congress & govt.

Which pols did you think I was referring to?

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

Our revolving door justice system is growing crime.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Then we should implementing changes, not adding guns, how does that address a poor justice system.

[-] -2 points by town (-374) 1 year ago

unless you get rid of all the people on the planet, you will always have crime. its part of human nature.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

But you aren't suggesting genocide are you? Perhaps you might support getting rid of certain groups of people?

[-] -1 points by town (-374) 1 year ago

genocide? no. certain groups? no, homicidal people know no particular ethnicity. i was talking about human nature.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Human nature is clearly NOT to slaughter people since the vast majority do not do so.

Right?

And those that do are mostly mentally disturbed.

So mostly human nature is to help others, that is evidenced by the enormous number of people coming to the aid of others.

Is that the Human Nature you're talkin about.

[-] -1 points by town (-374) 1 year ago

rwanda, nazi germany, stalinist russia, mao's china.