NASA Astronaut Mark Kelly: Armed Guards in Schools Won’t Work

It’s been said here before: being a victim (or the husband of a victim) of firearms-related violence does not make you an expert on crime prevention, firearms or Americans’ Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. To wit: NASA astronaut turned civilian disarmament proponent Mark Kelly on high capacity magazines: “Those were really made for the military to kill a lot of people all at once.” On modern sporting rifles: “assault weapons are really good at killing a lot of people all at once.” You know what’s really good at killing a lot of people all at once? Gas chambers. Bombs. Prison camps. I wonder if the man receiving a government pension courtesy of American taxpayers can tell me the relative body count between spree killers and government agents (e.g., purveyors of “ethnic cleansing”) “This isn’t about the Second Amendment . . . I’ve defended the Constitution. . . . Armed guards in schools won’t work . . .” Kelly’s campaign is despicable.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

87 Responses to NASA Astronaut Mark Kelly: Armed Guards in Schools Won’t Work

  1. avatarCornelius says:

    That’s funny because it worked in my high school.

    • avatarJohn F says:

      Maybe Local Police should start PROTECTING people in stead of giving out FRIVOLUS , $$MONEY MAKING Trafic tickets.

  2. avatarScott says:

    The are already armed guards in two types of schools: ultra rich and ultra poor….. no mass shootings in those places.

    • avatarWC says:

      There was an armed guard at Columbine.

      • avatarjwm says:

        He failed, so nobody should be allowed to try, WC. Are your kids in public or private school? Do they have armed security? If not they are no safer than the kids at Sandy Hook or Columbine. The guns are out there. Hundreds of millions of them.

  3. avatarJSIII says:

    A single armed guard who sits at a desk all day WILL NOT work. He will be the first one to go down, probably before even drawing his gun. As the TTAG school shooting simulation showed. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist or astronaut to see this.

    Multiple armed guards or LEO’s who actually patrol, making them difficult targets combined with armed teachers as a layered approach WILL work. Even if one of your armed guards is taken out it gives critical time for your other guards to respond and your armed teachers to get ready to repell the attacker from their room.

    • avatarHal says:

      Agreed. A proactive, static, situationally aware shooter who is always on the alert for an active shooter scenario is what is called for.

  4. avatarKelly in GA says:

    I really want to make a space cadet comment here. Toothache has dulled my wit this morning. Maybe all the days without gravity in space has altered his brain chemistry. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what stats mean. Rocket man, burned out his common sense a long long time…ago.

    Can someone do better?

  5. avatarpk in AZ says:

    I wish Kelly, who they only give facetime to because of his marriage to Gabriel Giffords, would just GO AWAY!

  6. avataruncommon_senes says:

    We, the Armed Intelligensia, need to destroy the notion that laws will stop criminals from harming people. That is what criminals do. And they will do it quite often with firearms regardless of laws.

    In 2010 or 2011, law enforcement agencies in the United States reported over 2 million violent crimes to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And no one is even estimating how many more violent crimes happened that no one reported to law enforcement agencies. Government law enforcement and criminal justice agents were completely powerless to stop those 2+ million violent crimes. And they will be just as powerless to stop criminals from acquiring and using firearms to harm citizens.

    It is foolish for any citizen to voluntarily disarm and face violent criminals without the means to defend themselves and their families.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      I don’t fully understand it, but reaction to violent crime seems to fall under two categories:

      1) No fair! Somebody make it so they can’t do that to me again.

      2) I better tool up so I can keep that from happening to me again.

      Call it juvenile vs. adult, idealistic vs. practical, intelligent vs. stupid, irresponsible vs. responsible. All of those dichotomies work, and the pure resistance to logic and facts for type 1 makes it seem like some very deep seated personality issues are at work.

  7. avatarKnowWhatIamTalkingAbout says:

    I respectfully disagree with absolutely everything Mr. Kelly has to say.

  8. avatarDon says:

    This is the difference between a rocket scientist and a guy who thinks it is a good idea to ride in one….

  9. avatarMatt in FL says:

    Such a colossal pile of bullshit he’s pushing. His only reason for saying it won’t work is, “Personally I don’t think so…” but he offers nothing to back it up. Instead of offering any (ANY!) evidence to back up his statement, he instead launches into an emotional appeal about having “defended the Constitution,” being a gun owner, “defending the 2A flying in combat over Iraq and Kuwait.” Hell, he even name-drops Seal Team 6. His entire statement is a meaningless, groundless emotional appeal. It’s pathetic, and unlike KnowWhatIamTalkingAbout above, I don’t respectfully disagree. I have no respect whatsoever for this man and the steaming pile of… nothing that he is pushing.

    Oh, and I forgot to add, he also managed to squeeze “common sense” into his statement, in case it was unclear which side he was on.

  10. avatarHal says:

    Hey Marky Mark,
    I am a law enforcement professional. Armed guards in schools WILL work. If I need expert advice on rocket propulsion or orbital navigation, I’ll call you. Otherwise, you’re a know-nothing so STFU.

  11. avatarROger.45 says:

    What’s more despicable than Kelly’s campaign is his willingness to parade his injured wife before the news cameras to push his agenda.

  12. avatarDisThunder says:

    I’m sorry he and his wife have suffered through what they have, but if he had spent half this much time or effort showing concern over her safety before her shooting as he has crusading to disarm the rest of us, I think it’s very possible it could’ve been prevented.

    • avatarpk in AZ says:

      Btw…

      The person who physically took down the Tucson shooter was concealed carrying…

      And he didn’t have to draw his firearm!

      • avatarJosh says:

        I heard he had a permit, but wasn’t carrying… either way, still impressive.

      • avatarWC says:

        The shooter was tackled when he dropped the magazine when he went to reload. The guy with a concealed carry gun showed up a moment after that, and almost shot the person who’d just taken the gun from the shooter.

        • avatarjwm says:

          Almost doesn’t count. Except with horse shoes.

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          How, pray tell, did he “almost shoot the person who’d taken the gun away” if by all accounts, he never drew his gun? How do you almost shoot someone with a holstered weapon? Did he have one of those self-aware firearms of myth and legend?

        • avatarWC says:

          “I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready,” he explained on Fox and Friends. “I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this.” Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. “And that’s who I at first thought was the shooter,” Zamudio recalled. “I told him to ‘Drop it, drop it!’ “

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          Never drew the weapon.

          I was mistaken that it was holstered. It was in his jacket pocket. And yet…

          Never drew the weapon != almost shot someone.

  13. avatarPascal says:

    He is just parroting his wife’s agenda.

    I would like to point out that before the president and all his goons went to Newtown, when interviewed some of the families would something like “we must do something to stop people like Adam Lanza from doing this again” After the Brady Bunch and all the presidents goons, the words changed to “we must do something to stop AR-15s from doing this again”

    It is all about the spin to get the agenda you want. They know it will not stop anything they know they cannot stop anything. Even Richard Cohen in today’s other post in his anti-gun rant says that school shootings are a “remedy for the (still) rare school shooting ” If they are rare, then why all the new laws?

    This has nothing to do with crime or saving lives — it is all about reaching some idealog utopoian society where government rules over everyone in a crushing way and nobody ever dies unless the government decides you should die.

  14. avatarSaul Feldstein says:

    The ineffectiveness of the 9mm as a self defense round could be argued based on the fact this stooge is still married. James Yeagers opinion notwithstanding.

    • avatarHal says:

      I’m a believer. 45 too. But I do love me a good 9 mil.

    • avatarpk in AZ says:

      I beg to differ…

      Jared Loughner used full metal jacket bullets (what I use to target practice with), not the much more expensive “self defense” rounds.

      Had Loughner used “self defense” rounds, Kelly would have had to bury his wife.

      • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

        Source for your conclusion? Or are you just assuming he bought FMJ?

        Doesnt change my opinion of 9mm one bit, a 45 FMJ and this guy would be a widower.

        9mm makes a great target practice round. If you stake your life on it you better pull the trigger 15x reload and do it again to be sure.

        • avatarpk in AZ says:

          Local news in Tucson..

          And anything other than FMJ and Gabby Gifford’s head would have…

          Well, I think you know what would have happened.

        • avatargloomhound says:

          The 9mm seem to work just fine(God curse Loughner) on six of the 19 people he shot. No common pistol is a death ray not even a .500S&W.

        • avatarHal says:

          I love .45. However, with 9mm I can engage multiple targets faster, with more rounds on target, with better control. Shot placement is important. Although it is a miracle that Mrs. Giffords survivied because typically any shot placement in the nervous system is a KO, even a .22 will kill. She was very very lucky.

        • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

          This argument is tasteless, not to mention perfect for anti-gunners to quote out of context. We appreciate the tongue in cheek when talking about the effectiveness of the round the shooter used, but this isn’t the time. Besides, the 9mm vs. .45 thing has been done to death.

    • avatarRandy Drescher says:

      Thats why I carry a 45. The cops say it takes a full “clip” of 9 to kill a pit bull. That just isn’t too confidence inspiring, Randy

    • avatarWLCE says:

      so you take one scenario where the victim survived by extraordinary circumstances then try and paint the whole 9mm caliber as ineffective?

      very unwise. its not just yeager’s opinion that 9mm is adequate. youll have to convince SOCOM otherwise too.

  15. avatarMark says:

    Violent crimes happen. That’s just the way it is. Look at England’s violent crime rate (since the gun-grabber’s say comparing ourselves to Mexico doesn’t count regarding violent crime as they are not a first-world nation). Mr. Kelly’s wife being shot doesn’t make him an expert at preventing crime, the same reason my wife being involved in a car accident doesn’t automatically make me an expert at vehicle safety requirements and how to prevent DUI’s and vehicle accidents. The simple fact of the matter is that murder has been around since the dawn of man. There have always been deranged people, and there will always be deranged people (and gangbangers, cartels, etc.). Guess what? With the population constantly expanding (to, what is it, 7 Billion now), there will be more and more deranged people. These people who think we will have a Utopian society if they confiscate guns need to build a time machine and take themselves back in time and hang out with the hippies. It’s not going to happen. Frankly, I’m also getting sick and tired of all of these politicians and “advocates” such as Mr. Kelly saying they respect the 2nd amendment and they will protect hunters, or simply saying they respect it, but would confiscate all guns if they could. The 2nd amendment was not written for hunters! The same reason that the first amendment wasn’t written solely for mainstream media to spew their lies and ignorance. The thing that scares me more than anything in this world today is the absolute and sheer stupidity, ignorance, and selfishness that has absolutely plagued our world.

    • avatarAl says:

      Mark, while I agree with you in concept I must strongly disagree with your “hippee”characterization. I enlisted in 1965 (enlisted-not drafted). By 1968 I was back on the street and re-examining our military objectives and history. Soon, my hair was long and I was a hippee based on the way the word was used. I was and still am a hippee type in many ways. Socially liberal,but fiscally conservative and unable to find much common ground with either political party. I enjoy firearms as a hobby and am a collector of sorts but have pretty much given up hunting. I have concealed carry permits in several states and NEVER want to go to D.C. , NYC, or any other of the so called gun free havens. As you say ,the second amendment is not about farmers and hunters but more about the avoidance of tyranny. I too am baffled by the stupidity of sheep like masses who fall for the lies propagated by msnbc on one hand and by fox on the other. While I’d give Kelly credit in some things in this area I agree with OHgunner.

  16. avatarOHgunner says:

    Using you brain-damaged wife to push a political agenda while dancing in the blood of children…. You sir, are an asshole

  17. avatarChuckN says:

    It’s guys like Kelly that have people lose a lot of respect for NASA.

    • avatarDon says:

      The bit of human meat we let ride the rocket because it is easier than building a good robot to fill the roll… that’s not NASA.

      Again, there is a big difference between a rocket scientist and the rocket payload. ;)

      • avatarLeo338 says:

        Apparently we substituted mentally challenged humans to go up in rockets. We used to send monkeys and other types of animals in them. Hmm, I wonder if PETA had something to do with this?

    • avatarWLCE says:

      if i ever wanted to fly into space, i would speak to the russians first. the odds of them getting me into space are higher than in the US.

  18. avatarg says:

    Kelly’s wife was the victim of a horrific crime and for that, he has my sympathy, but his anger / passion is misplaced. It ought to be directed at bettering our care for the mentally ill and getting guns out of the hands of people who aren’t mentally stable enough to own them.

    Leave responsible citizens alone, Mr. Kelly.

  19. avatarjwm says:

    Not having armed people worked so well for Sandy Hook, didn’t it? The last few days have been truly amazing in the level of stupid I’m seeing from those other people, the anti’s. I’m finding it harder and harder to remain civil and avoid the FLAME DELETED.

    But really, sometimes an asshole is just an asshole and they need to be told this.

  20. avatarBobtheGrape says:

    Mark Kelly is a not-so-brilliant man for a fellow who was granted a PhD and is an astronaut. He has said that semi-automatic rifles fire from 20 to 100 rounds per SECOND. Mark, baby, you are full of shit! The M-16A1 which I was issued in the National Guard fired 800 rounds PER MINUTE and it was an AUTOMATIC weapon. Semi-autos couldn’t possibly fire 20 – 100 rounds per SECOND because if you did the simple math you would know that you are full of dog poop: 60 SECONDS = one MINUTE so 20 RPS x 60 = 1200 ROUNDS PER MINUTE a much higher rate of fire than an automatic rifle; AND 100 RPS = 6000 RPOUNDS PER MINUTE. Mark get your head out of your derriere.

  21. avatarfreeport56 says:

    I live in Napa, CA. There are 125,000 people in our County. Both of the high schools have Public Service Officers due the Hispanic gangs (Nortes / Suenos). Even the presence of the officer does not stop the violence.

  22. avatarIn Memphis says:

    Hes just bit@#y because the government cut his space shuttle program and is probably enjoying the fact that they went rabid over something else. Someone get him some cranberry juice.

  23. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Thank you rocket skyantist kelly. I wish I could talk out of both sides of my mouth like that, saying that guns are deadly awfull & saying they are useless at the same time. Howdy doody made more sense & he was made of wood with someone’s hand up his ass, Randy

  24. avatarOutlaw says:

    F**k you, Mark Kelly.

  25. avatarSilver says:

    How come those who claim to have defended the Constitution are the first to try to destroy it? How can this tool say this isn’t about the 2A then go on to try and infringe upon the 2A?

    So much for astronauts being “American heroes.” Yet another childhood misconception revealed.

  26. avatarJosh says:

    The man has had to watch his wife come back from the brink of death, and she’s not quite the same. He’s watched her relearn how to speak, walk, eat, etc.. and he knows that she’ll never, ever recover everything that she lost. This is something that 99% of the people on this website can never hope to understand. You have no way of knowing what its like in that guy’s shoes.
    -Magazines allow for faster reloading, so they do enable more efficient killing.
    -How the hell are the basic firearms available to the general public supposed to stop our government if it turns against us? Think about that… a bunch of bushmasters and AK conversions against tanks, Apache helicopters, and a fully trained standing army… give me a fricking break. That whole line of reasoning is barely plausible.

    If you are going to fight the fight and push logically back against this stuff, stop with the crazy anti-gov’t bullshit, and stop trying to attack victims and their families. Instead, repeatedly point to the facts and studies which show zero correlation between crime rates and gun ownership rates in the general population. Keep banging that drum, and stop with the crazy right-wing batshit.
    The right-wing batshit road the NRA has led us down has won a few battles over the last 20 years, but it will eventually lose the public opinion war if it keeps playing the crazy kook card.

    • avatarOutlaw says:

      F***k you too. You’re the reason why this country’s going down the drain. So something bad happened and you want to punish those of us who didn’t do it?

      F***k you.

      • avatarRalph says:

        That was a bit harsh, Outlaw. But I completely agree with you anyway.

        • avatarJosh says:

          Thanks Ralph. You did notice that I was trying to point out the right way to win the argument right?
          I don’t care whether or not you guys can make a good case for guns as a tool to prevent tyranny.. the bottom line is it makes pro-gun rights people sound like nutcases in the public forum. This is a democracy, public opinion matters, and this kind of reasoning loses.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “I don’t care whether or not you guys can make a good case for guns as a tool to prevent tyranny..”

          of course you dont. when you have pre-conceived conclusions no amount of facts will sway your dogma. thank you for proving everyone’s point.

          “the bottom line is it makes pro-gun rights people sound like nutcases in the public forum. This is a democracy, public opinion matters, and this kind of reasoning loses.”

          we can sound like “nutcases” all we want. our country is a representative republic, where the civil liberties of the minority are protected from the majority. that is why we arent a democracy.

          I dont care if you trust the government or not. try reading a history book for once. We have the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA 2012 and 2013, ad nauseum, all examples of government working outside of the wishes of the people.

      • avatarJosh says:

        yeah, its all my fault. God forbid someone use logic around here. No lets all just be pissed off together while guns get outlawed without any reasonable debate.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          you spout logic then bring a emotional argument to bolster your case?

          you make me laugh.

        • avatarJosh says:

          Negative. Emotional element was to point out that folks should have empathy for Kelly’s situation. Not saying hes correct, but he doesn’t deserve to be shat on for speaking his mind.
          Logical element: The guns as safeguard to tyranny argument is not effective with the general public for preserving the 2nd amendment. You can talk about that in a gun shop all you want, you try it with the general population, you sound like a conspiracy theorist. Instead, it should be pointed out that crime continues to drop even as legal gun ownership/carrying has become more widespread. Much better point backed up by data. Best way to win the debate. Even better, you can make that point without insulting people who disagree with you. You’re not throwing mud at some guy who’s wife got shot, you’re just pointing out that the facts show him to be wrong…

        • avatarRKflorida says:

          You self declare that you are using logic and that makes it true? You find ardent 2nd amendment supporters to not be fit for “general public” consumption because their behavior and strong statements are offensive. Perhaps your love affair with public opinion is what needs to be looked at. Which public are you representing?

          Whether this Kelly guy’s wife is dead, alive, or in-between has nothing to do with his ignorance. A guy who thinks his ability to ride rockets makes him an authority on gun control.

        • avatarJosh says:

          The “public” I discuss are the easily swayed mainstream. The vast majority of people, including the majority of gun owners, who don’t really pay much attention to this stuff.. who don’t shoot on a regular basis, or maybe have never fired a gun. In the end, those are the folks whose opinion can save you or bury you. I’m from a place where everyone owns a gun, grew up with them, and don’t politicize them. I now live in an area where most of the people I interact and socialize with have never even fired a gun, or have only used on on occasion for hunting. I’ve seen how the “tyranny” argument flies with them first hand. It doesn’t work, and will even discredit you in their eyes. Some of these folks would freak out if they knew I had a CC permit. The “tyranny” argument is preaching to the choir.
          I’m talking about what works, not whats right. This blog has enough true believers, someone needs to get down to what works in the national debate. I think the best argument is pointing out the drop in crime at the same time as expanding gun ownership and carry laws. Its our most persuasive argument.

        • avatarWLCE says:

          “Negative. Emotional element was to point out that folks should have empathy for Kelly’s situation. Not saying hes correct, but he doesn’t deserve to be shat on for speaking his mind.”

          youre right but i have a right to throw “shat” on his opinion too; emotions dont have to silence my opposing viewpoint. i have had a family member (LEO) that was wounded in the line of duty by a criminal carrying a gun. I believe in private firearms ownership. i can understand emotions pertaining to firearms.

          “Logical element: The guns as safeguard to tyranny argument is not effective with the general public for preserving the 2nd amendment.”

          …that doesnt make it any less true, “general public” opinion or not. talk about revisionist history.

          “You can talk about that in a gun shop all you want, you try it with the general population, you sound like a conspiracy theorist.”

          …which matters why??? i dont care if people think im a “conspiracy theorist”. i dont have to compromise my ethics to form a truth that sits well with the uninformed.

          “Instead, it should be pointed out that crime continues to drop even as legal gun ownership/carrying has become more widespread. Much better point backed up by data. Best way to win the debate.”

          which i do point out first and foremost. before the conversation gets steered towards the constitution.

          “Even better, you can make that point without insulting people who disagree with you. You’re not throwing mud at some guy who’s wife got shot, you’re just pointing out that the facts show him to be wrong…”

          I can insult people that disagree with me when it directly affects my civil liberties if i decide to. spreading emotional disinformation in regards to a enumerated right will get a less than favorable response from me. once again, their right to swing their fist ends at the tip of my nose.

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          Holy crap, they’re doing some ice-skating in hell, because I’m about to agree point for point with WLCE, and that never happens.

          Josh, I read the first paragraph of your comment…

          “Negative. Emotional element was to point out that folks should have empathy for Kelly’s situation. Not saying hes correct, but he doesn’t deserve to be shat on for speaking his mind.”

          …and you were already going wrong. I’m going to abuse the hell out of anyone who holds that opinion and pushes it out on CNN trying to change policy, and WLCE well-covered why in his last paragraph on emotional disinformation/civil liberties.

          However, because I like how pithy it is, I’m going to quote myself from back in November, when I stole it from a linked article:

          11. Do my kooky beliefs impact your liberty? Do yours impact mine?

          That’s all of it, the whole enchilada, distilled down to its chewy center. If the answer to the first part is no, then shut the hell up. If the answer to the second part is yes, then shut the hell up.

        • avatarWC says:

          “11. Do my kooky beliefs impact your liberty? Do yours impact mine?

          That’s all of it, the whole enchilada, distilled down to its chewy center. If the answer to the first part is no, then shut the hell up. If the answer to the second part is yes, then shut the hell up.”

          This sounds like an argument for gay marriage.

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          I’m comfortable with that.

          Holy crap, aren’t you someone else I generally disagree with? Mass hysteria!

        • avatarWLCE says:

          im just trying to keep some intellectual honesty here.

          if we are going to talk emotionally, then lets talk emotionally. if we are going to talk logic, then lets talk logic.

          im nearly burnt out with refuting emotional sensationalism with logical facts. its been a rough three weeks. i feel like im repeating myself over and over again. its always the same bullshit that gets thrown out over and over again followed by the logical responses (for the most part) from those that frequent here. rinse, repeat.

          anti gunners are like the black knight from monty python. despite losing arms and legs, they still dont get enough.

    • avatarLeo338 says:

      @ Josh: Next week it will be 4 years since my mother was shot while she was at work. She died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. So yes, I can understand. I know what it’s like; at least he still can talk to his wife. At least they know who committed the crime. I will never see my mom again, and I don’t know who is responsible for it. All that has happened and I am not out there advocating for gun control. I don’t proclaim to be a victim of gun violence and use it to further an agenda. In fact I rarely bring it up.

      I side with the others here on TTAG. They have a right to call this idiot out. Who cares if him or his wife were a victim of a crime? That’s life, they aren’t the first and they will not be the last. They should be doing something positive and advocate for laws that will stop these deranged lunatics instead of trying to take guns away from us law-abiding citizens. As others have pointed out, being a victim does not make him an expert on guns or public safety. If he were an expert then shouldn’t he have prevented his wife from getting shot in the first place?

      I am also sick of hearing about your little guns will do nothing against tanks, drones, and helicopters. I thought they were killing machines that can mow down 100 people in 30 seconds? So dangerous you don’t even have to aim, just fire from the hip and take out an entire platoon. That’s why we need to ban them. Then when we point out the reason for the 2A, you people are quick to point out that stupid statement. So which is it? Why are we pulling out of Afghanistan? All they have are some puny AK’s and a few rocket launchers from the 70s’. I also don’t believe the military would turn on the citizens. Some might but the majority won’t. You are what the FF would call a loyalist. They didn’t need your help to win back then and we don’t need your help now.

  27. avatarCurzen says:

    I bet a sixpack that this is his just his campaign for running for office.

  28. avatarFeralRadiation says:

    Embarrassingly, I have seen shopping malls that are better protected than our schools. Yes you heard me right. I was in Washington D.C. on a school trip and we decided to stop at a mall for souvenirs and a meal at the food court there. Because the area that this mall was in was not the best, there were guards at the entrance. And I do not mean your normal mall security guards who sit behind a bank of security camera feeds. Instead there were 5 or 6 guards, from a private security firm, armed with revolvers, and to enter the mall you had to go through a metal detector and run your bag through an x-ray machine. Even in schools with guards the security is in no way close to this. Maybe school guards don’t work because at the moment they don’t even measure up to mall security (at some malls). Now here is a radical idea, if quality security guards and systems were employed at schools lives would be saved. So, next time a gun control advocate is about to open his/her mouth, I wish they would pause and consider that whatever they are opposing could actually be helpful. [/a wee bit of sarcasm]

  29. avatarGregolas says:

    Wotta space cadet!

  30. avatar16V says:

    How the hell are the basic firearms available to the general public supposed to stop our government if it turns against us? Think about that… a bunch of bushmasters and AK conversions against tanks, Apache helicopters, and a fully trained standing army… give me a fricking break. That whole line of reasoning is barely plausible.

    Pretty darned effectively. In between Lady Gaga or Skrillex or whatever, you should check out this thing called ‘assymetrical warfare’. It’s been going on in a place called Afghanistan for thousands of years, and nobody has ever conquered them. Ever. Right now, there’s a fully trained, equipped with the best tech on the planet army there, and they regularly get killed by guys who know nothing *but* field expedients. The Afghanis ran the last group of invaders out too. They were called the Soviets.

    One other thing. The bunch of “general public” that founded this country were up against a well-trained, well-equipped, professional standing army.

    • avatarRalph says:

      @16V, your comment is accurate. My only disagreement is that a nation of soccer moms and metrosexuals cannot be compared to Afghanistan, which is a nation of hard men.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        we still have the hundreds of thousands of veterans, police (former and retired too), and firemen that are plenty capable of resistance.

        Plenty of them, such as myself, have experience in fighting guerrillas in asymmetric warfare.

        the fact is that a larger body of able bodied, competent guerrillas could be assembled in america. they would also be better trained, equipped, and physically stronger than the average afghan.

        • avatar16V says:

          Ralph, I agree with you there are few anywhere on the planet more hardened to, well, everything than folk in that region. I was just using them as a response to the utter silliness of Josh’s suggestion.

          I would just go with WLCE’s point that even though many would have issues with how to use a firearm, even a really small percentage of quality folks are a really huge number. Only 1% in still 3.2ish million potential whatevers. Many are vets.

          Sure, we may be used to a far cushier existence than Afghans, but we have soooo many more field expedients on the shelves of every store everywhere.

  31. avatarWilliam says:

    I don’t know about y’all, but I always look to ex-astronauts for my opinions.

  32. avatarJWhite says:

    Look im gonna have to be a jerk here… Since when does your wife, having been shot in the head, make you a gun expert or someone who can even remotely comment or argue the fact of the matter without introducing logical fallacies and fear/emotionally driven statements.

    Whatever. I agree with whom ever said that if they spent ads much effort in securing the principle, as they have trying to disarm us, she most likely never would have been shot in the first place.

    • avatarBobtheGrape says:

      JWhite, you’re not being a jerk. I have stated this before Mark Kelly, Astronaut, PhD (I think), can’t do simple math. One of the articles I read that supposedly Mark was quoted in about semi-automatic weapons that can shoot 20 to 100 rounds per SECOND (RPS). Welll, Mark, you need to check your math. The M-16A1 is an AUTOMATIC weapon and it only fires 800 rounds per MINUTE (RPM). Let’s see if we do the math, 20 RPS = 1200 RPM. Huh? Where can you get a SEMI-automatic rifle that can sustain that rate of fire. Furthermore, 100 RPS = (are you ready for this Mark?) 6000 RPM. Well, the only weapons that can put out that volume of fire are AUTOMATIC weapons and are Gatling-type weapons. So Mark, get your head out of your ass and wise up.

  33. avatarRalph says:

    Gabby Giffords used to be pro-gun. Now she’s the female James Brady. I guess that getting shot in the head does not make a person smarter.

  34. avatarLSUTigersFan says:

    Counter-point – I asked my barber, and he said it would work. Vietnam vet trumps anyone at NASA. We win.

  35. avatarpat says:

    What do you get when you combine a homosexual with an astronaut?
    I dont know either, but I guess it dont involve guns.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.