Newtown CT Parents: Leave the Police in Our Schools


“Parent Amy Roman implored both the Police Commission and the Board of Education Tuesday night to continue to provide two police officers at each of the district’s six schools,” reports. “‘We feel this has gone from a want to a need,’ Roman told both the commission and the board. She was not alone. A couple of other parents expressed similar sentiments, and the district has received close to 300 emails, many of them voicing concern about long-term security and police presence in the schools. Schools Superintendent Janet Robinson said this presence is ‘indefinite,’ with Newtown’s department supplemented by officers from other departments. So . . . if the protection of armed civilians (note: police are civilians) is good enough for the community suffering the horrific aftermath of a spree killer, why not anywhere else? Or, indeed, everywhere else? And how come none of the parents called for gun control?


  1. avatar William says:

    What does that MEAN, “leave”? Try and convince me there was one there during the massacre.

  2. avatar LC Judas says:

    There is some hope, if that is not the cry. These are the mascots of gun control, as displayed by the left wing mass. If they aren’t calling for gun control then this is not as foregone as it appears.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      It demonstrates that at least some people recognize the value of armed good guys at the school. No matter what laws or systems we try to enact, someone will always “fall through the cracks”. And when that happens, the only solution — the failsafe — is armed good guys on site.

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    “Free doesn’t mean armed cops in schools. In fact, it’s goddam expensive.”

    Gov. Dannel P. Malloy

    1. avatar Sammy says:

      Free does mean we have a God Given right to self preservation. Self preservation is a commandment of nature as well.

      1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

        Just this week, we hired an armed security contractor (ex-military) full time at my kids private parochial school. Dresses very well and goofs with the kids. Money very well spent. How can our kids not deserve our full time protection?

        1. avatar JustAJ says:

          Someone once said to me “We guard our money with guns and our children with (GFSZ/No guns allowed) signs.”

    2. avatar Ropingdown says:

      Since I feel Gov. Malloy’s pain, I’ve searched for an answer…and found it: The kids apparently aren’t listening to their U.S. History teacher anyway, so just swap one for the other, no budget busting. As for the parents wanting a guard, the parents are just like politicians: In the abstract, they think we shouldn’t have guns. In the concrete, faced with the actuality of madmen and criminals, they want armed security for their kids…and they think we shouldn’t have guns, although they themselves bought one yesterday on the sly. Guns can stop madmen and criminals? Who knew? I met one of these sly gun-grabber gun-buyers at the range a few months back. What a pleasurable experience! I foresee the formation of libs-only gun clubs and the return of…Don’t Ask Don’t Tell 2.0.

      1. avatar Ralph says:


        This might be one of the funniest things I’ve ever read!

    3. avatar Sylvester says:

      Expensive? Picture this… 20 dead children and one of them is yours. Does price matter now?

  4. avatar 2ADefender says:

    Hey guys:

    I for one am sick of seeing our 2nd Amendment RIGHT attacked from every angle. Wanted to pass something along with a hope that you would join this effort from Patriot Post:

    “Patriots, I call on you to pledge: ‘We, the People, affirm that we will support and defend Liberty as “endowed by our Creator,” enshrined in our Constitution and empowered by its Second Amendment, against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”


    Sign here:

    1. avatar Ivy Mike says:

      Every angle includes the Right’s hearty support of a Standing Army, a.k.a., the Military-Industrial-Complex, which the U.S. Constitution attempted to prohibit via Article 1, Section 8, and clarified in the 2A of the Bill of Rights.

      If the Militarist Right hadn’t pissed on the first part of the 2A, the Left wouldn’t be following suit on the latter part of the 2A.

      1. avatar Outlaw says:

        Bullshit. The standing army predates the conventional left and right in this country, hack.

        And it should go the way of the dodo.

        1. avatar Ivy Mike says:

          Actually, the “Left/Right” political shorthand terminology is as old as the Constitution itself.

          At any rate, I agree with you, lets follow the whole 2A/Constitution and disband the Standing Army the 2A was meant to prevent.

          “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty….”

          ~Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789

    2. avatar SkyMan77 says:

      +1… Done…. Thank you Sir….

    3. avatar Ralph says:

      against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

      Right now, I’m not all that concerned about the foreign.

      1. avatar Elliotte says:

        That’s only because you don’t live down along the southern border in CA, AZ, NM, or TX. I think there’s a lot of folks down there who are concerned about both types of enemies. Something tells me there’s not a lot of Canadian drug cartels pushing down into MA

  5. avatar Don says:

    Everyone wanted to say the NRA recommendation was “insane” because they are building the narrative on the assumption that “guns are evil” which therefore means “the NRA is evil” which means that “whatever their ideas are they are wrong”

    Well look here what’s happening. I guess the idea wasn’t wrong. Maybe this discrepancy is an indication that they should go back and check the assumptions which preceded it. Sound logic only follows to wrong conclusions when the initial assumptions were wrong.


    1. avatar jordan says:

      and don’t forget to remind folks that the first thing gannett publishing did when they felt threatened was to hire -armed- guards to stand outside their offices.

      so, guns are okay for them but not for “the children”?

      1. avatar Don says:

        Yeah “guns are ok if you can afford the poll tax of hiring a servant to carry your gun for you”


  6. avatar Pascal says:

    Two things:

    1) Say it with me……Gov. Malloy, you are an ass**** because you statements counter what the people of CT want. One more example

    2) I am NRA Instructor but not full-time, not even Part-time nor do I advertise, BUT I have classes I am teaching starting this weekend through February because people in CT are scared and the more gun owners we turn out, the more the legislature in Hartford will have to FOAD

  7. avatar Lance says:

    Which mean the media hates the NRA but most parents agree to have armed personnel to protect schools.

  8. avatar Sammy says:

    Like the Bush tax cuts. When Bush did it it was unthinkable. When Barry was going to let them expire it was unthinkable. Just sayin’.

  9. avatar Mark says:

    Maybe hanging around with more professional law enforcement could illustrate to a few liberals that one isn’t required to be in uniform to be immune from becoming a homicidal maniac as a consequence of proximity to a firearm?

  10. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    & thats what its going to take, mothers waking up, Randy

  11. avatar JimD says:

    How bout the government just gets out of the way an let us protect our own kids since they’re not equipped to get the job done.

  12. avatar Anon in CT says:

    Once things cool off, and it is only a single cop at each school, shouldn’t they go plain clothes and dress like teachers? No need to put a ” shoot me first” sign on them

    1. avatar Outlaw says:

      Nah, they’ll bust kids for minor infractions and a good percentage of them will have some sort of record before leaving elementary or middle school

      Cops in schools is a horrible idea for many reasons. The schools are already like prisons. Let teachers carry. END. OF. STORY.

      Hell, teachers should flout these suicidal idiotic laws and carry anyway.

      1. avatar 16V says:

        My metro already has had cops in schools for almost a decade.

        Kids are now routinely arrested for all the stuff most kids do (at least some of) during HS. Fighting – arrested and charged. A little booze – ticketed. Some weed- arrested and charged. Even smoking cigarettes under 18 will get them a ticket.

        That’s what teachers and the principal were supposed to be for.

        1. avatar Ropingdown says:

          You just can’t expect the teachers and principals to handle child discipline and safety when they’ve got all these merit-based-bonus forms to fill out, and all that union literature to read. Be reasonable.

  13. avatar Taurus609 says:

    Weren’t these the same people that lambasted the NRA for even suggesting such a thing?

  14. avatar AlphaGeek says:

    OMGWTFBBQ! Guns! In Schools! In Newtown!

    But… but… that completely destroys the narrative that anyone who suggests putting armed defenders (e.g. police) in schools is a Very Bad Person and possibly Mentally Detective.

    I bet there are a WHOLE lot of people on the anti side getting all head-explody right about now. This has always been the huge gaping truck-sized hole in the “no guns in schools” argument: we already have guns in schools, attached to school resource officers and local patrol officers.

    1. avatar Ropingdown says:

      First, Alpha, that was a lovely RF version of the annual Bad Hemingway contest. Laugh. Second, the anti’s heads don’t explode. One pinhole leak and all the air rushes out making a little pfffftttt sound.

  15. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Well jwm (a regular commenter here) and I have both said it. We will gladly volunteer to be concealed carrying citizens at our children’s/grandchildren’s schools on a regular basis.

    The good news: it doesn’t cost the school district or the local police anything. And it provides a valuable layer of protection.

    The solution is so obvious and yet so many people don’t get it.

  16. avatar okto says:

    OH LOOK. Guns are only a monolithic evil until they protect your sorry ass, huh?

    1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      Sure sense, as long as you have a law enforcement certificate. Please, we can afford a credentialed resource officer in every school. They make less than teachers! Too much liability with dudes off the street like you, jwm and me.

      1. avatar jwm says:

        I think dealing with the liability issues thru legislation would be simpler and less costly, not to mention a damn sight safer, than trying to disarm a gun loving nation.

        1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          No offense gents, but my kids deserve at least a certified resource officer, not some guy like you and me with maybe a concealed carry permit. When it’s just me and the kids, I’m fine.

  17. avatar DisThunder says:

    Hmm…well, maybe the trick to it is we all grab our blue polo shirts, cargo pants, coyote boots (you know you have some) and then order one of those stupid Conceal Carry Badges you see in the back of gun mags? Think how safe they could all feel, with us looking like assholes…
    Never let it be said that fashion hasn’t earned a spot in the gun control discussion. Sure, the Nazis disarmed their populace too, but thanks to Hugo Boss they looked FABULOUS doing it!

  18. avatar ConservativeGirl says:

    I keep hearing it’s a bad idea to have police in schools but I don’t hear anything about the Tennessee school shooter who was stopped by a school resource officer.

    This is must read and must share information for the disarmament battle we are in.

  19. avatar Dru says:

    Since we want to deal with facts here and extrapolating from Nick Leghorn in his rebuttal to the NY Times, the chances of another school shooting happening are… Especially a grade school shooting, slim to almost non-existant. So why are we talking about this?

    Makes us look tactifoolish

    If the real scourge is gang related violence, find ways to solve that, and not by banning any weapons.

    It will be easier to drop the death rate from the probable 70% of “homicides” than any percentage of the 5 – 14 year old “accidents and homicides”

    It is basic math people

  20. avatar foggy says:

    Michael Kehoe, the Chief of Police in Newtown, CT, has unsurprisingly gotten the wrong message from this incident and is calling for a ban on “assault rifles”.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email