Comments on: Where was the liberal “outrage” over Clinton’s “COPS in School” federal grant program?

By: Carlos

Carlos — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:23:08 +0000

@dj: I’m just about as tech-illiterate as one can get, and even I could follow the instructions. Your willful ignorance is astoundingly evident in your lack of capabilities.

By: ST

ST — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 18:17:44 +0000

dj, you’re a freaking idiot. Check the update I just posted for a screencap of the COPS in Schools page. I suspect you never clicked on the link to begin with, did you? Funny, as I just clicked on the link and got the exact page that came up the first time. Stop trying to misinform people, and furthermore, insinuating I’m lying doesn’t do anything for your credibility since it’s likely you never clicked on the link to begin with.

You’re on borrowed time on this site, so if you respond, you better make it worth both my and my readers’ time.

By: dj

dj — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 17:40:00 +0000

Very odd. I can’t find anything that links to a program called “Cops in Schools” by the Clinton administration. There was a program his administration called COPS–Community Oriented Policing Services–where they would fund 100,000 more cops in the US to get involved in their communities. This meant that cops could serve as coaches and mentors in schools, but that their policing duties would mainly still be in the community, not the schools. In addition, the program funded addition security systems for schools, like metal detectors. If someone can truly find a link to what is being called “Cops in Schools,” please post it. I’ve looked on the DOJ COPS page, etc. Nothing. And, the defunding of COPS was the Bush administration, not the dems. In fact, Obama refunded it through the stimulus program to add cops into cities, but of course the repubs fought the stimulus. It isn’t too difficult to check this on the stimulus website so feel free.

By: Carlos

Carlos — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 14:29:17 +0000

To BigTimeLib and kevin trudell: yeah, we knuckledraggers have a real problem with reality, imagining that what happens in the real world is reality, not what happens in our imaginations. Such ignorance is astounding!

BTL, do you really think that imagining that if every “assault weapon” is banned, they would magically disappear from the hands of wackos (most of whom, it turns out, are either apolitical or very statist)? What happens to all the weapons that magically “disappear” from military armories yearly? Do they just cease to exist? If that’s what you believe, not only do your unicorns need feeding but I’ve got some prime ocean beachfront property near Pahrump that I can sell you for a very reasonable price.

And KT, the point isn’t that “only five kids were killed.” The point is that under any scenario kids are going to die in a school shooting, and as long as there is a school system there will be shootings. If your concern is truly “for the kids” (which would be very unusual for a lib – that’s simply an excuse for “we statists want more power”) then it’s time for you to wake up and smell the evil that is around you and decide that limiting the damage to “the kids” is the best scenario possible. (BTW, the “evil that is around you” isn’t the smell of conservatives, it’s the willful ignorance of acknowledging just how atrocious humans can be.)

By: Tom the Redhunter

Tom the Redhunter — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 04:17:31 +0000

Excellent point ST an I’d forgotten all about Bill Clinton’s “cops in schools.”

It’s kind of like missile defense; on it’s own you’d think it would be the ONE defense program liberals would champion. After all, by itself missile defense doesn’t kill anyone and doesn’t threaten anyone. It’s the perfect liberal defense weapon But because Reagan proposed, it, they’re against it.

By: kevin trudell

kevin trudell — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 03:43:51 +0000

Anyone who thinks armed guards in schools is a solution to this stuff is a fool. What armed personell means is only five people will die , rather than fifteen. Wow! Victory! Problem solved! only five dead kids.

By: BigTimeLib

BigTimeLib — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 18:54:29 +0000

I think you Looney Bin types are missing the point (as you usually tend to do). You’ll notice that the NRA isn’t calling for a ban on Assault Weapons (or “Weapons of War”, as the President so eloquently called them). Their solution is to demand armed guards, and even armed voluteers, at every single school in the US of A. Their solution is to NOT ban weapons that should only be in the hands of the Miliary and Law Enforcement. That’s the “Nuts” part! Can you imagine! “Yeah, I’m not gonna give up my semi-auto, so you better put some cops in your schools just in case some maniac shows up to kill lots of kids w/his semi-auto.” And, yes, shame of Presindent Clinton for not getting the ball rolling on a ban after the Columbine massacre. And, as pointed out above, most of the funding for that COPS program ended in 2005, under the Bush Adminstration. Cuts had to be made in order to fight that illegal war in the middle east.

By: CaMom

CaMom — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:16:20 +0000

My husband is a lifetime NRA member – has been around all sorts of weapons since he could walk (coming from a very active hunting family). He’s retired, and would be proud and honored to volunteer to cruise the campus of our local, rural grade school and middle school, to help insure the safety and security of the children.

By: Sunday Links: Facebook Friends Pics Edition Volume 46

Sunday Links: Facebook Friends Pics Edition Volume 46 — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 15:18:26 +0000

[...] Where was the liberal “outrage” over Clinton’s “COPS in School” federal grant program? [...]

By: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 14:39:11 +0000

[...] Sister Toldjah wonders where the outrage was over Clinton’s COPS program [...]

By: ConMom

ConMom — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 14:27:22 +0000

[...] Democrat Golden Rule: Do as they say, not as they do: Where was the liberal “outrage” over Clinton’s “COPS in School” federal grant program? [...]

By: Carlos

Carlos — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:41:18 +0000

Hate to disagree with you, derfallbright, but inner city schools are probably the one place you won’t find the need for SROs or volunteers, for exactly the reason most suburban/rural/outskirt-city schools DO need them, and that’s because anyone brighter than a two-watt bulb who can spirit a gun into an inner city school knows that, with the gangs, the chances of getting shot back at are increased dramatically.

That being said, however, I wouldn’t recommend stocking all schools with gangs, and I’m afraid that’s exactly the kind of solution our unicorn feeders will come up with – the “solution” will be worse than the problem!

By: andom

andom — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 12:46:55 +0000

wait a moment!
I read that “An estimated one-third of all sheriffs’ offices and almost half of all municipal police departments assign nearly 17,000 sworn officers
to serve in schools. Moreover, nearly half of all public schools have
assigned police officers” from this 2010 paper
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/files/RIC/Publications/e041028272-assign-officers-to-schools.pdf

Do we know if in the schools were we have seen massacres there were these officers?

By: derfallbright

derfallbright — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 02:14:32 +0000

The NRA was on the right track, but their idea of putting armed ‘volunteers’ in the schools is just simply unreasonable for most modern school districts.

No matter how well trained and how good the intentions of a volunteer might be, most insurance companies are simply not going to cover the liability for this kind of thing.

And lets be honest, you are going to have the greatest need for the armed guards in the intercity high crime areas, and their are going to be far fewer people willing to volunteer to work in high crime schools.

it think it would have been a greater gesture for the NRA to have sponsored a large grant to support the schools use of regular law enforcement officers. Maybe serving as a central coordinator to collect donations from major gun manufacturers and I grit my teeth when I say this, maybe support a dedicated state or local tax on gun and ammunition sales targeted at support of law enforcement officers in schools.

In all truth these mass killings by mad men can occur anywhere, but schools seem to be the one location that the Left and Right can agree are sitting ducks because they have been so publicly declared gun free zones.

By: BobC

BobC — Sun, 23 Dec 2012 01:20:50 +0000

I agree with Drew the Infidel…I’ve been saying all along that we have the people already on the municipal payroll – teachers, administrators, etc. No legs for the argument that its too expensive. Train and certify people at each public school. No need for hiring new SROs.