Will Your child be safe with a bullet proof back pack and body armor?
Were the mass murders of innocent children, teachers and school administrators at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Connecticut a wakeup call for parents across America concerning child safety? According to Fox News, many parents are seriously considering sending their children to school with bullet proof back packs and various degrees of body armor to keep them safe.
Is the nation now at a point where Barbie dolls, Nintendo games, and toy soldiers are going to be replaced with pink and blue bullet proof backpacks and form fitting child size body armor under the Christmas tree?
The violent murders by Adam Lanza of 20 children has re-opened a national debate concerning just how safe are children and what measures or precautions can and should parents take to keep their precious kids safe.
Fox News reported on Wednesday, December 19th that a Utah company’s sales of bullet proof back backs and other safety clothing manufactured by the company Amendment II is literally going through the roof. With an approximate increase of 500 percent in sales since the murderous assaults in Newtown, Conn., parents and perhaps grandparents are grabbing up the, “pint-sized” protection safety lightweight armor called RynoHide.
While President Obama and his newly designated gun-control czar Vice President Joe Biden search for ways to strip gun rights from legal owners by the president’s end of January 2013 deadline, parents are left to fend for themselves.
If stricter gun control measures was the real solution, how does the president and gun control advocates account for the massacre which robbed the young children of their lives in Newton, Conn.? The state is one of five states with the strictest gun control measures in America.
What about the 270 children who were murdered in President Obama’s hometown of Chicago over the past three years. In fact Illinois leads the nation in strict gun control measures. Their gun ban law ban had deprived thousands of home owners of their right to protect themselves in their residence, from home invaders and gang violence until the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court overturned their 28-year-old handgun ban.
Just how many gun control measures will it take before liberal gun control activists and politicians wake up and address the real problem; which is the mentally unstable shooter pulling the trigger. So, whether it is a Columbine or Aurora Colorado massacre or a Newtown, Connecticut mass shooting, it is the shooter that special presidential task forces, national commissions and any other so-called violence solution panels should and must focus on.
Depriving Americans of their 2nd Amendment rights by using a drip, drip, drip method, until finally the nation’s citizens are disarmed is not an option; citizens are willing to witness or permit. This potential constitutional stripping peril was addressed in 2010, by the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito was insistent in the 2010 court decision which overturned the Chicago City Handgun Ban.
Justice Alito stressed:
"It cannot be doubted that the right to bear arms was regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as states legislated in an evenhanded manner."
Comments
OOPS AGAIN.... BOLD ENOUGH TO SHOOT OUT THE GLASS...sorry.
Paula Z. My mother in law, used to sell all kinds of pepper spray, some purse size, mid size, all the way up tp SWAT COP FIRE CANISTER SIZE, about 2ft. tall, called MOCK 2 PEPPER SPRAY....POLICE GRADE, SWAT TEAM SIZE. I CARRY THE LARGER PURSE SIZE, AND A TAZER. Yes....... training with it, I have been sprayed. OUCH! And, it makes all of your facs burn, eyes water, and snot runs out your nose.....YUK !! --- BUT? Not going to be used on a guy INTENT LIKE THE HEAVY ARMED FAST SHOOTER OF THE CT. SCHOOL SHOOTING.... BECAUSE HE WAS BOLD ENOUGH TO SHUT THE GLASS OUT TO ENTER THE SCHOOL, ALREADY SPRAYING IT WITH BULLETS, AND HAD ALREADY KILLED SEVERAL CHILDREN, AND SCHOOL OFFICIALS. PEPPER SPRAY WILL NOT WORK IN THAT SITUATION
Somebody should ask President Obama, Diane Feinstein, Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi if they would prefer armed guards or teachers at their children's school, or a gun ban? You can bet your ass what their true answer would be. As for armed guards, we could also have all teachers & school personal carry strong pepper spray, low cost and many sources of protection.
Overkill but it could have helped on those rare occasions..
A shooting school has offered to train ALL interested educators to protect their students for FREE , I would only be at peace with my children in school if they were in a school with said trained educators and administrators . This school is called " FRONT SIGHT " and is in Pahrump Nevada . NUFF SAID !!
Michael, We can't teach anyone morals. That is the job of the parents. I have no idea what kind of parent the shooter's mother was, but I'm willing to bet she had taught him murder was wrong. If you ask 99% of the murders on the planet they will say killing is wrong. the problem lies with not caring about the consequences, not caring about their own lives. Most of the mass shooters end up taking their own life. They intended to kill themselves, they just want to take others with them.
I don't think this is about morality, but mental health. You can go into the inner cities and find some of the most vile individuals and they will tell you the massacre in Newtown made them feel ill. These things have always happened, but we now hear about them more. I just ask people not to confuse morality with insanity.
I was thinking? how many people remember the zip- gun that the inner-city gang had. It was a very simple weapon to make with ordinary materials found around many homes. If memory serves me correctly, there was so much violence that the Federal Govement was paying them not to kill one another. We need to go back to teaching morals and that life is valvable and quit trying to play god. I am sure we have always had mentally-ill people and I know people in my area have always had guns.
One of the main stumbling blocks in mental health laws in this country is that a potentially dangerous person has to name a specific person or group to a counselor before the therapist can report his/her name to police. This law is known as the Tarasof decision in CA or the "duty to inform" in most states. It refers to the section of the Welfare & Institution code that is often called a 5150 by police. Even if that happens, a dangerous person can only be detained for 72 hours and then for a period of 14 days "intensive treatment". Other detentions are possible but not before another hearing to show the person is still dangerous. A petion to commit someone to a mental hospital is no easy procedure any more and shouldn't be. You can't detain someone for their dangerous thoughts, only if they express who they want to harm or actually harm said person. The Tarsof decision became law in 1978.
What we need are trained and packing teachers or multiple armed officers.
That scumbag sure has protection and how many other politicians are we protecting??? But what has been done by the pc left???? Advertise how gun free our schools are. DUH!!!!! Train and arm the teachers. They are after all what is between nuts and the kids. And dont conceal either. That would save so very many lives.
There will always be nuts and they will find a way but if they are taken down early on, well, problem solved.....with guns!
I just joined the NRA!
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next