TexasCHLforum.com

It's always good to have all the perspectives available in such times and here is yet another from the Tenth Amendment Center. They state the NRA proposition is unconstitutional.
And then there is the article about what Ron Paul has to say here.

It appears this could be a lengthy conversation, that is if the powers that be actually listen to all sides.

I have to admit I was good with the NRA proposal, but deep down would prefer just to promote more CHL. But now, I feel this is something worth talking about.

SpeedSkimmed those
One appears to base their anti-argument on Congress has no authority to fund police in schools
While it may or may not be true, that sort of seems weak argument-wise, when it's already being done

COPS in Schools (CIS) http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=54" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The COPS in Schools (CIS) grant program is designed to help law enforcement agencies hire new, additional school resource officers (SROs) to engage in community policing in and around primary and secondary schools. CIS provides an incentive for law enforcement agencies to build collaborative partnerships with the school community and to use community policing efforts to combat school violence.

The COPS in Schools program provides a maximum federal contribution up of to $125,000 per officer position for approved salary and benefit costs over the 3-year grant period, with any remaining costs to be paid with local funds. Officers paid with CIS funding must be hired on or after the grant award start date
...... more at Dept of Justice link

viewtopic.php?f=94&t=60626" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The thought of a gunman indiscriminately shooting children in an elementary school tears at all of our hearts. No American ever wants to see something like this happen again. But as I argued previously, we cannot allow our grief and calls to “do something” to drive us toward unconstitutional solutions that will lead to more power centralized in D.C. That poses a far greater danger to America than any deranged shooter.

This has been the argument of conservatives for all of the proposed 2A infringing legislation and this guy is using it for his side of the debate. Amazing!

I believe there is plenty Congress can due to fund that. They already fund the No Child Left Behind Act. They could probably fund something related to school security.

The money could easily come from our waste filled foreign aid bribes to countries and regimes who despise the United States. Funding is an excuse, it is not a reason.

C-dub wrote:I believe there is plenty Congress can due to fund that. They already fund the No Child Left Behind Act. The could probably fund something related to school security.

But just because they have already overstepped their bounds in the past does not make it a correct option in future cases such as this. Securing schools should be a state issue, just like everything else related to schools should be.

MasterOfNone wrote:

C-dub wrote:I believe there is plenty Congress can due to fund that. They already fund the No Child Left Behind Act. The could probably fund something related to school security.

But just because they have already overstepped their bounds in the past does not make it a correct option in future cases such as this. Securing schools should be a state issue, just like everything else related to schools should be.

I agree. I was just pointing out that this other group saying the suggestion was unconstitutional might be false and that they probably could fund such a thing.

10 Amendment Center wrote:OK, maybe an armed, uniformed goon roaming school hallways makes sense.

Or not.

Anyone who starts an article like that isn't going to be taken seriously. I have no idea who the 10 Amendment Center is, but I don't care to learn. If they claim that providing funds to states to use to hire police is unconstitutional, then they clueless.

Chas.

C-dub wrote:I believe there is plenty Congress can due to fund that. They already fund the No Child Left Behind Act. They could probably fund something related to school security.

They can fund abortions in Africa, and AIDS treatment in Africa. They can fund HAMAS and other terrorist groups in the middle east. They can fund the nuclear defense of all of western Europe. Surely they can fund the NRA school safety propositions here in the USA.

I agree that the school security, heck ALL of education, is a state & local matter and Fedzilla needs to stay out of it. I'd be happy if they shuttered the DoEd tomorrow. But, as is typical, Fedzilla will desire to insert itself into every aspect of our lives. That's why Wayne's call for Con-gress to 'take action' caused me to cringe. I'm sure there's a line of beaureaucrats lined up with a plan to put a bunch of TSA types into the schools. Calling for volunteers is the best path from here. We need to work the solution with minimal gov't involvement.

Heck, just removing the prohibition against CHL by teachers and staff would go a long way. That doesn't mean ANYONE would be required to carry. But any nutcase planning a copycat spree would have to factor in the unknown. Of course, we all know that unknown will be removed in some districts by the vocal antis on the shool boards LOUDLY proclaiming that their districts policy is prohibition. But the cost to the school districts for removing the prohibition on CHL is almost zero. Certainly lower than retaining full-time security. Of course, each school district should have the freedom to do as they choose on the issue.

I'm no fan of big government. But in the wake of Sandy Hook, the calls for "somebody" to "do something" are going to be too irresistable for Congress to resist. So we've either got to put Congress to work on the NRA proposal to secure all schools, or they're going to get behind the Kalifornia Senator's and Apologist-in-Chief's gun-grab. I'd rather have them working on the NRA plan.

Yes, Columbine Had Armed Guards—And They Saved Lives
Posted 12/24/2012 06:36 PM ET
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorial ... RSS%29&p=2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The deputy and the backup he immediately called for exchanged fire with the shooters a second time and helped begin the evacuation of students, all before SWAT teams arrived, and before Harris and Klebold eventually killed themselves in the library.

Harris and Klebold also carried improvised explosive devices, some that detonated, others that didn't. One thing is certain — the armed resistance of Gardner and his backup bought time and saved lives.

========================================================
Gun statistics cast doubt on weapons ban
December 24, 2012
By: Anthony Martin

http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-sta ... eapons-ban" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Most gun crimes in the U.S. are committed using cheap handguns that fire a limited number of rounds, not the semiautomatic variety that fire ammunition with large capacity magazines.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

C-dub wrote:I believe there is plenty Congress can due to fund that. They already fund the No Child Left Behind Act. They could probably fund something related to school security.

They can fund abortions in Africa, and AIDS treatment in Africa. They can fund HAMAS and other terrorist groups in the middle east. They can fund the nuclear defense of all of western Europe. Surely they can fund the NRA school safety propositions here in the USA.

Having broken the constraints of the Constitution, and being authorized to to do so are two entirely different things. Just because our Congress and Executive branch have spent federal funds on such things does not, de facto, make them legal. The Constitution is clear, anything not specifically authorized is left to the states to fund. Police are a perfect example of what are to be left to the states.

I would like teachers armed and a cop at every school.