A couple of days after , we know that police locally have beefed up patrols around St. Louis County elementary schools.
The news is almost too great to bear, as evidenced by watching President Barack Obama choking up as he talked about the shootings on Friday.
As a parent, I know that like you, I think nothing of sending my child off to school every day. We just cannot wrap our heads around the thought of teachers, who should be explaining the three R's, not getting between our children and a gunman.
In Connecticut, Brenda Lebinski told Newtown Patch that her daughter is safe because "my daughter's teacher is my hero. She locked all the kids in a closet and that saved their lives."
We think our children will be safe in the school when we put them on the bus or drop them off at the curb.
And when something horrible happens, we wonder if the schools should be doing more to protect them.
Is that unfair? Is it unrealistic to expect schools to be able to guard against such a staggering act of violence? Or is there more they should be doing? What are you willing to give up for more security — tax dollars? The convenience to visit school without a security screening?
Thank you for the call. I think for everyone this unimaginable horror has left us with an uneasy feeling and worry in our hearts. How could it be any other way? As my husband I and are talking thru way to protect children in schools he had an interesting point. Even though we use key cards and a buzz in system (similar to Sandy Hook Elementary) we too have windows that could be shot out in an identical fashion. Two distinct solutions came to our mind. The first solution would be to have a trained, armed person(s) in the building. For instance, at St. Peters possibly the Maintenance person or if one of the front office staff felt comfortable with keeping a locked weapon in their desk for such an emergency. Obviously this would come with some responsibility of target practice quarterly or something of that nature, but as a parent I would be comfortable with someone on the support staff having a weapon locked in a safe box for an emergency situation that require lethal force. We cannot send the staff to a gun fight with crayons and a stamp pad.
We just wanted to make a few suggestions that might want to be considered to increase the safety of the kids at the school. Of course we are all frightened at the thought that this could EVER happen. If there is ANYTHING we can do to protect our children then I think we have to consider all options. All weapons will not be off the street tomorrow, the next day or next year. Either will the people that are willing to do horrible acts. As much as I would like to live in the world and pretend this could NEVER happen at Childs Name’s school, it just isn’t the reality. So getting real and looking for real solutions is at the forefront of my thoughts at the moment.
It is the "Teacher costs" that must come down. Public sector unions are the leaches of society. My hope is that there are a whole bunch of Resident "snobs" who see the light.
The constituion Does allow for any law "regulating commerce". I would remind you that obamacare "regulates" medical insurance. We already have Gun license laws that can refuse ownership of guns to "certain" individuals. Guilt is not the starting point of refusal. Refusing A gun in the house of any mentally Ill person could be Constitutional under the "Welfare of US citizenry clause" or the "Commerce Clause". Once that Mother Placed that Gun in the hands of that "mentally Ill child" placed the Welfare of every Citizen in Danger. No supreme court would rule otherwise.
The same Way "Teachers " Have opted OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY? Why don't Teachers have to Pay their social security Tax for the benefit of all. Exactly my point! You want me to pay Public Education because I opt out while Teachers can opt out of Soc sec and not have to pay into that public system. Private school parents do not Opt out of anything. It is the Public school Parents who Opt out of Paying for their own Education. Public school parents "freeload" off a neighbor who already pays for their childs education. Teachers Opt out of a Public Social Security system--Yet do not pay One-cent to support that Public cost. Instead-, choosing to freeload their Pension by again Taxing it as "Education". Result--Residents support Teacher pensions and have to support their own soc security costs. Don't you see a double cost for all the workers in School districts. Why should You (Teachers) be exempt from soc sec? Why should You OPT Out ? And yet NOT pay into the system. You are the "Human Leaches" of society. No other words can describe your greed and fraud to the uninformed Parents. Shame on you,.
Every Resident in every Public school district does not get a "fair Shake" And that is exactly what I hope to accomplish here first. My message is for Residents who are not teachers or part of the Public sector Union. (I fully support Private unions-you should know). That is because they must compete for their wages. Teacher unions compete among themselves. (translated-- No competition) Result: the highest non-earned Wages in Missouri. You can continue to call me any name you want. An informed resident will take time.
Be very careful in using the General Welfare clause that way, you'll quickly regret it. As you are trying to use it, nothing would then be unconstitutional if duly passed by Congress and then the whole concept of limited government and any rights you may have is gone. If not sure you really want that... "All those in favor of stoning PaulRevere is order to appease the rain gods and promote the General Welfare, say "I". The motion is passed, grab a rock. Sorry dude, it's not personal, it's for the General Welfare." Of course supplying a gun to a mentally ill person is/could be a crime, but you cannot prevent that same non-mentally ill person from owning a gun by virtue of the fact that they MIGHT give it to a mentally ill person they happen to live with. Perhaps they want it as protection from that same mentally ill person. You might be able to make a case that it is the mentally ill person who is prevented from living with a person who owns guns, but I doubt. Not all mentally-ill persons are violence prone and often times the mentally ill have no one else to live with other than a family member. You aren't going to gain much sympathy from the Court in requiring people who are caring for ill relatives to give up their civil rights.
So if you want too stop, be a real protector of Children ,stop Buying these weapons, and grow up, or move to a Country that lets you play Baby Killer. Protect Children with Your Brain not a Bullet from a Baby Killer Weapon. One Day someone that you care form will Die from such a Weapon and You pulled the trigger because you supported these Companies and Clubs, and Politicians , because you needed to purchase a Baby Killer weapon that can Kill Children and your Love Ones.
Do you Drink? Do you ever take Drugs? Do you Own a Car? Now would you like to label every drunken driver or Pot smoking driver a "KILLER" if they actually Kill over 44,000 Adults and children a year.(All incorrectly labelled Auto Accidents) SHOULD CARS BE SUPPORTED? SHOULD ALCOHOL BE SUPPORTED? Not disagreeing with you. You have a good point. But, it is the "USER" of these weapons that Kill. According to your logic--The only way to stop "auto killings" is to BAN THEM---Stop buying them.
How about putting bullet proof vests on every child and teacher? How about Turning on a special smoke system that floods the halls into a complete inviisible smoke screen.. Like a water sprinkler system.
The (Missouri)Teachers unions themselves got special waivers to not pay into soc sec.(??1980's). They Opted-Out. They have private pensions, proving that we all could retire with $80,000 pensions if we could ALL OPT-OUT of soc sec. It is not a Law. I think there are teachers in otrher states that DO belong to the soc sec system like all other workers in America. I speak only about MISSOURI's ELITIST Teacher Unions-- A Majority of who are out to retire 10 years earlier with CEO styled pensions that actually run 3X more than 99% of CEO's. All paid by the working middle-class in Missouri. I say their pensions should not be any more than comparable Social security workers get. That alone would substantially reduce Property taxes for every Parent and business in Missouri. It's our money , not theirs. Schools already have the money to boost security. It's just that our Greedy Unions are raking it off the top and stealing it from the KID's security. Just a 2% Teacher's pay cut would give all the security our Kid's need. That would show how much they CARE for the kid's. ($1.4mil in Mehlvile $800Thousand in Lindbergh) That buys a lot of security.
Technically, a "Taxation clause" does not exist. The power of congress to "TO LEVY TAXES" does exist. That is where justice Roberts pinned obamacare. THE POWER TO TAX. Justice labelled it a tax, Not congress. But, that clause says congress has "The Power to Tax" to pay the "DEBTS OF THE US". (Note: TO PAY THE DEBTS OF US) Come 2014, there should be a whole new round of lawsuits. Why, Because Obamacare TAX would not be "Paying the DEBTS OF THE US" in accordance with the constitution. Congress, Levying a TAX to PAY OUR Personal medical expenses Hospitals, etc IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. Only U.S. owned Doctors and Hospitals can make that TAX constitutional--that is Truly Govt provided Health care. The same kind of Health care we all Tried in Missouri's City of St Louis. (CALLED CITY HOSPITAL) Remember That? Wait until 2014! Round 2 could be coming! Congress has it fully in their power to use a Tax for the "GENERAL WELFARE" of the country. I am not sure the welfare of any one individual was the intent of "Welfare clause". Another topic!
I sometimes wish we wouldn't have tapped into the trust fund for private schooling, and sent you to PUBLIC SCHOOL instead! Then maybe you wouldn't feel so highfalutin and ENTITLED. AND we would have SAVED A LOT OF MONEY! Boy you TAX my nerves sometimes. TAX TAX TAX!