Democrats Now Claiming That Cops in Schools Won’t Stop School Shootings

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.


At this point the NRA could come out with a call for an assault rifle ban and the Democrats would immediately jeer that too. The response to the NRA’s call for police officers in schools is a road sign of just how nuts the Democratic Party has become.

Rep. Joseph Crowley of New York, the incoming vice chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said the NRA’s idea is “the exact opposite direction the American people want us to move in,” adding that the American people “were expecting a completely different response” from the pro-gun lobby.

“It’s an incredibly false notion to think that simply by having armed guards in our schools that somehow that will deter someone who is dead-on going to try to take not only the lives of other people but in this case and other cases themselves as well,” Crowley said at a Capitol Hill news conference Friday afternoon. “The way in which the NRA is approaching this now is irrational.”

Who’s irrational here?

Clearly it’s irrational to think that having armed guards will stop an armed attack. Because school shooters are the Terminator and absolutely nothing can stop them except an assault rifle ban. Or maybe some sort of magic spell.

Oddly though when threatened by an armed man, the irrational approach of so many people is to call for the police. And then the police irrationally show up, even though it’s completely irrational to think that they can do anything about an attack.

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland said, “The recommendation of an arms escalation in America is not, I think, the solution that the American people believe … makes common sense.”

So having police officers on call is armed escalation? Did the Democrats just revert to their crazy 70s Pro-Criminal rhetoric?

Is Hoyer seriously contending that the American people will not believe that stopping school shootings with police officers is not common sense?

The Democrats are contending that since there was an armed deputy at Columbine who did exchange fire with one of the shooters and helped evacuate students, but did not succeed in single-handedly stopping two gunmen, that police don’t work.

But then again since Connecticut has an assault rifle ban and that didn’t work, then clearly nothing works and all is lost.

That gives the Democrats something in common with the NRA, which also used to argue that police don’t work. Now the NRA is arguing that police work and proposing Clinton’s old plan for putting police officers in schools. And the Democrats are arguing that police officers can’t possibly stop shooters and that it’s irrational to even propose that.

Pelosi triumphantly caped the session of Democratic craziness with a rambling rant that at no point in time resembled something a non-crazy person would say.

“For the NRA and others to sort of shield themselves by saying it’s the mentally ill or something, and therefore we have to have more armed cops in the schools or more guns in the school — what are they — are they going to have [a gun] on the teacher’s desk?” Pelosi asked in wonder. “Wait a minute, man with a gun; I have it locked up someplace. Wait until I go get it. I mean, this — this just doesn’t make sense; we’ve got to reduce violence.”

There’s an army about to invade the United States. What are our soldiers going to do? Go look for their guns someplace, and then fuel up their tanks and try to look at maps? This doesn’t make any sense. We can’t win wars. We’ve got to reduce violence.

  • S. Hauptman

    Funny how the secret service is armed and protects the prez. Funny how every courthouse (including the Supreme Court) has armed guards who make them feel safe.Funny that every state building in the country has armed persons protecting every Governor and state rep. who ever weaseled their way into office. Funny how no one storms into a police station with a gun or a shooting range with evil intent. Funny how talk sho idiots like Pierce Morgan (hypocrit) has armed people in the lobby of his studio building yet we cannot seem to admit that our children just might be SAFER with armed guards or off duty policmen at the door of their schools!? It's about controlling people and pushing the liberal agenda that guns are evil. If children see that guns make them safer it completely obliterates the lefts position and they won't have that! Not even at the costs of more innocent lives. It's the left they need to fear, NOT the NRA.

  • erielhonan

    NRA claiming cops in schools will stop attacks. Like the cop in Columbine High not stopping that attack. Like the cops shooting bystanders in front of the Empire State building.

    You know what will help stop the attacks? Reducing the power of lies and hate in this country. False conservative hatemongering websites, like this for instance, need a little Anonymous attention. Your rhetoric is ugly, transparently false, and only feeds discord from the basest and most primitive-minded pseudo-conservative jackbooters. Sow what you reap, fascists.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      I appreciate your call for ending hatermongering, but shouldn't you start with yourself?

      • erielhonan

        No, I shouldn't. The only thing in the world I am intolerant of is intolerance. I don't base my personal and political opinions on the hatred or denigration of anyone or anything, except hatred and denigration. But those things I hate with a white-hot passion.

        Ridding ourselves of the tolerance of hatred and violence will go a lot further in ending gun violence than plopping a bunch of Barney Fife wannabes in our schools ever can. But hate addicts, the likes of this website very much included there, will stand in the way of any progress on that front every time, with their insipid lies and paper-thin twisted logic. And I hate that.

        • Daniel Greenfield

          Then I applaud your proposal to end intolerance by being intolerant and ending hatred by being hateful.

          In no time at all we'll be able to disband the useless police departments full of Barney Fifes and replace them with angry internet commenters.

          • erielhonan

            You really missed the point didn't you. Typical partisan tactic – take a snip, spin it, and run. Doesn't matter how clear the point of the original comment was.

            Also – La Pierre talked about volunteers (wannabe Barney Fifes) as well as cops. Also, any cop who gets schoolsitter duty is likely not the sharpest spoon in the dishwasher (I will say that if we go with cops in schools some will be competent and motivated for the duty. But for a large part it will be the flunkies who get the job). Also, no cop is omnipresent – what about the cop at Columbine? Are you gonna ignore that documented fact?

            Did I say anything about getting rid of cops? No, I said something about reducing gun violence. But that was an Olympic-class leap you took there. That's exactly the paper-thin twisted logic that I'm talking about. Bravo.

          • Mary Sue

            You wouldn't know how to reduce gun violence if it was revealed to you From On High™

            you perfectly demonstrate the irrationality and illogic possessed of the Left.

          • Mary Sue

            You're hateful and intolerant. Does that mean I should be hateful to you?

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            I don't base my personal and political opinions on the hatred or denigration of anyone or anything, except hatred and denigration.

            then

            La Pierre talked about volunteers (wannabe Barney Fifes) as well as cops. (emphasis mine)

            I suppose "denigration" is only when others do it.

            Feh.

          • WSG

            Your delusional ignorance of history and human nature is typical for a Progressive. "Hatred" is NOT disagreeing with a Radical, pointing our the FAILURES of the utopian Progressives" social policies is NOT hatred. Trying to preserve what is left of Judeo- Christian civilization in the face of raging nihilism is not Hatred but self preservation. Of course it is precisely those Judeo- Christian values which so animates the left's hatred of this Republic and the US Constitution.

          • RedWhiteAndJew

            But you see, to leftists, pointing out their errors is by definition, hatred. A debate with them, is like a debate with a religious fanatic (and unlike many of the leftists here, I use that term descriptively not pejoratively; as when they refer to religious people thusly, as a whole). That is what so many leftists are: secular-religious fanatics. Contradicting them, or proving them wrong, thereby making others question the leftists' doctrines, is an evil act. But to them, evil, by name, is a passe concept. The proxy for evil they commonly use is "hate." That word's use serves exactly the same purpose for them, as kafir does for islamists.

        • Mary Sue

          well then, when are you going to speak out against the hatred and violence espoused by Radical Islam and idiots like Code Pink, PETA, and the Black Panthers, etc?

          You don't know what intolerance is.

    • Mary Sue

      actually it's the left-wing hatemongering sites, such as Democrat Underground, that need a little Anonymous attention.

      You're really freaking stupid if you think that the attacks have anything to do with 'hate mongering'. It has to do with crazy people. Many of which are on the left!

  • Rivkah F.

    I live in Israel where after unfortunate terror attacks most schools have placed an armed guard at the gate and in many schools, pupils are required to wear a polo-shirt or a sweatshirt with the school logo on it. In high schools, pupils must present an identification card at the gate and certainly, visitors must do so. While determined terrorists may try to enter, the guard and the identification process certainly act to prevent or deter them. In addition, they clearly prevent robbery and drug peddling. A suspicious looking individual is profiled (sorry, safety first). In one case, about 20- 25 years ago, a guard at a school fired shots and the principal and some high school kids ran out with baseball bats and struck & disarmed the terrorist. Guards do help.

  • Mary Sue

    Did the Democrats just revert to their crazy 70s Pro-Criminal rhetoric?

    Yes, yes they did.

  • RedWhiteAndJew
  • Brujo Blanco

    The left.consistently comes up with non solutions for problems. Drilling for oil willnot solve the oil shortage. Now armed.guards will not stop the violent.armed.attacks on schools. Their solution is to disarm everyone and keep armed cops out of the schools. Armed thugs avoid people with guns and places that are guarded by armed guards. I have actually investigated many incidents involving firearm violence. These criminals do not look.for armed.people to.attack because they prefer soft targets. Now we have notified every violent wacko in the country that they can score a high body count in a.school because the lefties in charge are.likely to.keep.armed guards out of the schools. The dems have this idea that banning guns.will stop armed violence. They are wrinv. Armed.violence will.spike.

  • RedWhiteAndJew

    Cops in schools are a fine idea, but if I were hell-bent on murder and carnage, the guy in blue with a star on his chest and a mic on his shoulder would be my first target.

    Much better is a model where the armed people in a school are numerous and anonymous.

    Train the teachers and administration staff, and let them volunteer to come to work armed.

  • RedWhiteAndJew

    Read this. You have to read the whole thing, to find the bit that's specifically relevant to this article, but the whole thing is great.

  • Thomas Wells

    Considering that a large chunk of Obama's core voters are criminally inclined lunatics,this stance by the democrats is logical.

    • RedWhiteAndJew

      You raise an interesting point. When dim pols exhibit Einstein's definition of insanity by repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results, and the knobs keep voting for them, what else are they to conclude, WRT their constituencies?

      If I were a dhimmi pol, I certainly wouldn't want my core voters to be firearm owners. Hell, I wouldn't want them to have sharp sticks. And, being a dhimmi politician, I would have no respect for liberty and the Constitution…

      And here we are.

  • http://www.wakepedia.blogspot.com Wakefield Tolbert

    But Daniel, while it may very well be that media and lefties are spinning around on this so fast it might warp space-time, if I recall correctly, the GOP at the time–and more than a few conservative commentators, said Clinton's idea for the COPS in schools program was a waste of time and money and mocked it openly. Did they not?