Obama's $500 million gun violence package

[badger]

The president's long list of executive orders includes:

— Ordering tougher penalties for people who lie on background checks and requiring federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

— Ending limits that make it more difficult for the government to research gun violence, such as gathering data on guns that fall into criminal hands.

— Requiring federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

— Giving schools flexibility to use federal grant money to improve school safety, such as by hiring school resource officers.

— Giving communities grants to institute programs to keep guns away from people who shouldn't have them.

Link (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=745&articleid=20130116_745_0_WASHIN309664)

Thoughts?

[sappstuf]

I assume


such as by hiring school resource officers.

means security guards... Can't he be man enough to just admit it?

[nutinbutdust]

I am reading 4.5 Billion instead of 500 million. LINK (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/least-45-billion-new-spending-gun-control_696120.html)


President Obama and Vice President Biden revealed their proposed reforms intended to reduce firearms related violence.

The proposal contains a mix of executive actions, regulations, and calls for Congress to act legislatively. The total package will cost at least $4.5 billion in new spending.

Among the new spending the president proposed:

• $4 billion for the president’s proposal “to help keep 15,000 cops on the streets in cities and towns across the country.” (That is roughly $266,000 per police officer.)

• $20 million to “give states stronger incentives to make [relevant] data available [for background checks] … “$50 million for this purpose in FY2014”

• “$14 million to help train 14,000 more police officers and other public and private personnel to respond to active shooter situations.”

• “$10 million for the Centers for Disease Control to conduct further research, including investigating the relationship between video games, media images, and violence.”

• $20 million to expand the National Violent Death Reporting System.

• $150 million to “put up to 1,000 new school resource officers and school counselors on the job.

Not sure if this estimate is too high. His speech looked like a lot of political posturing and setting up congress to take the blame, if they dont pass new laws.

[badger]

I am reading 4.5 Billion instead of 500 million. LINK (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/least-45-billion-new-spending-gun-control_696120.html)



Not sure if this estimate is too high. His speech looked like a lot of political posturing and setting up congress to take the blame, if they dont pass new laws.
It is possible that the Associated Press' estimate doesn't include the $4 billion for police officers, hence the about-500 mil difference in headlines.

IMHO, I am glad that we are taking the safety of our children so seriously. But, at the same time, school shootings are not that common compared to shootings at other places (like Section 8 housing apartments).

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Incredible! All this hype and he basically says nothing. What really scares me is he will be using TheSocialist'scare law to have your doctor ask you about guns...my response would be "none of your effing business..." Good luck getting that 4.5 Billion package through the House...

[East Coast Bias]

I agree with nut alot of political posturing. His executive order items are soft-ball items. He is recommending Congress pass the hard items. Zero chance any of the legislation gets done. Renaming buildings is about all this Congress has been able to agree on.

[Curly Bill]

Maybe now they can get some ammo back on the shelves so I can stock up before the next wave of anti-gun hysteria hits us.

[jkjsooner]

I assume



means security guards... Can't he be man enough to just admit it?

I don't think Obama thinks security guards are a bad idea. Requiring cash strapped schools to have security guards is. It's also not a very conservative stance.

Did you guys see the NRA add? They label Obama as a hypocrite because he has secret service protecting his kids. I mean, give me a break, does the NRA really think we're that dumb? Of course his kids are protected. They are many times more likely to be targeted than a normal kid and if they're kidnapped it puts our country in a very compromising position.

What if I wanted every American to have a secret service detail? Could I call Obama a hypocrite because he would think that's a foolish idea?

The NRA is bordering on liberal territory here. They throwing around elitist and hypocrite because Obama's kids have something normal kids don't.

[rock on sooner]

I agree with nut alot of political posturing. His executive order items are soft-ball items. He is recommending Congress pass the hard items. Zero chance any of the legislation gets done. Renaming buildings is about all this Congress has been able to agree on.

He HAS to have Congress pass the hard items. The prez can't legislate with
XO's and even those have a finite shelf life...until the other party gets into
the White House.

Did anyone see the NY laws that were just signed? Seems like some common
sense prevailed, even in blue state NY. The Pubs there signed on.

The MAJOR issue, imo, is the mental health issue and the identifying of said
crazies. Getting the CDC to study it more will help, unless Congress withholds
funds to pay for it.

[Wishboned]

Maybe now they can get some ammo back on the shelves so I can stock up before the next wave of anti-gun hysteria hits us.

Amen! I went to three stores yesterday and every damn shelf was bare.

[Curly Bill]

Amen! I went to three stores yesterday and every damn shelf was bare.


Innerwebs shops are the same way! I read a newspaper article today that even local police and stuff are having trouble getting ammo to practice, and some may be in danger of not having enough to shoot their annual qualifying dealios.

[badger]

Innerwebs shops are the same way! I read a newspaper article today that even local police and stuff are having trouble getting ammo to practice, and some may be in danger of not having enough to shoot their annual qualifying dealios.

President Obama is doing what he can to revive the economy by motivating consumers :D

What industry needs help next? Fast food?

Obama: In an effort to curb obesity FOR OUR CHILDREN I am announcing a $4.5 billion to $500 million (amount undetermined) to only allow for the most healthy foods to be made available, and therefore, the most bland...

I think I would immediately run out and get several dozen cases of my favorite soda :eek:

[Curly Bill]

President Obama is doing what he can to revive the economy by motivating consumers :D

What industry needs help next? Fast food?

Obama: In an effort to curb obesity FOR OUR CHILDREN I am announcing a $4.5 billion to $500 million (amount undetermined) to only allow for the most healthy foods to be made available, and therefore, the most bland...

I think I would immediately run out and get several dozen cases of my favorite soda :eek:

Never thought of it like that! So...Obammy is really a friend to the gun industry?

[Wishboned]

Innerwebs shops are the same way! I read a newspaper article today that even local police and stuff are having trouble getting ammo to practice, and some may be in danger of not having enough to shoot their annual qualifying dealios.

Have you tried Cheaper Than Dirt? www.cheaperthandirt.com

[hawaii 5-0]

I'm really not worried about the Criminals. They're gonna rob and kill regardless due to their desparation.

What concerns me is the ability of the Crazies and their access to guns. The ones that go kill innocent people for no certifiable reason.

5-0

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Maybe now they can get some ammo back on the shelves so I can stock up before the next wave of anti-gun hysteria hits us.

^^^This and the gun prices drop down to near reasonable...

[badger]

Never thought of it like that! So...Obammy is really a friend to the gun industry?

It's like cash for clunkers, except in this case, you get to keep what you already own, but feel compelled to upgrade

[nutinbutdust]

Did anyone see the NY laws that were just signed? Seems like some common
sense prevailed, even in blue state NY. The Pubs there signed on.



Yeah common sense prevailed there... In New York last year 5 people were killed with what they call assault rifles. 34 were killed with blunt objects... Didnt see em out law hammers.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

What concerns me is the ability of the Crazies and their access to guns. The ones that go kill innocent people for no certifiable reason.5-0

5-0 so far no "crazy" dude who shot them up has purchased a weapon after being diagnosed as being said crazy. WHile I agree that this should be a limit, if the medical people are not reporting the issue (like in Colorado), how can they be defined as crazy and prevented from exercising their constitutional right? You gonna go and do "pre-crime" like in the movie?

Not bashing, but I think this is the crux. Would reporting people be grounds for a failure of physician-client priviledge, or will there be a means test at which point is defined as a report/don't report level? Then again, who reports?

[pphilfran]

President Obama is doing what he can to revive the economy by motivating consumers :D

What industry needs help next? Fast food?

Obama: In an effort to curb obesity FOR OUR CHILDREN I am announcing a $4.5 billion to $500 million (amount undetermined) to only allow for the most healthy foods to be made available, and therefore, the most bland...

I think I would immediately run out and get several dozen cases of my favorite soda :eek:

They need to follow the amusement park industries lead...

If you are this wide you can't eat this food....

[sappstuf]

I don't think Obama thinks security guards are a bad idea. Requiring cash strapped schools to have security guards is. It's also not a very conservative stance.

Did you guys see the NRA add? They label Obama as a hypocrite because he has secret service protecting his kids. I mean, give me a break, does the NRA really think we're that dumb? Of course his kids are protected. They are many times more likely to be targeted than a normal kid and if they're kidnapped it puts our country in a very compromising position.

What if I wanted every American to have a secret service detail? Could I call Obama a hypocrite because he would think that's a foolish idea?

The NRA is bordering on liberal territory here. They throwing around elitist and hypocrite because Obama's kids have something normal kids don't.

The Left did when the NRA was the one to propose the idea a month ago... Funny how it comes around.

The NRA ad is not talking about the Secret Service. The actual school has security guards and quite a few of them as well.


According to a scan of the school's online faculty-staff directory, Sidwell has a security department made up of at least 11 people. Many of those are police officers, who are presumably armed.

Moreover, with the Obama kids in attendance, there is a secret service presence at the institution, as well.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gregory-mocks-lapierre-proposing-armed-guards-sends-kids-high-security-school_691057.html

[diverdog]

I assume



means security guards... Can't he be man enough to just admit it?

No that is what they are called and typically they are state troopers. Their role is fairly expansive. Both my kids schools have resource officers.

[diverdog]

The Left did when the NRA was the one to propose the idea a month ago... Funny how it comes around.

The NRA ad is not talking about the Secret Service. The actual school has security guards and quite a few of them as well.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gregory-mocks-lapierre-proposing-armed-guards-sends-kids-high-security-school_691057.html

The NRA actually lobbied against a similar idea years ago.

[badger]

They need to follow the amusement park industries lead...

If you are this wide you can't eat this food....

If you are this wide you can't eat this food... by the way, this stipulation begins in February 2013. Also by the way, many snack food items store incredibly well and have "use by" dates that can sometimes go a few years in advance. There's also your freezer!

The Mayan thing didn't work out, but the "end of the world" for gun lovers is making people stock up!

[jkjsooner]

The Left did when the NRA was the one to propose the idea a month ago... Funny how it comes around.

The NRA ad is not talking about the Secret Service. The actual school has security guards and quite a few of them as well.



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gregory-mocks-lapierre-proposing-armed-guards-sends-kids-high-security-school_691057.html

I stand corrected about the secret service.

As for the left on the security guards in schools, I don't think they think having a security guard is a bad idea. They think forrcing every school to have a security guard is a bad idea because we simply can't afford it. There is a big difference between the two.

I know a lot of conservatives thought this was a bad idea for both fiscal reasons and for concerns over federal reach. Many of their kids also go to private schools with security guards as well. Are they hypocrites or are we going to live by the American idea that those with means can afford to do more than those without means?

Like I said, the NRA is encroaching on liberal territory here - expecting everyone to have the benefits of the rich, driving up costs for schools, and increasing federal control over local schools.

If they want to say that Obama isn't liberal enough on this issue then fine but that isn't a message that should resonate with their members.


And, anyway, I think we would all agree that the President's family needs extra protection for national security purposes.

[nutinbutdust]

Did you guys see the NRA add? They label Obama as a hypocrite because he has secret service protecting his kids. I mean, give me a break, does the NRA really think we're that dumb? Of course his kids are protected. They are many times more likely to be targeted than a normal kid and if they're kidnapped it puts our country in a very compromising position.


NRA Response LINK (http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/01/16/obama-national-rifle-association-guns-newtown/1838715/)


The NRA issued its own statement, saying the ad is about Obama's opposition to more armed guards in school.

"Whoever thinks the ad is about President Obama's daughters are missing the point completely or they're trying to change the subject," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam.

He added: "This ad is about keeping our children safe. And the president said he was skeptical about the NRA proposal to put policemen in all schools in this country. Yet he and his family are beneficiaries of multiple law enforcement officers surrounding them 24-hours a day. That's the real issue. Anything else is an attempted calculated distraction."

The NRA ad’s racking-up thousands of views. The White House condemnation has put it into rotation on all the news nets.

[Ton Loc]

NRA Response LINK (http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/01/16/obama-national-rifle-association-guns-newtown/1838715/)



The NRA ad’s racking-up thousands of views. The White House condemnation has put it into rotation on all the news nets.

Anytime you have to release a statement about your commercial or ad that explains what the real message is --- you've done a terrible job with your commercial.

[jkjsooner]

NRA Response LINK (http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/01/16/obama-national-rifle-association-guns-newtown/1838715/)



The NRA ad’s racking-up thousands of views. The White House condemnation has put it into rotation on all the news nets.

It's not about the President's kids? Have you seen the ad? "Are Obama's kids more important than yours? ... when his kids are protected by armed guards."

Yep, it is about his daughters and the disparity between your kids and his kids.


Answer my questions. Is it a conservative stance to say it's hypocritical for someone with resources to have a level of protection that normal kids can't have? Is it a conservative stance for the federal government to require schools to hire armed guards? Is it hypocritical for Obama to say that we simply can't afford the NRA's plan?

I understand that the ad wasn't about the secret service but if you're going to call Obama a hypocrite you might as well call him a hypocrite because he has secret service and you don't. It makes about as much sense.


I grew up in a small town. If my school was required to hire a full time armed security guard they might have to just close up shop.

The NRA's plan sounded like something a liberal would dream up.

[BigTip]

Interesting how y'all are focusing on the cost and scope of these presidential edicts.

I am much more concerned that this is another 23 executive orders his highness has issued. There has to be a limit to this legislation by imperial order. Just saw on the news that Senator Rubio was having a big problem with this.

I also saw that the NRA said they have had 100,000 new members sign up. I put my money where my mouth is and just spent $35 signing up on line. I have never been a member before. Maybe the next time they quote new membership it will be 200,000. Anything to help send a message.

[SicEmBaylor]

Executive Orders are supposed to circumvent neither the Constitution nor the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives in Congress. Signing these Executive Orders today will become one of the most egregious abuses of Presidential power in American history. -- no surprise considering his political idols.

I hate to devolve into hyperbole, but it is no exaggeration to say that the President has not only betrayed his oath of office but become an enemy of the Constitution and an enemy of the people. With a split Congress, the chance of overturning his executive orders is next to nil. That will have to wait, potentially, until after the mid-terms assuming this leads to a Republican takeover of Congress in the mid-terms. The other option is to do what one lawmaker has suggested in Texas -- use state power to shield citizens from the unlawful executive orders of the President and refuse to comply. This would be my option.

Sadly, I'll once again reiterate that I had some hope for the Obama Presidency. I didn't vote for him of course, but I watched his Senate career pretty closely. I watched his demeanor in committee meetings and listened closely to the questions he asked (especially during the Rice confirmation hearings for SecState). I liked a lot of what I heard. His partnership with Tom Coburn in shining daylight on Federal budget and allowing citizens to track what legislators spend was phenomenal. I liked some of what he claimed he would do in so far as reducing the deficit. I also liked his pledge to bring more transparency to the political process. I even liked his pledge to end the war in Iraq and quickly wind things up in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, the President failed to live up to every positive expectation that I had of him and not only broke many of those pledges but doubled down on the mistakes of the Bush administration. I've been most frustrated with his outrageous spending that continues to grow exponentially as we continue to borrow more money for more projects all the while our credit rating drops. The President said we can't cut our way out of a deficit -- we can't spend our way out of it either! In stead of coming up with a true bipartisan agreement that would drastically cut spending while adjusting the top tax rate, the President bullied the testicular-absent Boehner and McConnell into tax cuts that amount to virtually nothing in exchange for 70%+ of the population getting a tax increase.

Add to this that the President evidently believes he can rule the country by fiat rather than with the will of the people consistent with (and this is important) the Constitution of the United States. Dark days are ahead. I weep for the Republic.

[diverdog]

Executive Orders are supposed to circumvent neither the Constitution nor the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives in Congress. Signing these Executive Orders today will become one of the most egregious abuses of Presidential power in American history. -- no surprise considering his political idols.

I hate to devolve into hyperbole, but it is no exaggeration to say that the President has not only betrayed his oath of office but become an enemy of the Constitution and an enemy of the people. With a split Congress, the chance of overturning his executive orders is next to nil. That will have to wait, potentially, until after the mid-terms assuming this leads to a Republican takeover of Congress in the mid-terms. The other option is to do what one lawmaker has suggested in Texas -- use state power to shield citizens from the unlawful executive orders of the President and refuse to comply. This would be my option.

Sadly, I'll once again reiterate that I had some hope for the Obama Presidency. I didn't vote for him of course, but I watched his Senate career pretty closely. I watched his demeanor in committee meetings and listened closely to the questions he asked (especially during the Rice confirmation hearings for SecState). I liked a lot of what I heard. His partnership with Tom Coburn in shining daylight on Federal budget and allowing citizens to track what legislators spend was phenomenal. I liked some of what he claimed he would do in so far as reducing the deficit. I also liked his pledge to bring more transparency to the political process. I even liked his pledge to end the war in Iraq and quickly wind things up in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, the President failed to live up to every positive expectation that I had of him and not only broke many of those pledges but doubled down on the mistakes of the Bush administration. I've been most frustrated with his outrageous spending that continues to grow exponentially as we continue to borrow more money for more projects all the while our credit rating drops. The President said we can't cut our way out of a deficit -- we can't spend our way out of it either! In stead of coming up with a true bipartisan agreement that would drastically cut spending while adjusting the top tax rate, the President bullied the testicular-absent Boehner and McConnell into tax cuts that amount to virtually nothing in exchange for 70%+ of the population getting a tax increase.

Add to this that the President evidently believes he can rule the country by fiat rather than with the will of the people consistent with (and this is important) the Constitution of the United States. Dark days are ahead. I weep for the Republic.

well you would be wrong. There have been over 15000 executive orders issued since 1789. None of these even come close to the worst. And pray tell which ones are unconstitutional?

[pphilfran]

well you would be wrong. There have been over 15000 executive orders issued since 1789. None of these even come close to the worst. And pray tell which ones are unconstitutional?

To be honest I am surprised that most of those points haven't already been in place....sad thing is they won't do diddly to resolve the problem...

[diverdog]

To be honest I am surprised that most of those points haven't already been in place....sad thing is they won't do diddly to resolve the problem...

The background data may help. The rest is mostly a waste of good ink.

[pphilfran]

The background data may help. The rest is mostly a waste of good ink.

Yes...but that is the way to do it...they don't have a clearly defined problem which led to same stupid stuff...various points make sense....

[sappstuf]

No that is what they are called and typically they are state troopers. Their role is fairly expansive. Both my kids schools have resource officers.

Fairly expansive and carry a gun, correct?

[diverdog]

Fairly expansive and carry a gun, correct?

Yes they do. However they are there for gang activity, bullying and drugs. They also help troubled kids and do a lot of mentoring. We have had them since the mid 90's. this is nothing new.

http://www.nasro.org/

[sappstuf]

Yes they do. However they are there for gang activity, bullying and drugs. They also help troubled kids and do a lot of mentoring. We have had them since the mid 90's. this is nothing new.

http://www.nasro.org/

I haven't heard much of anything about gang activity the past month... I'm thinking the reason for their sudden expanse has nothing to do with it.

Since they do carry guns, isn't this a tacit admission from the Left that so-called "gun free zones" are a horrible idea?

[SCOUT]

I am going to skip over a bunch of posts and I apologize for that. However, I have read the whole thing and want to make a summary type statement.

The idea that politicians want to limit law abiding citizens right to have guns, is fundamentally flared. At the same time, there are legislators who feel the need to restrict gun ownership, yet feel the need to have their own armed protection.

This is where the rubber meets the road. Is having an armed private citizen safer than having no guns.

If the answer is no, then these folks who have private security are hypocrites. Period....No discussion....

[hawaii 5-0]

Maybe we should just leave the 2nd Amendment alone and use it just like James Madison and the Founding Fathers had it.

Only smooth bore single shot pistols and muskets.

I guess blunderbusses might be allowed.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

Maybe we should just leave the 2nd Amendment alone and use it just like James Madison and the Founding Fathers had it.

Only smooth bore single shot pistols and muskets.

I guess blunderbusses might be allowed.

5-0

I bet you would have trouble winning a checker game against a bowl of soup.

[diverdog]

I haven't heard much of anything about gang activity the past month... I'm thinking the reason for their sudden expanse has nothing to do with it.

Since they do carry guns, isn't this a tacit admission from the Left that so-called "gun free zones" are a horrible idea?

No. I need to ask my wife if they carry guns because I am guessing.

Gang activity is still a very big problem. We have the Bloods in little ole Dover DE.

[Curly Bill]

Have you tried Cheaper Than Dirt? www.cheaperthandirt.com (http://www.cheaperthandirt.com)

Yep, I've looked there too.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

The people over at Sig Forum are bashing CTD big time for gouging. They have Pmags (errr for the press, a clip) going for $130 ! :eek:

[FaninAma]

well you would be wrong. There have been over 15000 executive orders issued since 1789. None of these even come close to the worst. And pray tell which ones are unconstitutional?

Could you give us one thing the current occupant of the Oval Office has done that you disagree with?

[FaninAma]

No. I need to ask my wife if they carry guns because I am guessing.

Gang activity is still a very big problem. We have the Bloods in little ole Dover DE.
I find that interesting. I lived in the middle of the worst area in OKC for gangs when I was in residency. The OKC police cracked down and had the area cleaned up within 3 years. Now the area has undergione a major renovation and is the area where the high rollers want to live.

How di they do that? Because they made it a priority and got the job done and didn't worry about being called racists or bowing to political correctness. I suspect the city fathers in Dover could do the same thing if they had any backbone.

[FaninAma]

I stand corrected about the secret service.

As for the left on the security guards in schools, I don't think they think having a security guard is a bad idea. They think forrcing every school to have a security guard is a bad idea because we simply can't afford it. There is a big difference between the two.

I know a lot of conservatives thought this was a bad idea for both fiscal reasons and for concerns over federal reach. Many of their kids also go to private schools with security guards as well. Are they hypocrites or are we going to live by the American idea that those with means can afford to do more than those without means?

Like I said, the NRA is encroaching on liberal territory here - expecting everyone to have the benefits of the rich, driving up costs for schools, and increasing federal control over local schools.

If they want to say that Obama isn't liberal enough on this issue then fine but that isn't a message that should resonate with their members.


And, anyway, I think we would all agree that the President's family needs extra protection for national security purposes.

The problem will take care of itself. If a school district decides not to have armed guards on duty then it becomes a huge liability issue for the school district should anything happen on school property that may have been prevented with the guards.

And I guarantee you the costs of hiring a few armed guards will pale in comparison to the costs of government mandates for things like assistance to children with disabilities, free lunch programs, after hour day care programs, etc.

Head Start is the biggest waste of taxpayer money in the school system ever dreamed up by progressives. Study after study after study shows that any potential advantage from the program is lost within 2 years of leaving the program. The only thing that really makes a difference in a childs's early academic performance is involved parents

[jkjsooner]

I haven't heard much of anything about gang activity the past month... I'm thinking the reason for their sudden expanse has nothing to do with it.

Since they do carry guns, isn't this a tacit admission from the Left that so-called "gun free zones" are a horrible idea?

Since we're mentioning gangs and guns, the whole argument that "only criminals will have guns" ignores one important point. Many gang members are arrested on gun related charges. The gun laws have been an effective tool to identify criminals.

If only criminals had guns it would be much easier to identify criminals.

I'm not saying you have to agree with this approach but the police do rely on it to a certain extent.

[hawaii 5-0]

I see that someone's bullshlt meter is calibrated too low.


5-0

[jkjsooner]

Head Start is the biggest waste of taxpayer money in the school system ever dreamed up by progressives. Study after study after study shows that any potential advantage from the program is lost within 2 years of leaving the program. The only thing that really makes a difference in a childs's early academic performance is involved parents

I hate to keep bringing it up and I'm not doing so to try to win an argument but it is my situation so I will discuss it.

I have an autistic 3 year old. I try my hardest to engage him in learning activities and teach him but I simply don't have the skills to do so effectively. I keep trying but it is nothing like engaging a typical child.

I absolutely need programs like head start if there's any chance that my son can be mainstreamed. I need that help as early as possible.

It's easy to dismiss these programs if you're not in my situation. I can't afford $50k a year for an intensive autism program. I can and do hire some additional therapies but 30 minutes here and there isn't going to get the job done and my wife and I being involved isn't going to be enough.

I'd bet those studies you refer to don't address kids with special needs. Study after study of autistic kids shows that early intervention is very important.

[FaninAma]

jk,

While I sympathize with your situation the problem ,IMO, is that the Feds have mandated that every school system provide these programs in their schools even if they have one student who meets the criteria. It is very expensive and in the long run it takes away funding for educating the most students in the best way the school system can.

I am not a big advocate of mainstreaming every student that has learning issues because I think too many kids who will never be able to be mainstreamed are placed in these programs. The result is the schools, especially smaller schools, are less able to afford things for most of their students.

I am a proponent of specialized schools that teach special needs children to learn life skills in a more effecient manner. So I don't disagree with you that the programs aren't needed but I do disagree how the schools are being forced to go about providing them. It is inefficient, costly and prevents maximizing the finances of individual school districs for the benefit of the greates number of students. Additionally, I think the local schools are ill-equipped and trained to handle these children and specialized classrooms with staffed with individuals trained to meet the needs of these kids would be a better way to go. Does it mean that parents may have to locate nearer one of these speicalized schools to enroll their kids? Yes. But personally, if I had an child that needed more intense attention and instruction I would not want them to try and receive that in Podunk, Ok.

I would Hold out the School for the Deaf in Sulphur, OK as an example of a school tht does a great job with deaf students. I would propose other designated schools for autistic children...not to warehouse them but to get them the help they really need.

And I can assure that the public schools, especially the small, rural ones, cut corners and try to circumvent the requirements. I see it every day. There is no way the kids that need extra help get it in these schools.

I do favor huge tax breaks and subsidies for for families with children who need extra help but to make sure the help gets to the kids who need it, the criteria need to be clearly defined.

If the system continues like it is and funding becomes tighter and tighter, these kids are going to fall between th cracks as school districts are forced to strectch their funding to deal with ever increasing government mandates leading to fewer and fewer opportunities for ALL students at public schools. As a result , I think you will see more and more parents who can afford it sending their kids to private schools.

[OU68]

Maybe we should just leave the 2nd Amendment alone and use it just like James Madison and the Founding Fathers had it.

Only smooth bore single shot pistols and muskets.

I guess blunderbusses might be allowed.

5-0

Want to apply that same logic to the 1st?

[Soonerjeepman]

Jk,
The one big issue is YOU are involved. Unfortunately there are a ton of parents of challenged children, or the in the poverty area that DON'T get involved. Maybe that was FIA's argument,not sure. My GF does First Steps in Missouri...that is where she goes to the homes of these kids and works with the parents on things they can do for their child. These children are pre-preschool age. Most are very poor and some of the issues are unbelievable. She does what she can but seriously some situations are hopeless. Really sad.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Jk,
The one big issue is YOU are involved. Unfortunately there are a ton of parents of challenged children, or the in the poverty area that DON'T get involved. Maybe that was FIA's argument,not sure. My GF does First Steps in Missouri...that is where she goes to the homes of these kids and works with the parents on things they can do for their child. These children are pre-preschool age. Most are very poor and some of the issues are unbelievable. She does what she can but seriously some situations are hopeless. Really sad.

This! JK you have skin in the game and are there as an active parent... I would surmise most of us looking to cut welfare, etc. are tired of the deadbeat parents and generationally exposed welfare frauds who do nothing all day, 'cept drink, commit crimes and are deliquents and take home 50K+ per year welfare. I am a lot more sympathetic to people trying hard to do something than those who are just sitting around...

Case in point - when I was in Jr. High and High School, the dice/craps game was near the band room...it was filled with Free Lunch Token types, but they had more money in rolls than I ever saw until after college...

[Midtowner]

This package is a joke. A really bad joke. The NRA is currently its own worst enemy. There are some changes which could really curb crime while respecting the rights of citizens to have firearms. Europe is a different place. The population is not nearly so spread out, so gun bans can work and folks won't be placed in nearly the danger they'd be in here. That said, we do have a serious gun violence problem, but I think the solution is a lot more simple than some would think.

Remember when a DUI used to be no big *** deal? When the officer would often just drop you off at your house and the ticket was just a token amount? Well, MADD came in and toughened up DUI laws and made things a lot tougher on drunk drivers. Your first DUI could easily cost in excess of $10,000 once you add everything up and after the second, you're looking at potential jail time. These days, in my experience, I haven't seen too many frequent fliers on the DUI dockets, and when I have, we're talking about things like drug court and 10-year suspended sentences on the 3rd count. That's serious time, and the laws have largely worked to curb drunk driving.

So why not impose a 30 year mandatory/85% sentence on ANY gun crime including accessory and conspiracy, etc. Remove prosecutorial discretion from the picture, no pleading down to a lesser charge, none of that, commit a crime with a gun/abuse your right? Your forfeit a very large part of your life in the free world. We wouldn't even be talking about recidivism with gun crime for at least 3 decades. Why is the NRA not arguing for something like that?

[sappstuf]

http://www.terrellaftermath.com/Cartoon%20Archive/January%202013%20Archive/MissRuudPacking4Web-1_17_13.jpg

[TheHumanAlphabet]

This... commit a crime with a gun/abuse your right? Your forfeit a very large part of your life in the free world. We wouldn't even be talking about recidivism with gun crime for at least 3 decades. Why is the NRA not arguing for something like that?


Probably because they saw Congress and the Courts meddle and change (i.e. reducing) sentencing requirements and seeing the Courts declare overcrowding a human rights violation and putting said courts under court review...

[Midtowner]

Probably because they saw Congress and the Courts meddle and change (i.e. reducing) sentencing requirements and seeing the Courts declare overcrowding a human rights violation and putting said courts under court review...

Overcrowding is a human rights violation.

Obviously.

I'd look at reducing mandatory sentences for drug crimes to offset.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Overcrowding is a human rights violation.



Lets just say we differ on this one... It is supposed to be punishment, not a spa visit...

Before you reply with some space or number... Lets just say there is probably some number out there not to go lower than, we probably won't agree on it...

I would advocate tents if one is running out of space, a la, Sheriff Joe.

[sappstuf]

Overcrowding is a human rights violation.

Obviously.

I'd look at reducing mandatory sentences for drug crimes to offset.

Guns and drugs go together... Seems like you would only be breaking even.

[Midtowner]

Lets just say we differ on this one... It is supposed to be punishment, not a spa visit...

The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. The American Correctional Association has adopted standards based on studies which have been adopted by quite a few prisons. They have found through conducting studies that overcrowding results in increased stress, anxiety, the opportunity for predatory activities and has contributed to the spread of disease and sexual assaults. If we believe that part of prison is rehabilitation, overcrowding results in inmates being denied access to rehabilitation programs. If that doesn't move you, it also contributes to danger towards staff and to the premature decay of facilities.

The recommendations of the ACA aren't exactly shangri-la. We're talking a minimum of fifty to seventy square feet of living space per prisoner, a minimum of 60 square feet per inmate, no fewer than one toilet and sink for every 8 inmates, a matress for each inmate, etc. Believe it or not, we have minimum standards, even for prisoners. They have rights as well.

[olevetonahill]

Guns and drugs go together... Seems like you would only be breaking even.

Druggies steal everything that aint nailed down and No crowbars handy. That be the ticket turn more of THOSE crazymother****ers loose so we can lock up some one who commits a crime with a Gun.

[Midtowner]

Druggies need rehabilitation, maybe forced institutionalized rehab, but not long-term punishment.

Also depends on their drug of choice... marijuana users are often very productive members of society. Same with recreational cocaine users. Depending on their level of addiction, maybe being required to submit to random UAs for a long time would be better than locking them up. Meth/PCP/crack? Institutionalized rehab.

As far as drug distribution? What a pointless thing to be throwing around life sentences for. For every mule you put away for life, there are 10 more wanting to score some quick and easy cash.

[FaninAma]

Who pays for the rehab?

[Midtowner]

Who pays for the rehab?

DOC.

It's cheaper than incarceration.

Also drug court programs have been shown to be very effective in reducing recidivism. I'm not convinced those are the best programs for treating certain substances such as meth, but can be perfectly fine for potheads and drinkers.

[sappstuf]

Druggies need rehabilitation, maybe forced institutionalized rehab, but not long-term punishment.

Also depends on their drug of choice... marijuana users are often very productive members of society. Same with recreational cocaine users. Depending on their level of addiction, maybe being required to submit to random UAs for a long time would be better than locking them up. Meth/PCP/crack? Institutionalized rehab.

As far as drug distribution? What a pointless thing to be throwing around life sentences for. For every mule you put away for life, there are 10 more wanting to score some quick and easy cash.

Druggies have to want rehabilitation... Most don't.

[sappstuf]

No. I need to ask my wife if they carry guns because I am guessing.

Gang activity is still a very big problem. We have the Bloods in little ole Dover DE.

I did quite of bit of research. They almost always carry guns and a lot of times, they are in their uniform.

It is most certainly a tacit admission that gun free zones are death traps.

[sappstuf]

I agree with nut alot of political posturing. His executive order items are soft-ball items. He is recommending Congress pass the hard items. Zero chance any of the legislation gets done. Renaming buildings is about all this Congress has been able to agree on.

I saw the phrase "impotent tyranny".. I found that amusing.

One of his EO is to nominate a director of the ATF. This position has been vacant for Obama's first 4 years and he has never gone through the trouble of sending a single name to the Senate for confirmation. Now he has to order himself to fill a vacancy he has had 1455 days to fill....

Leadership!

[SicEmBaylor]

I saw the phrase "impotent tyranny".. I found that amusing.

One of his EO is to nominate a director of the ATF. This position has been vacant for Obama's first 4 years and he has never gone through the trouble of sending a single name to the Senate for confirmation. Now he has to order himself to fill a vacancy he has had 1455 days to fill....

Leadership!
I'd rather him not fill that particular position. The ATF is the most dangerous law enforcement agency in these United States full of jack booted fascist thugs that should be run out of government service for perpetuity. If I had a free hand to do as I wished...I would fire every employee at the ATF and ensure not a single one of them got a job in government again at any level let alone law enforcement and then I would board up ATF HQ and sell the building to the highest bidder. They should be defunded yesterday.

[diverdog]

I did quite of bit of research. They almost always carry guns and a lot of times, they are in their uniform.

It is most certainly a tacit admission that gun free zones are death traps.

Based on what? Two incidences? Columbine had a resource officer. I do not think an armed guard is going to stop a nut from shooting people.

[sappstuf]

Based on what? Two incidences? Columbine had a resource officer. I do not think an armed guard is going to stop a nut from shooting people.

Why not? An armed principle stopped the Pearl High School shooting from turning into a mass shooting.

[okie52]

I'd rather him not fill that particular position. The ATF is the most dangerous law enforcement agency in these United States full of jack booted fascist thugs that should be run out of government service for perpetuity. If I had a free hand to do as I wished...I would fire every employee at the ATF and ensure not a single one of them got a job in government again at any level let alone law enforcement and then I would board up ATF HQ and sell the building to the highest bidder. They should be defunded yesterday.

Did you weep for Timothy mcveigh? Send flowers to his funeral?

[okie52]

Based on what? Two incidences? Columbine had a resource officer. I do not think an armed guard is going to stop a nut from shooting people.

"Resource officer"? LOL. PC is always good for a laugh.

An armed guard would/could certainly delay a nut or divert his attention until help arrived.

[Midtowner]

Druggies have to want rehabilitation... Most don't.

And that's where incarceration or involuntary rehab comes into play. Drug courts work--a lot. They reduce recidivism and get folks back on the right foot. At least here in OK, if you're in drug court, you have to wear an ankle monitor, are only free to go to home, work, treatment and the grocery store and other places with permission. You have a curfew. You are required to go to ALL of your counseling sessions and to submit to random UAs. You are also required to go to court twice a month to talk to the judge about your progress. Make that step one. Fail that? You go to involuntary rehab. Fail that? We go back to long-term incarceration to take you out of circulation.

It's my experience that most druggies on some level want rehabilitation, but simply lack the willpower to follow through. The science of rehabilitation is that it takes time for the brain to rewire itself back to normal--1.5 to 2 to 5 years. Most voluntary rehab centers are only 6 months. Voluntary rehab should be followed up with sober living centers and regular testing. Even drug court lasts 18 months.

[pphilfran]

And that's where incarceration or involuntary rehab comes into play. Drug courts work--a lot. They reduce recidivism and get folks back on the right foot. At least here in OK, if you're in drug court, you have to wear an ankle monitor, are only free to go to home, work, treatment and the grocery store and other places with permission. You have a curfew. You are required to go to ALL of your counseling sessions and to submit to random UAs. You are also required to go to court twice a month to talk to the judge about your progress. Make that step one. Fail that? You go to involuntary rehab. Fail that? We go back to long-term incarceration to take you out of circulation.

It's my experience that most druggies on some level want rehabilitation, but simply lack the willpower to follow through. The science of rehabilitation is that it takes time for the brain to rewire itself back to normal--1.5 to 2 to 5 years. Most voluntary rehab centers are only 6 months. Voluntary rehab should be followed up with sober living centers and regular testing. Even drug court lasts 18 months.

This is a hell of a lot better than time in the pokey...

[FaninAma]

DOC.

It's cheaper than incarceration.

Also drug court programs have been shown to be very effective in reducing recidivism. I'm not convinced those are the best programs for treating certain substances such as meth, but can be perfectly fine for potheads and drinkers.

Or we could do what China and Singapore do with repeat drug offenders.

I am a big believer that everybody deserves help when they make mistakes the first time....maybe even the second time. But when you keep making the same mistake over and over and over again I don't think society owes you a damn thing.

[sappstuf]

Senator Dianne Feinstein released her legislation on assault weapons yesterday.

She thinks it will cut down on those mass killings, I suppose.

Let us look at the number of people killed in mass killing(4 deaths or more) since 2000.

2012: 45
2011: 17
2010: 8
2009: 26
2008: 5
2007: 40
2006: 0
2005: 0
2004: 6
2003: 0
2002: 0
2001: 0
2000: 7

154 people total... In 12 years... In a nation of 300+ million..

For a little persepective, over the past 30 years an average of 54 people are killed annually by lightning strikes. 55 people were killed by subways last year in New York City alone...

A big waste of time.

[Midtowner]

Or we could do what China and Singapore do with repeat drug offenders.

I am a big believer that everybody deserves help when they make mistakes the first time....maybe even the second time. But when you keep making the same mistake over and over and over again I don't think society owes you a damn thing.

Society always owes you your rights, whether you are hopeless addict or a soccer mom.

[Harry Beanbag]

Senator Dianne Feinstein released her legislation on assault weapons yesterday.

She thinks it will cut down on those mass killings, I suppose.

Let us look at the number of people killed in mass killing(4 deaths or more) since 2000.

2012: 45
2011: 17
2010: 8
2009: 26
2008: 5
2007: 40
2006: 0
2005: 0
2004: 6
2003: 0
2002: 0
2001: 0
2000: 7

154 people total... In 12 years... In a nation of 300+ million..

For a little persepective, over the past 30 years an average of 54 people are killed annually by lightning strikes. 55 people were killed by subways last year in New York City alone...

A big waste of time.


Waste of time? It's a golden opportunity for the anti-Liberty crowd. There's no place for logic in a political agenda.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

A big waste of time.

Not if you are a Progressive, bent on taking over the country... You will not be able todoit if people have good guns, are civics educated and understand the tyranny they will impose....