"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

In article ,
says...

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

David Gregory's children attend Sidwell Friends which has a security
staff of 11.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

Now the security of our schools is only for the privileged.

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

We had "narcs", young looking cops, who dressed a few years to far in
the past and were always trying to get drugs. Most were spotted,
identified and ostracized within the first hours of their appearance at
our school. Most of us in high school had known each other since 5th or
6th grade. It was hard for an outsider to work themselves into our
circles.

On 12/24/2012 1:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

So they are not sitting ducks...

We had "narcs", young looking cops, who dressed a few years to far in
the past and were always trying to get drugs. Most were spotted,
identified and ostracized within the first hours of their appearance at
our school. Most of us in high school had known each other since 5th or
6th grade. It was hard for an outsider to work themselves into our
circles.

You watched too much tv....

On 12/24/12 2:24 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/24/2012 1:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black
Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

So they are not sitting ducks...

Doubtful. There were many entrances to that school, and it covered most
of a large city block. On the other hand, this *was* in the days before
Fox News and ready availability of Bushmaster-style rifles.

On 12/24/12 2:33 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:37:00 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

We never had cops in schools in the 60s. I went to high school in the
1700 block of G st NW so we had plenty of places to go for a quick
bite. They did not have the closed campus thing either. If you were
not in class you could go. In fact they had a no smoking within a
block of school thing so guys would go over to F street for a quick
smoke between classes. The back steps of the school was a great short
cut, through the alley. There was also a great little mom and pop
tavern at 18th and F that had a passable 35 cent hamburger (vs a dime
for what midwesterners call a "slider" at Little Tavern). A beer was
25 cents if you could trick them into believing you were 18.


I really don't know why we had an actual cop in the school. Perhaps he
was injured on his job as a cop and the school duty was a way to fill
out his years for a full retirement. In any event, he was a very decent
guy, well-liked and never one to bust your chops for minor "infractions."

My recollection is that 17th & G is an area of mostly federal office
buildings these days.

ESAD wrote:
On 12/24/12 2:24 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/24/2012 1:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black
Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the
terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for
decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an
active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high
schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive
vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated
the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for
lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

So they are not sitting ducks...

Doubtful. There were many entrances to that school, and it covered
most of a large city block. On the other hand, this *was* in the days
before Fox News and ready availability of Bushmaster-style rifles.

What does a particular "style" of rifle have to do with anything? A
Remington/Benelli/Mossberg "style" hunting shotgun could have been just
as bad, or worse, CT.

On 12/24/2012 8:47 PM, Earl wrote:
ESAD wrote:
On 12/24/12 2:24 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/24/2012 1:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black
Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the
terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for
decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an
active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high
schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive
vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated
the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for
lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

So they are not sitting ducks...

Doubtful. There were many entrances to that school, and it covered
most of a large city block. On the other hand, this *was* in the days
before Fox News and ready availability of Bushmaster-style rifles.

....and before the days when each and every 12 year old in the country
has more "experience" clearing a room (video games and TV, CSI, ETC...)
or in a tactical entry than a frekin' American Soldier...

What does a particular "style" of rifle have to do with anything? A
Remington/Benelli/Mossberg "style" hunting shotgun could have been just
as bad, or worse, CT.

On 12/24/12 9:10 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/24/2012 8:47 PM, Earl wrote:
ESAD wrote:
On 12/24/12 2:24 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/24/2012 1:07 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/24/12 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:30:25 -0500, ESAD wrote:

"It will be a sad day for this country if children can safely
attend
their classes only under the protection of armed guards."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the violence aimed at black
Americans
in September 1957 at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.
Eisenhower sent in the troops to protect children from the
terrorists
who were keeping them from attending school.

There have been cops in middle and high schools here for
decades but
they are only there to catch a kid smoking a joint in the bathroom.

The cop at Columbine was under specific orders not to engage an
active
shooter. I agree that to actually be effective a "guard" should get
extensive training and that should be in conjunction with a planned
procedure about what everyone else will be doing.


Back in my high school days, we had a plainclothes police officer
assigned permanently. He was armed, but I doubt he ever had to use
his
pistol, not back then. If memory serves, his name was "Al," everyone
knew him and he seem to know everybody. In those days, high
schoolers at
our school engaged in pretty harmless mischief, not expensive
vandali$m,
and there weren't many fights. The cafeteria food was just awful, so
many juniors and seniors "snuck" off campus to run over to an Italian
deli a long block away and get a good sub sandwich. That infuriated
the
assistant principal, but not Al. He also strolled over there for
lunch a
couple of days a week, usually in the midst of a small crowd of
students. For Al, a kid wanting a decent lunch was not an "offense"
worth his time or trouble.

Life was a lot simpler and safer in the early 1960's.

Why would the put a plain clothes policeman in your school?

So they are not sitting ducks...

Doubtful. There were many entrances to that school, and it covered
most of a large city block. On the other hand, this *was* in the days
before Fox News and ready availability of Bushmaster-style rifles.

...and before the days when each and every 12 year old in the country
has more "experience" clearing a room (video games and TV, CSI, ETC...)
or in a tactical entry than a frekin' American Soldier...

Violent video games. violent music, violent movies, et cetera, are
readily available and have been for many years in most, if not all, the
western democracies. Yet, it is Americans who seem the most violent and
into gunplay.