Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Weekly Standard)   NBC News talking head David Gregory chides NRAs Wayne LaPierre for even considering the notion of having armed guards at schools. After the interview, he picked up his kids at their school...which has 11 on the security payroll   (weeklystandard.com ) divider line
    More: Dumbass, NBC, mock trial, Sidwell Friends, payrolls, security  
•       •       •

9338 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Dec 2012 at 11:07 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-12-24 08:38:34 AM  
6 votes:
Did you guys know that the President said he doesn't think all Americans should have Secret Service protection, even though he himself has Secret Service protection??? What a hypocrite! It's like he thinks some lives are more valuable than others!
2012-12-24 08:24:58 AM  
5 votes:
 the co-ed Quaker school Sidwell Friends

                  HA    HA

 encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com

            ARMED QUAKERS
2012-12-24 09:47:15 AM  
4 votes:
It's like the World Series of Intentional Obtuseness in this thread.
2012-12-24 08:11:30 AM  
4 votes:
Only children of the elite deserve schools with gun-carrying protectors.
2012-12-24 07:59:28 AM  
4 votes:
Some children are more important than others, submitter. It's a fact of life.
2012-12-24 04:13:55 PM  
3 votes:
www.lostrepublic.us
2012-12-24 09:23:25 AM  
3 votes:
NRA- All pets require litterboxes!

David Gregory- no, not all pets need litterboxes.

NRA-OMG but you have litterboxes for your cats! That means you're a hypocrite, Michael Moore has to be put to death by firing squad, and Sarah Palin is the head of the Department of Education!

Rational people- *facepalm*
2012-12-24 08:41:32 AM  
3 votes:

kxs401: I'm.... outraged?

Wait, no I'm not. Just because one school where lots of children who might be potential targets attend needs guards, that doesn't mean all schools need guards. Why are republicans constantly so pouty and outraged? Does it make them happy?


Hey, I'm with you. Some kids need security. Why should the hoi polloi get that sort of service?Security costs money, and those resources need to be spared only on a certain class of people.
2012-12-24 07:56:20 AM  
3 votes:
Security guards at the school where Obama's kids attend?

This is an outrage!
2012-12-24 12:36:20 PM  
2 votes:
img27.imageshack.us
2012-12-24 12:13:17 PM  
2 votes:
i50.tinypic.com

Every person that died in an auto accident in 2011 was killed by a black Dodge Challenger? What are the farkin' odds?
2012-12-24 12:09:19 PM  
2 votes:
Best part? The neo-Confederates are never going to realize that the liberals are going full Obama mode and are just pretending to be against armed-guards-in-every-school so they can trick idiots like DIA into being for it. Before you know it, 200,000 more unionized government workers with government-paid healthcare for life, more protection for poor kids (Socialism), and all paid for by increased taxes (on ammo and guns). Brilliant. Let's oppose it until they double down. Make it 400,000 more on the dole.

/thread needs more wild hog pics
2012-12-24 11:36:59 AM  
2 votes:
oblig

www.sarasota.k12.fl.us
2012-12-24 11:22:28 AM  
2 votes:
I've solved the problem...

No more gun worries... no more bomb scares... just bliss

Your kids are safe now.. thanks to the new security team put into place in schools....

www.dziennik.com

/your welcome
2012-12-24 08:18:42 AM  
2 votes:

BunkyBrewman: Security guards at the school where Obama's kids attend?


TFA mentions that this is not counting the SS detail.
2012-12-24 05:30:42 PM  
1 vote:
Like black teenagers don't already have guns....


trollface.jpg
2012-12-24 05:26:57 PM  
1 vote:
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-12-24 04:58:08 PM  
1 vote:
Internet Liberals 10-12 years ago:
" He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."

Internet Liberals today:
"Waaaaaaah school shooters are everywhere! Please start restricting our gun ownership rights so that we can be more secure"
2012-12-24 04:03:01 PM  
1 vote:

ZeroPly: I am gratified that this has morphed into a Stephen Hawking rape thread. That has a lot more promise for fresh ideas than the bi-daily Fark gun thread.


Why don't you go back to chasing elk around and pissing them off with .223 wounds?
2012-12-24 02:26:46 PM  
1 vote:
assets.diylol.com
2012-12-24 02:15:08 PM  
1 vote:
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-12-24 12:48:48 PM  
1 vote:

BSABSVR: Also, since the theme of the the thread seems to be a pointless and incorrect gotcha: Who under the age of 60 gives a Fark about David Gregory?


Man, I miss Tim Russert!
2012-12-24 12:26:37 PM  
1 vote:
Why would a school in DC need security at all?

Washington DC has very strict gun control. Therefore, there is no crime there.
2012-12-24 12:16:08 PM  
1 vote:

Fade2black: Notabunny: I love the smell of right wing desperation in the morning

And I love my side of Liberal Hypocrisy right next to my bowl of Oatmeal as well, tool.

[i50.tinypic.com image 578x639]

I'm not even a gun nut (have literally never fired one outside of Paintball), and even I know the Liberal argument is about as retarded as it gets.


If you use this analogy you might be retarded.
2012-12-24 12:06:09 PM  
1 vote:

Igor Jakovsky:
Meh, my public high school installed an armed school resource officer who was an actual cop a few years after I graduated. He was there mostly because there was a lot of drug dealing going on at the school. After Columbine, the school board decided to keep him on staff.

I don't necessarily see why it is such an awful idea. A trained officer may not be able to save everyone but they may be able to mitigate the damage.


Because it's clearly already in place.


Plus it would mean thousands of new jobs. Why do you hate job creation?


So did the TSA. You don't need to hire a maid every time you shiat your pants. It's a bad situation, but it's pretty rare.

Attacking people in schools is not a nationwide epidemic. Murdering people in large quantities with high-capacity guns is.
2012-12-24 11:45:40 AM  
1 vote:

LargeCanine: my knowledge always - advocated keeping guns away from mentally unstable people.


Minus that one year they ran that "arm the mentally unstable" campaign, but that turned out to be a typo.
2012-12-24 11:39:14 AM  
1 vote:

cman: Only children of the elite deserve schools with gun-carrying protectors.


images2.wikia.nocookie.net
"Since you've already attended public school, we're assuming you've already had experience with small arms."
2012-12-24 11:29:15 AM  
1 vote:

david_gaithersburg: St_Francis_P: david_gaithersburg: St_Francis_P: sammyk: Well, if you got nothin you attack the messenger.

The public reacted very negatively to LaPierre's message, so the Conservative Entertainment Complex has decided to double down on it. Good times.
.
wut?

Google is your friend.

.
Ahh, thanks. A term invented by Media Matters, a Hillary Clinton/George Soros propaganda project. I take it you subscribe to that insane shiat?


You link to Rense.com. Now tell us how the mind control chemicals get into contrails.
2012-12-24 11:27:20 AM  
1 vote:

coco ebert: I'm also amused by the sudden interest by conservatives in educational equality and mental health funding.

GTFO with that sh*t.


I think they have been worried for years about the mentally ill, Progressives, and Democrats, but I'm repeating myself.
2012-12-24 11:10:45 AM  
1 vote:
Also, since the theme of the the thread seems to be a pointless and incorrect gotcha: Who under the age of 60 gives a Fark about David Gregory?
2012-12-24 10:26:14 AM  
1 vote:
It's time once again for conservatives to demand wholeheartedly for something essential to keeping children safe that not a single one of them ever thought about or said we needed before Friday.
2012-12-24 10:18:44 AM  
1 vote:
I'm also amused by the sudden interest by conservatives in educational equality and mental health funding.

GTFO with that sh*t.
2012-12-24 09:57:25 AM  
1 vote:

sigdiamond2000: It's like the World Series of Intentional Obtuseness in this thread.


And there will be people calling other people names soon.
2012-12-24 09:18:49 AM  
1 vote:
I also hope no guns were harmed due to David's insensitive comments and dismissive attitude. After all, the safety of our guns is the most important thing here
2012-12-24 09:15:47 AM  
1 vote:

Nabb1: nmrsnr: JerseyTim: Let's just say I think that college football is bad and is something that needs to be scaled back in a major way. Even if I held those beliefs, it would not be some crazy thing to send my kids to Stanford.

Wait, there might be other reasons to send a kid to a school other than their armed security presence? Since when?

Oh, absolutely. Security is a nice perk. The much higher quality of education and not having to deal with the poors are the main draw.


Amazing to see you and DIA now so supportive of equal, safe, high quality public education.  I would think you'd be in favor of choice.  Choice for higher quality.  Choice for better security.  You guys sound like Bolsheviks today.  Suddenly so concerned about the common people.
2012-12-24 09:11:40 AM  
1 vote:
If all the kids and teachers were packing heat those guards wouldn't be needed. Duh.... problem solved. Can't you all see that?
2012-12-24 08:55:51 AM  
1 vote:

kxs401: Regardless of whether you think all schools need armed guards or not, it's not hypocritical for Sidwell Friends to have armed guards when other schools don't


I can only assume that you regularly rail on people for wanting to have things that you afford yourself.
2012-12-24 08:54:28 AM  
1 vote:

kxs401: I'm.... outraged?

Wait, no I'm not. Just because one school where lots of children who might be potential targets attend needs guards, that doesn't mean all schools need guards. Why are republicans constantly so pouty and outraged? Does it make them happy?


That's pretty much what I was going to say. When you have the children of high profile folks attending your exclusive school in droves (it is a very exclusive school, btw), you'll want that security. However, the chances of someone trying to kidnap and hold for ransom one of the kids at one the schools here are  probably zero. If there's gonna be a kidnapping in my solidly middle class area, it's going to be a parent who was denied custody or a perv. Why should my community bear the extra expense of bored, armed personnel on every site? While my city is financially solvent, the ones around us are not. They'd have to get the big, bad ol' government to pay for it.

We have an armed,  off duty officer at one of the High  Schools at all times, but he was always in the lunch room,  hanging  out with the lunch ladies, unless it was time for his rounds. Not only that, that particular school is pretty rough. It's a necessity in that situation, but the kids were most likely to be.the ones needing to be shot, not an intruder.  Hell, a bunch of those kids were probably packin' heat on the sly. It's one of the reasons that when I found  out how bad  things were there when my son was still in H.S., I moved.

Also remember, Columbine had an armed guard, Virginia Tech subcontracted out with the  police department and Fort Hood was a military base,  for pity's sake. The presence of armed personnel is obviously not a deterrent at all. Something does need to be done, but armed guards at every school, especially of the citizen patrol or teacher variety, is not the answer. What the answer  is, I am not entirely sure. I'll get back to you when I figure it out.
2012-12-24 08:54:09 AM  
1 vote:

nmrsnr: Yeah, but doesn't consider that the school is also where Ambassadors' and other dignitaries' children go, who also probably merit heightened security.


Good to see that you understand that their are children that are more important than yours.
2012-12-24 08:49:35 AM  
1 vote:

EnviroDude: Only peasants send their children to schools where they can be slaughtered.


If you want armed security for your kids then pay for it yourself.  Send them to a school that has it.  Unless you're ready for the taxes it will take to pay to put them in every public school.

Higher taxes for education and a massive expansion of government.   EnviroDude, I don't think I even know you anymore.
2012-12-24 08:49:09 AM  
1 vote:

kxs401: Nabb1: kxs401: I'm.... outraged?

Wait, no I'm not. Just because one school where lots of children who might be potential targets attend needs guards, that doesn't mean all schools need guards. Why are republicans constantly so pouty and outraged? Does it make them happy?

Hey, I'm with you. Some kids need security. Why should the hoi polloi get that sort of service?Security costs money, and those resources need to be spared only on a certain class of people.

Oh, clearly. All Americans should get exactly the same level of day-to-day protection. That makes perfect sense.


Of course it doesn't, and I wouldn't want to waste time with anything like one or two police officers assigned detail or anything like that. Look, banks need armed guards. Malls need armed guards. Pro sports events need armed guards. These are things we value. It's all about priorities.
2012-12-24 08:45:11 AM  
1 vote:

Nabb1: kxs401: I'm.... outraged?

Wait, no I'm not. Just because one school where lots of children who might be potential targets attend needs guards, that doesn't mean all schools need guards. Why are republicans constantly so pouty and outraged? Does it make them happy?

Hey, I'm with you. Some kids need security. Why should the hoi polloi get that sort of service?Security costs money, and those resources need to be spared only on a certain class of people.


Oh, clearly. All Americans should get exactly the same level of day-to-day protection. That makes perfect sense.
2012-12-24 08:32:32 AM  
1 vote:

kronicfeld: David Gregory probably does not set school policy.


And he clearly doesn't object strongly enough to not send his kids there.
2012-12-24 08:31:12 AM  
1 vote:

kronicfeld: David Gregory probably does not set school policy.


Yet he probably chose the school based on it's policies. Go figure.
2012-12-24 08:22:11 AM  
1 vote:
Only peasants send their children to schools where they can be slaughtered.
2012-12-24 07:26:39 AM  
1 vote:

sammyk: Well, if you got nothin you attack the messenger.


The public reacted very negatively to LaPierre's message, so the Conservative Entertainment Complex has decided to double down on it. Good times.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report