National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre made an impassioned request for armed guards at every public school. Many sensible people are cutting his idea into little bits, but I’d like to add my own analysis.
Bruce Schneier has identified his type of response: LaPierre wants to spend a great deal of money to deal with the LAST disaster. But terrorists and crazed gunmen aren’t total idiots. If one target is protected, they’ll attack another. So let’s take LaPierre’s logic where it’s going:
Public schools will be protected with armed guards. So people with guns might attack private schools. Better put an armed guard at every one of their buildings.
Private schools will be protected with armed guards. So people with guns might attack colleges. Better put an armed guard at every one of their buildings
Colleges will be protected with armed guards. So people with guns might attack theater events. Better put many armed guards at every theater and concert hall.
Theater events will be protected with armed guards. So people with guns might attack AA meetings. Better put an armed guard at them. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc. ...
Now hiring and arming all these guards seems to solve our unemployment problem. But where will the money come from, to buy their guns and pay them? When we have 10,000,000 armed guards protecting all our gatherings and schools and concerts and Christmas singalongs, we must notice that the work of these guards adds NOTHING to the national economy. The USA needs productivity, not people holding guns and standing around.
And: we will need a giant bureaucracy to screen applications for the armed guard jobs. There’s no way that every armed guard will be perfectly screened. A few, just a tiny few of those 10,000,000 armed guards might be the people we are guarding against.
2 comments:
Exactly,I don't know what makes them think that people killing each other will solve the world's problems. That will only make terrorists/gangs long for revenge .Also,no nation should throw its money around just on a single person's view.
People Killing Each Other COULD solve many of the world's problems. A lot of our worst problems are due to overpopulation. If half the world's people killed the other half, the remnant would place a lot less strain on the environment, and there might be more opportunity for those left over to work productively.
But even if everyone would kindly allow me to decide who lives and who dies, I wouldn't accept the task. All that killing would be just horrible.
- PB
Post a Comment