A bit of clarity...
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
A bit of clarity...
http://www.sidwell.edu/news/article/index.aspx?linkid=32603&moduleid=379
http://www.siriusintel.com/trainingeducation/dcspo.html
http://www.siriusintel.com/trainingeducation/dcspo.html
CTChris- Posts : 5109
Join date : 2011-09-19
sansone- Posts : 1697
Join date : 2011-10-06
Scumbuster- Posts : 1118
Join date : 2011-09-01
It seems to be a bogus argument of semantics.
Apparently the "security officers" are not armed but the "Special Police officers" are. Or at least they are required to hold the SPO license to qualify for the job. The question is valid: Why require an SBO if the job is just an unarmed security position?
One thing is for sure. Many of the kids that go to that school arrive each day delivered by armed security, and go home the same way. And the hours they spend at school they are in a HIGHLY secured environment surrounded by heavily armed men. SS and SPO's both. So the argument that Barry's kids go to a gun-free school is bullshit. Just like his stupid skeeter photo-op is.
I am glad that his kids are so safe. If only everyone else's were.
One thing is for sure. Many of the kids that go to that school arrive each day delivered by armed security, and go home the same way. And the hours they spend at school they are in a HIGHLY secured environment surrounded by heavily armed men. SS and SPO's both. So the argument that Barry's kids go to a gun-free school is bullshit. Just like his stupid skeeter photo-op is.
I am glad that his kids are so safe. If only everyone else's were.
CTChris- Posts : 5109
Join date : 2011-09-19
Scumbuster- Posts : 1118
Join date : 2011-09-01
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum