>The NRA stance of "there should be more good guys with guns" still baffles me - we don't need more good guys with guns we need less bad guys with guns or just a whole lot less guns period.
>
>It's interesting that you mention that - take a look at this news story from CNN:
>
>http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/27/obama-admin-borrows-a-page-from-the-nra-funding-cops-in-schools/
>
>I'll give the administration credit for doing this - but it's certainly interesting.

hmmmm...well I'm not really a fan of that idea either - although an armed cop is probably better than an armed civilian in the schools.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," LaPierre said last year in announcing an NRA program that would help facilitate and train such armed guards.

...see that just seems dumb. How about just stopping the bad guy from having the damn gun in the first place? I know this is anti-NRA talk because their goal is to enable as many guns as possible to be sold. Any conversation with the NRA about reducing gun violence ends up the same way "oh - reduce gun violence? sure we can do that - first we need a whole bunch more guns....." it's the most ignorant concept ever. I have no status to show, but it would seem logical that places with less guns have less gun problems.