Letter: NRA proposal is preposterous



Now that the NRA has broken its silence since the massacre at Sandy Hook school, its proposal declares the problem isn’t the guns (surprise, surprise) but the fact that there are “Gun Free Zones” for schools. The gunman/woman can take their high-powered weapon to schools as he/she knows there are no guns there. The NRA proposal is to have armed security guards in every school, a really novel idea.

Obviously the NRA would support the arming and training of the guards. Oh yes, that would cost a lot of money.

Regarding the Dec. 21 Columbian headline, “Court: Education funding can’t stall,” the Washington Supreme Court has ordered the Legislature to fund the public schools, and the court wants to see progress, not by slowing down the cuts, but by funding what the Legislature has defined as “basic education.” Now we add trained, equipped, armed security guards for each school; big schools get five or six, small schools one or two? Who will define basic requirements? Will it be the Legislature, or the courts? Where will the money come from?

Will the NRA support federal, state, and local taxes, perhaps a 20 percent sales tax on each firearm sold? Not going to hold my breath.

Hugh Shuford