NRA lied: No armed guards at Obama girls’ school

[Kimberly]

An expensive private school for the wealthy priviledged elite of Washington DC doesn't have armed guards.
Yeah, right.

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 06:46 PM
 deminks (7,024 posts)

NRA lied: No armed guards at Obama girls’ school
http://americablog.com/2013/01/nra-lied-armed-guards-obama-schoo.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Americablog+%28AMERICAblog+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

There’s a reason they’re call gun “NUTS.” The NRA just lies. These guys should consider teaming up with the religious right, considering the audacity of lies they tell.

You might recall that we reported earlier this week that the NRA had launched an ad/Web site targeting President Obama’s children. The ad claimed – falsely, we now know – that the school the Obama girls attend, Sidwell friends, has “11 armed guards.”

In fact, the school has no armed guards of any kind.

Now, you’d think that when the NRA saw that the source for lie was “Breitbart,” a far right blog known for its sensationalism rather than it’s love of veracity, they’d have double checked. Well, if they did, they double checked with Fox News, because it’s a lie.

(end snip)

The article quotes the Washington Post fact checker.

4 Pinocchios for a slashing NRA ad on security at Sidwell Friends School

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/4-pinocchios-for-a-slashing-nra-ad-on-security-at-sidwell-friends-school/2013/01/16/95b2127a-6032-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_blog.html

Sidwell's Security Personnel

Sidwell lists eleven people in the security department, seven who are called Special Police Officers. Why would they hire police officers if they didn't need people with firearm training?  And then not arm them?!?!?  Apparently the press doesn't even care anymore that we know they're lying.

 
 

[LC EFA]

Could it be that they're not included on the list of Sidwell's staff because they're employees of the USSS, not Sidwell ?

[J P Sousa]

  The article quotes the Washington Post fact checker.
 

I think they meant FAT checker. 
.

[J P Sousa]

 Looks like the Washington Post is just another PROPAGANDA rag or another Joseph Goebbels. 

http://www.sidwell.edu/news/article/index.aspx?linkid=33252&moduleid=379

Applicants must have a current SPO license

District of Columbia Special Police Officer Firearms Training
(DC SPO Training)
 

The 40 Hours course consists of:
•Law & Regulations
•General Duties & Responsibilities
•Patrols, Access Control, Communication & Documentation
•Emergency Procedures
•Confrontation Management
•Firearms maintenance, Safety, & Handling
•Firearms Safety Rules/Common Sense
•Basic Marksmanship
•Use of Force
•Fundamentals of Shooting
•Course of Fire
•Dry Fire Practice
•Live Range Qualification

[BigTex]

Sidwell's Security Personnel

Sidwell lists eleven people in the security department, seven who are called Special Police Officers. Why would they hire police officers if they didn't need people with firearm training?  And then not arm them?!?!?  Apparently the press doesn't even care anymore that we know they're lying.

 
 

are they lying though? this seems pretty thorough to me

But what about the claim that Sidwell Friends has 11 armed guards, which some Web sites have depicted with images of armed police with binoculars?

 This is based on the fact that the online directory for Sidwell Friends lists 11 people as working in the Security Department. Five are listed as “special police officer,” while two are listed as “on call special police officer,” which presumably means they do not work full-time. The directory also lists two weekend shift supervisors, one security officer and the chief of security.

 Under the District of Columbia General Order 308.7, a special police officer is a private commissioned police officer with arrest powers in the area that he or she protects. They may also be authorized to bear firearms — but it is not required. Security officers, by contrast, cannot carry firearms and in effect are watchmen. So five to seven security personnel in theory could be licensed to carry firearms.

But we spoke to parents who said they had never seen a guard on campus with a weapon. And Ellis Turner, associate head of Sidwell Friends, told us emphatically: “Sidwell Friends security officers do not carry guns.” (Note: this includes those listed as special police officers.)

[Johnny Yuma]

Looks like the Washington Post is just another PROPAGANDA rag or another Joseph Goebbels. 

the Washington Post has never been known as a factual paper, as far as I've known ...

[Kimberly]

are they lying though? this seems pretty thorough to me

But we spoke to parents who said they had never seen a guard on campus with a weapon. And Ellis Turner, associate head of Sidwell Friends, told us emphatically: “Sidwell Friends security officers do not carry guns.” (Note: this includes those listed as special police officers.)

I would be interested in knowing if security wore uniforms or street clothes. If so, then it's probably a concealed weapon. That's be why parents never saw it. As for the quote, I wonder. Either they store the guns and get them when they need them or they're relying on the SS protection of Obama's daughters. Or they're lying. Or the Washington Post is lying.

I still stand by the assertion that a elite, expensive private school in DC without armed guards is darn near improbable.

[txradioguy]

Could it be that they're not included on the list of Sidwell's staff because they're employees of the USSS, not Sidwell ?

No. The protective detail is in addition to the other 11 security officers. Most of whom I'd bet are retired members of the USSS.

[Vagabond]

You'll have to forgive me if I don't believe that the SPOs aren't packing.  They may have concealed weapons but they are not unarmed.  Further, that ring of Secret Service agents is absolutely armed.  The NRA was spot on about security including guns being used to protect the president's daughters.

[LC EFA]

You'll have to forgive me if I don't believe that the SPOs aren't packing.  They may have concealed weapons but they are not unarmed.  Further, that ring of Secret Service agents is absolutely armed.  The NRA was spot on about security including guns being used to protect the president's daughters.

It's not really about the staff employed by Sidwell as security - It's all about the USSS detail that augments their force and without doubt provides intel and operational command structure.

[Skul]

Even when ignoring any Secret Service personell, on thing comes to mind about the private security.
Seems to me that divulging the type and extent of security being provided, would be a breach of security.
It would be stupid and irresponsible for the private company to admit how it's handled.
Sort of a rule one of the fight club, deal.

To me, the question is not are they armed, as to how well, they're armed.

[JohnnyReb]

So, English Bobbies are used to guard the school, huh?

[Delmar]

Response to former9thward (Reply #12)Fri Jan 18, 2013, 08:41 PM
pasto76 (1,232 posts)
23. uh, yeah. they might. The PSD is for the girls. Its not a full on detail with perimeter. I kinda kno

sidwell friends is in the same scholastic leagues as the boarding school i attended. I saw chelsea from a distance once.

personal security details - having been on them in Iraq - are like a bubble around the VIP. lots of things happen around that bubble, and you just dont care. And as noted above, if anything started going crazy in that school, the Obama girls get whisked off to safety. That leaves a lot of other children behind.

A DUmmyland subject matter expert weighs in.  From the halls of our elite boarding schools to the killing fields of Iraq, this Dummy has seen it all--including chelsea, once.  Patso numbers has spoken, case closed.

[Airwolf]

Even when ignoring any Secret Service personell, on thing comes to mind about the private security.
Seems to me that divulging the type and extent of security being provided, would be a breach of security.
It would be stupid and irresponsible for the private company to admit how it's handled.
Sort of a rule one of the fight club, deal.

To me, the question is not are they armed, as to how well, they're armed.

I'm with you. They probably have enough to keep people in line that most can only dream of owning.

[J P Sousa]

I would be interested in knowing if security wore uniforms or street clothes. If so, then it's probably a concealed weapon. That's be why parents never saw it. As for the quote, I wonder. Either they store the guns and get them when they need them or they're relying on the SS protection of Obama's daughters. Or they're lying. Or the Washington Post is lying.

I still stand by the assertion that a elite, expensive private school in DC without armed guards is darn near improbable.

Absolutely.  ANY school in DC, one of the most violent cities, without armed guards is just not plausable. 

If you look at the DC public schools job description for "SPO's" they use the phrase; "protect life". How in the world do you protect life without a firearm ?

As johnnyReb said, "English Bobbies" ? 
.

[Freeper]

Lets assume for sake of argument this is true. Is it really a good idea to announce they are not protected by armed guards?

[thundley4]

Lets assume for sake of argument this is true. Is it really a good idea to announce they are not protected by armed guards?

You can bet that the SS is there when Obama's rug rats are there.

[Freeper]

You can bet that the SS is there when Obama's rug rats are there.

Yeah I know that there are armed people protecting them, the point was if what they claimed was true they just endangered the preezy's kids.

[txradioguy]

Yeah I know that there are armed people protecting them, the point was if what they claimed was true they just endangered the preezy's kids.

Sounds like something that needs to be reported. I'm sure the Feds remember how to get to the DU offices.