A good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by grean;1060538008[COLOR=red

]He was suspended without pay. Then he resigned[/COLOR].

The Sheriff said, in a press conference, that the officer did not do what was expected of him. Further he explained that it is protocol for any and all first responders to engage the suspect immediately. Back up be damned.

I doubt after thirty years he just up and resigned. He probably took his retirement and moved on.


Jim

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

I doubt after thirty years he just up and resigned. He probably took his retirement and moved on.


Jim

When he was at the school he was a "short-timer," but as it is apparently turning out there were three other deputies there also who didn't enter either. They may be under an "internal affairs" investigation, but for some reason until late yesterday no mention was made of those three or their status.

In fact it was the police officers who appeared who revealed their presence when they got there along with two ("new") other deputies who actually entered with the police officers.

The Sheriff "neglected" to mention his other deputies who didn't enter either while there was shooting going on, or the media chose not to report it if he did. Guess it wasn't important enough to mention.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

When he was at the school he was a "short-timer," but as it is apparently turning out there were three other deputies there also who didn't enter either. They may be under an "internal affairs" investigation, but for some reason until late yesterday no mention was made of those three or their status.

In fact it was the police officers who appeared who revealed their presence when they got there along with two ("new") other deputies who actually entered with the police officers.

The Sheriff "neglected" to mention his other deputies who didn't enter either while there was shooting going on, or the media chose not to report it if he did. Guess it wasn't important enough to mention.

Well maybe he'll be on the Ellen Degenerate show and we'll hear his side of the story.


Jim

[IIFFOFRDB]

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Well maybe he'll be on the Ellen Degenerate show and we'll hear his side of the story.


Jim

It won't matter. He should probably be in "witness protection," but the Feds would give him up.

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Well maybe he'll be on the Ellen Degenerate show and we'll hear his side of the story.


Jim

And what makes me sick, is this cretin who failed to do his job, is getting his OWN Security provided by fellow cops, cause of the threat's this cretin has received.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by garhkal

And what makes me sick, is this cretin who failed to do his job, is getting his OWN Security provided by fellow cops, cause of the threat's this cretin has received.

Do you mean they aren't providing security for the other three deputies who didn't go into the school while the shooter was still firing? That's discrimination.

Personally, I think I'd rather be on my own! Like the Las Vegas hotel security guy.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The policy of not entering without backup changed after the Columbine shooting, which was treated as a hostage situation, which it wasn't. Since Columbine, most police officers are being instructed to get to the shooter and end the situation. "If someone in the building is shooting, and you’re the first one there, you’re going in." – Indiana State Police Trooper Aaron Gaul.

I'd like to see the written policy/guideline statements for Indiana to see if they match up. Same for FLA and TX.

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

That would be a narrow band option, such as the shooter just suddenly appeared and the first time noticed by anyone was the teacher seeing them come through the door, which was not the scenario you provided. Recall, Sandy Hook involved the shooter shooting his way through security. In the Florida case, many students reported hearing shots from afar, from somewhere, before seeing the shooter.



Yes, hitting bystanders is problematic. Possibly there could be other charges, reckless endangerment or involuntary manslaughter - I dunno. If the perp was dropped, it would probably come under some sort of hero-hallo. Either way, knowing what is beyond your target is a fundamental rule. Hopefully one could use basic geometry to reduce the risk. Like stay low, aim high. But the question remains, would you take that shot if it meant you might hit an innocent? I mean that from an internal thought process as much as from a defense from prosecution sense.



It's done in prisons as well. But do we want schools to be indistinguishable from prisons, sans the razor wire? At what cost? I doubt it's in the ounce category, more like multiple pounds of prevention. School budgets are hard to come by. As a consumer, I would want to see school choice options, yes vouchers, where I could pick the school of my choice. Maybe I want a place with razor wire and that prison vibe or maybe something different. But yes, not having a confrontation that endangers student is highly important.



That's called situational awareness. I think of it as the Holy Trinity; You, your weapon and the environment. The perp is part of the environment. Observing their movements and protecting yourself are important as much as knowing how/where/when to use your weapon. Obviously, panic and fear are your enemies, so is the perp, but the perp is likely to be irrational and in some soft of blood lust. Calculate the odds based on the factors carefully and quickly. One big difference between them and you is clarity. You only need to make one shot, they are spraying rather randomly and erratically. Still - pretty terrifying.

I recall about 5 years ago a situation where 7 bystanders were wounded...by the NYC PD. Their shooting was found to be awful because, they said, NYC didn't allow guns.

[grean]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

I doubt after thirty years he just up and resigned. He probably took his retirement and moved on.


Jim

Probably right. I was just relaying what a read.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by grean

Probably right. I was just relaying what a read.

The Media puts out a lot of malarkey on these high profile stories. For all we know the Officer was of campus at the time of the shooting.

Jim

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

The Media puts out a lot of malarkey on these high profile stories. For all we know the Officer was of campus at the time of the shooting.

Jim

(CNN)When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff's Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff's deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/polit...ies/index.html

The Sheriff needs to be quiet! He's not doing himself any favors.

The media hype and reporting of this horrific shooting reminds me of the early reporting (for weeks) regarding Darren Wilson's shooting of Michael Brown that resulted in the FAKE HANDS UP bullshit by the BLM group, sports personalities, comedians, pundits, and talk show hosts and hostesses.

It was based on FAKE FACTS. Even Obaminable bit on it.

I suspect this is not the first time the Coral Springs PD officers have had issues with the Sheriff's Department.

CSPD "Active Shooter" link on their webpage:

https://www.coralsprings.org/governm...place-security

FEMA Link: https://training.fema.gov/is/courseo...px?code=is-907

DHS Link: https://www.dhs.gov/active-shooter-preparedness

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The policy of not entering without backup changed after the Columbine shooting, which was treated as a hostage situation, which it wasn't. Since Columbine, most police officers are being instructed to get to the shooter and end the situation. "If someone in the building is shooting, and you’re the first one there, you’re going in." – Indiana State Police Trooper Aaron Gaul.

Several matters:

#1: "most police officers are being instructed"

Not all.

#2: I suspect if accurate stats were developed you would find that "most police officers" are not adequately equipped or TRAINED to enter a building in an active shooting situation particularly against a shooter who is armed with a semi-automatic rifle. If the PUBLIC and THE MEDIA want officers to engage in such matters the TAXPAYERS need to step up to the plate and equip and train them. They DON'T and WON'T!

#3: (Which should have been #1) How does "Indiana State Police Trooper Aaron Gaul" KNOW what "most police officers are being instructed" to do?

#4: Example: The FBI "SWAT" are good, well-trained, and instruct state and local LE officers both as first responding patrol officers and special operations team members. Recently in Houston an FBI team entered a residence to extract a kidnapping victim inside and one of the FBI team members shot and killed the kidnapping victim. That was in a relatively small building with 2-3 people in it.

It's one thing to talk shit .... it's another to do it.

(Too many people watch "law and order" shows and live cop "reality" shows.

It's always easier to keep someone OUT than go in and take them out! Prevention is the key.

As for responses: Years ago the San Diego PD had the highest officer death rate per capita than any city in the country. They explored the cause. Failure to provide back up (or wait for back up) on calls involving violence (mostly "domestic" cases ... of which most "violence" calls are). They looked back at their training academy and saw the training was "back ups"! They had relaxed those rules. They re-instituted mandatory backups on violence calls. Their officer death rate when down substantially.

On a related issue: Our country is experiencing a rise in fake 911 calls with officers getting ambushed when they arrive and approach the location. Some have never even gotten out of their vehicles. Additionally, for YEARS (beginning about 9 ago to be specific) the LE officers have literally been under siege by the MEDIA and POLITICIANS (not to mention members of the PUBLIC) for responding in a violent manner against offenders. So "you" want them to stand down and not be so "violent," but you want them to rush into an active shooting situation ill-equipped and ill-trained with NO KNOWLEDGE as to where the shooter(s) is or even how many there are ... and what any of them even look like!

(Remember this shooter left with students and was captured down the street!)

For all you anti-LE Liberals .... who are being critical ...

... well you know what to do!

Do you know who the LE folks are who are most stressed by this event (excluding the students and the families of the wounded or dead) ...

... the ones who weren't there! They've never been and never will.

This is a response to Trooper Gaul's "advice":

But questions linger over whether a solitary officer should act as a lone ranger and go in without help.

“The rule of thumb is never to go in alone. It’s a suicide mission if you go by yourself everywhere,” said Texas-based security consultant Chris Grollnek, a former police officer and Marine who now trains businesses and other organizations how to respond to active shooters."

https://www.twincities.com/2014/01/1...olice-tactics/

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Several matters:

#1: "most police officers are being instructed"

Not all. Hence "most"; not "all".

#2: I suspect if accurate stats were developed you would find that "most police officers" are not adequately equipped or TRAINED to enter a building in an active shooting situation particularly against a shooter who is armed with a semi-automatic rifle. If the PUBLIC and THE MEDIA want officers to engage in such matters the TAXPAYERS need to step up to the plate and equip and train them. They DON'T and WON'T! Check out post #37. Gaul said his department was issued rifles and helmets for such occasions.

#3: (Which should have been #1) How does "Indiana State Police Trooper Aaron Gaul" KNOW what "most police officers are being instructed" to do?That was my determination based on my reading what Gaul and other officers are saying.

#4: Example: The FBI "SWAT" are good, well-trained, and instruct state and local LE officers both as first responding patrol officers and special operations team members. Recently in Houston an FBI team entered a residence to extract a kidnapping victim inside and one of the FBI team members shot and killed the kidnapping victim. That was in a relatively small building with 2-3 people in it. Yep, that will happen.

It's one thing to talk shit .... it's another to do it.

(Too many people watch "law and order" shows and live cop "reality" shows.

It's always easier to keep someone OUT than go in and take them out! Prevention is the key.

As for responses: Years ago the San Diego PD had the highest officer death rate per capita than any city in the country. They explored the cause. Failure to provide back up (or wait for back up) on calls involving violence (mostly "domestic" cases ... of which most "violence" calls are). They looked back at their training academy and saw the training was "back ups"! They had relaxed those rules. They re-instituted mandatory backups on violence calls. Their officer death rate when down substantially.

On a related issue: Our country is experiencing a rise in fake 911 calls with officers getting ambushed when they arrive and approach the location. Some have never even gotten out of their vehicles. Additionally, for YEARS (beginning about 9 ago to be specific) the LE officers have literally been under siege by the MEDIA and POLITICIANS (not to mention members of the PUBLIC) for responding in a violent manner against offenders. So "you" want them to stand down and not be so "violent," but you want them to rush into an active shooting situation ill-equipped and ill-trained with NO KNOWLEDGE as to where the shooter(s) is or even how many there are ... and what any of them even look like!

(Remember this shooter left with students and was captured down the street!)

For all you anti-LE Liberals .... who are being critical ... In this instance, it's the "liberal" LE who are the problem for not enforcing the laws on the books that would have kept that weapon out of the shooter's hands. The sheriff in coordination with local school officials instituted a "hug it out" policy that ended in this massacre.

... well you know what to do!

Do you know who the LE folks are who are most stressed by this event (excluding the students and the families of the wounded or dead) ... Four deputies constitute two two man teams affording back-up for fire and maneuver. Officer Peterson, it is reported, arrived on the scene 90 seconds after the shooting began. The shooting lasted for some six minutes. So, for four minutes thereafter, Officer Peterson stood behind a staircase with his pistol drawn and did not move, according to an eyewitness.

... the ones who weren't there! They've never been and never will.

This is a response to Trooper Gaul's "advice":


https://www.twincities.com/2014/01/1...olice-tactics/

.

[LexusLover]

My point is, and will continue to be, all of this theoretical conversation has a lot of "assumptions" in it, which complicate the task for the first responder. There were officers on the seen from Coral Springs before the shooting ended with two additional SO deputies who made entry into the building.

Why is everyone (some aren't) just focusing on Peterson. There were 3 other deputies who arrived just after he did and before Coral Springs.

At that point there was "backup" and they could have made entry.*

*Unless they were not authorized to enter or were given direct orders not to enter at that time. That's something the public doesn't know and may never know. It will be on the radio traffic recordings for the SO, which will include any dispatch comments. I would think if it's SOP the radio channels would be "closed" to nonessential traffic and only traffic related to the incident would be on the radio. It will be simple to sort out, if the recording is intact.

Keep in mind there was a fire alarm, which more than likely set off bells at the fire station/EMS units to respond ... so there may be some radio information on their channels related to responses and/or "stand down" orders.

"Rifles and helmets"? How about body armor that can handle a .223? Which only protects "center mass"! The Indiana Trooper wasn't commenting on the incident in question ... he was generalizing before the incident. Did the Florida Sheriff have "gear" for the fight in each unit (Peterson's?).

[Ronin3]

I tend to stay away from volatile subjects on this board. Generally, I lack all the facts to state an opinion, or I see some truth in both sides. The only thing I'll state here, is my belief that any armed human being, law enforcement or not, has a moral and ethical obligation to immediately protect any innocent person, or persons, being shot at.