Another gunman, another elementary school

[Anonymous]

If you are a LO or a SRO you are signing up to sacrifice yourself if need be. They absolutely should have went in after him. Especially if there was more than one of them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we all give praise to the Queen or King of deflection here, who is going to argue you need to be a sniper to go into an elementary school being shot up? This is a wonderful discussion. I’m so glad to see this.

When and why are people so unable to hold multiple perspectives on a complicated problem? If they are there, they should be as well trained as possible. This is a technical field, firearms, with professionals who know more and can educate. To learn and do better. It is one piece of a complicated puzzle.

[Anonymous]

I didn’t sign up to wear a badge and strap on a gun. And I’m not going to presume that I would respond in a crisis in the manner that others might expect that I would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are a LO or a SRO you are signing up to sacrifice yourself if need be. They absolutely should have went in after him. Especially if there was more than one of them

Unfortunately, that's not what their training tells them to do:

Police training starts in the academy, where the concept of officer safety is so heavily emphasized that it takes on almost religious significance. Rookie officers are taught what is widely known as the “first rule of law enforcement”: An officer’s overriding goal every day is to go home at the end of their shift.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/12/police-gun-shooting-training-ferguson/383681/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we all give praise to the Queen or King of deflection here, who is going to argue you need to be a sniper to go into an elementary school being shot up? This is a wonderful discussion. I’m so glad to see this.

When and why are people so unable to hold multiple perspectives on a complicated problem? If they are there, they should be as well trained as possible. This is a technical field, firearms, with professionals who know more and can educate. To learn and do better. It is one piece of a complicated puzzle.

You’re not holding multiple perspectives, you’re posting multiple times to try and scold people away from judging the police who refused to enter the school and take down the shooter. Do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reports coming out that the police waited outside the school for over an hour while the shooter was inside. Kids were bleeding out while they were too much of cowards to help. Despicable. They should all be fired. Cops are not the answer!

I thought Texas had many good guys with guns who will protect their people. Where were they?

Not having their guns because the school is a no gun zone and they follow the law. Unlike people who want to shoot other people, who do not follow the law.

There was at least one armed officer at the school. Plus others who reportedly responded after the shooter crashed his truck. The police are on record that they “engaged” with the shooter before he entered the school.

Then they go in after him. Discharging your weapon one then giving up and waiting outside was the wrong thing to do. They should have continuously engaged with him and followed him in- until either he or they were unable to engage further.

There is no indication at this point that any officer fired a weapon at the shooter before he was allowed to gain entry to the school.

Correct. And it turns out his vest was not body armour but merely ammo storage. A few well placed shots to the chest would have done the trick.

As my husband in law enforcement, an air marshall, has said, two to the chest, one to the head. These guards are unlikely to have strong marksmanship skills though right? That requires a lot of training and practice, a lot of muscle memory. Maybe this will bring about changes in training. There will be a lot to unpack about this tragedy on multiple levels obviously.

Aren’t we past putting this entirely on the SROs? What about the other LEOs that got there quickly and went in and pulled out only their children?

I don’t think we know they only rescued their children.

Maybe they got their kids' friends out too. They certainly ignored the room where the active shooter was executing children.

Well unlike they school security officers, they were off duty and not tasked with protecting the school. So let's maybe stay on topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reports coming out that the police waited outside the school for over an hour while the shooter was inside. Kids were bleeding out while they were too much of cowards to help. Despicable. They should all be fired. Cops are not the answer!

I thought Texas had many good guys with guns who will protect their people. Where were they?

Not having their guns because the school is a no gun zone and they follow the law. Unlike people who want to shoot other people, who do not follow the law.

There was at least one armed officer at the school. Plus others who reportedly responded after the shooter crashed his truck. The police are on record that they “engaged” with the shooter before he entered the school.

Then they go in after him. Discharging your weapon one then giving up and waiting outside was the wrong thing to do. They should have continuously engaged with him and followed him in- until either he or they were unable to engage further.

There is no indication at this point that any officer fired a weapon at the shooter before he was allowed to gain entry to the school.

Correct. And it turns out his vest was not body armour but merely ammo storage. A few well placed shots to the chest would have done the trick.

As my husband in law enforcement, an air marshall, has said, two to the chest, one to the head. These guards are unlikely to have strong marksmanship skills though right? That requires a lot of training and practice, a lot of muscle memory. Maybe this will bring about changes in training. There will be a lot to unpack about this tragedy on multiple levels obviously.

The chest is a pretty big target. That’s why it’s recommended.

I suppose if the target is standing squarely in front of you and not running away from you. Either way the shooter was wearing a ballistic vest. We can assume the resource officer was not carrying a high velocity rifle. Keep staying at that Holiday Inn Express.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reports coming out that the police waited outside the school for over an hour while the shooter was inside. Kids were bleeding out while they were too much of cowards to help. Despicable. They should all be fired. Cops are not the answer!

I thought Texas had many good guys with guns who will protect their people. Where were they?

Not having their guns because the school is a no gun zone and they follow the law. Unlike people who want to shoot other people, who do not follow the law.

There was at least one armed officer at the school. Plus others who reportedly responded after the shooter crashed his truck. The police are on record that they “engaged” with the shooter before he entered the school.

Then they go in after him. Discharging your weapon one then giving up and waiting outside was the wrong thing to do. They should have continuously engaged with him and followed him in- until either he or they were unable to engage further.

There is no indication at this point that any officer fired a weapon at the shooter before he was allowed to gain entry to the school.

Correct. And it turns out his vest was not body armour but merely ammo storage. A few well placed shots to the chest would have done the trick.

As my husband in law enforcement, an air marshall, has said, two to the chest, one to the head. These guards are unlikely to have strong marksmanship skills though right? That requires a lot of training and practice, a lot of muscle memory. Maybe this will bring about changes in training. There will be a lot to unpack about this tragedy on multiple levels obviously.

Aren’t we past putting this entirely on the SROs? What about the other LEOs that got there quickly and went in and pulled out only their children?

I don’t think we know they only rescued their children.

Maybe they got their kids' friends out too. They certainly ignored the room where the active shooter was executing children.

Well unlike they school security officers, they were off duty and not tasked with protecting the school. So let's maybe stay on topic.

What makes you think that they were off duty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we all give praise to the Queen or King of deflection here, who is going to argue you need to be a sniper to go into an elementary school being shot up? This is a wonderful discussion. I’m so glad to see this.

When and why are people so unable to hold multiple perspectives on a complicated problem? If they are there, they should be as well trained as possible. This is a technical field, firearms, with professionals who know more and can educate. To learn and do better. It is one piece of a complicated puzzle.

You’re not holding multiple perspectives, you’re posting multiple times to try and scold people away from judging the police who refused to enter the school and take down the shooter. Do better.

I was posing the question of whether they did not respond more quickly and assertively due to poor training. Also see earlier links discussing the nature of the shooter's weapons (and their power) as well as the earlier link above about police training. I was not scolding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the school doors weren't locked? Why

The classrooms face the outside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are a LO or a SRO you are signing up to sacrifice yourself if need be. They absolutely should have went in after him.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reports coming out that the police waited outside the school for over an hour while the shooter was inside. Kids were bleeding out while they were too much of cowards to help. Despicable. They should all be fired. Cops are not the answer!

I thought Texas had many good guys with guns who will protect their people. Where were they?

Not having their guns because the school is a no gun zone and they follow the law. Unlike people who want to shoot other people, who do not follow the law.

There was at least one armed officer at the school. Plus others who reportedly responded after the shooter crashed his truck. The police are on record that they “engaged” with the shooter before he entered the school.

Then they go in after him. Discharging your weapon one then giving up and waiting outside was the wrong thing to do. They should have continuously engaged with him and followed him in- until either he or they were unable to engage further.

There is no indication at this point that any officer fired a weapon at the shooter before he was allowed to gain entry to the school.

Correct. And it turns out his vest was not body armour but merely ammo storage. A few well placed shots to the chest would have done the trick.

As my husband in law enforcement, an air marshall, has said, two to the chest, one to the head. These guards are unlikely to have strong marksmanship skills though right? That requires a lot of training and practice, a lot of muscle memory. Maybe this will bring about changes in training. There will be a lot to unpack about this tragedy on multiple levels obviously.

The chest is a pretty big target. That’s why it’s recommended.

I suppose if the target is standing squarely in front of you and not running away from you. Either way the shooter was wearing a ballistic vest. We can assume the resource officer was not carrying a high velocity rifle. Keep staying at that Holiday Inn Express.

No, he was not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a LO or a SRO you are signing up to sacrifice yourself if need be. They absolutely should have went in after him.

Nope.

DP. Then what good are they? If you're not signing up to either protect or serve what are you signing up to do exactly? Why have a special class designated, armed, and trained to protect us from violence if, we the violence actually starts, they're worth less than the unarmed parents ready to die for the kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we all give praise to the Queen or King of deflection here, who is going to argue you need to be a sniper to go into an elementary school being shot up? This is a wonderful discussion. I’m so glad to see this.

When and why are people so unable to hold multiple perspectives on a complicated problem? If they are there, they should be as well trained as possible. This is a technical field, firearms, with professionals who know more and can educate. To learn and do better. It is one piece of a complicated puzzle.

It ain't that complicated. Too many guns too easy to get=lots of gun deaths. Pretty simple almost a no-brainer if you're honest with yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reports coming out that the police waited outside the school for over an hour while the shooter was inside. Kids were bleeding out while they were too much of cowards to help. Despicable. They should all be fired. Cops are not the answer!

I thought Texas had many good guys with guns who will protect their people. Where were they?

Not having their guns because the school is a no gun zone and they follow the law. Unlike people who want to shoot other people, who do not follow the law.

There was at least one armed officer at the school. Plus others who reportedly responded after the shooter crashed his truck. The police are on record that they “engaged” with the shooter before he entered the school.

Then they go in after him. Discharging your weapon one then giving up and waiting outside was the wrong thing to do. They should have continuously engaged with him and followed him in- until either he or they were unable to engage further.

There is no indication at this point that any officer fired a weapon at the shooter before he was allowed to gain entry to the school.

Correct. And it turns out his vest was not body armour but merely ammo storage. A few well placed shots to the chest would have done the trick.

As my husband in law enforcement, an air marshall, has said, two to the chest, one to the head. These guards are unlikely to have strong marksmanship skills though right? That requires a lot of training and practice, a lot of muscle memory. Maybe this will bring about changes in training. There will be a lot to unpack about this tragedy on multiple levels obviously.

The chest is a pretty big target. That’s why it’s recommended.

I suppose if the target is standing squarely in front of you and not running away from you. Either way the shooter was wearing a ballistic vest. We can assume the resource officer was not carrying a high velocity rifle. Keep staying at that Holiday Inn Express.

No, he was not

Cite?