Anonymous wrote:If cops were getting kids out of that building safely then why were parents screaming to go into rescue their own children?

I've got no idea of what was really going on and, based on the minimal details provided here, neither does anyone else. But, accepting your description of the event, it's because if I'm a parent in this situation, I'm concerned about *my* kid being safe and I don't give a damn about the rest of the people in the area until my kid is safe. And if that gets other people killed, I'll feel guilty about it later.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

Ideally, the police keep the public out and then go into the building and deal with the shooter, that's current thinking on what to do in these situations. That's not DCUM experts, that's police experts. T his is easily Googleable, but here's a couple sources (https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/ActiveShooter2018-UpdatedFormat%2007.16.2021_0.pdf, https://www.baltimorecityschools.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/10-18_ActiveShooter.pdf, https://mcp.maryland.gov/Directive%20Manual/13-100.pdf).

In the absence of police doing what they should do, then yes, parents should go in and try. As a father, my duty is to keep my child safe. If my kid is in a building where someone is shooting kids and no one better trained or equipped than I am is able or willing to help, then I go in and do what I can. Same as a burning building. That's the job when you're a parent, even if it might get you killed.

Do we know that there was no law enforcement inside the building as these officers were keeping parents out? Serious question. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just haven't heard anything clear on that point.

Anyone? This whole part of the incident turns on that question. If some cops are outside, keeping civilians out while other cops are on the inside; it's a *completely* different scenario than if cops are outside keeping civilians out while nobody is even trying to do anything about the shooter.

Well, so far we have DPS giving conflicting reports about the resource officer (being there, engaging with the shooter, and their agency interviewing the resource officer) hours apart today. I think it's safe to say they're disorganized and don't yet know what's true themselves at best, a pack of cowardly liars trying to cover their behinds at worst. So I'd take anything they say about where officers were with a grain of salt. At the press conference today, the DPS said he wrecked his truck, then spent 12 minutes shooting at people near the school and the building (as I understood him) and getting into the school, but not interacting with police because there were none present. Four minutes after getting inside the school, police arrived and went in, they shot at each other, police were wounded and retreated. They set up a perimeter, threatened and restrained parents to prevent them from going in, did some strategery, and CBP went in after approximately 40-60 minutes and killed the shooter.

People there reported that some police went in, seemingly acting as individuals rather than with the department, to save the kids important to them and not near the shooter. One of the restrained parents seems to have made it in and saved her child. An interview with someone in the state police (I think) seemed to confirm that random officers went inside to remove select children.

The press conference didn't provide much info, didn't give a timeline, didn't say why the police waited so long to go in, and conflicted with other official statements previously given. He did say the authorities tried to negotiate with the gunman. Not sure what that means, and he didn't explain what he means by "negotiate."

Basically, it's a clusterf**k. Incompetence mixed with deceit and cowboy wannabes trying to hold onto power and not have everyone hate them. Between the lies and misunderstandings, it's going to be hard to sort this out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

One mom actually rescued her kid from another classroom!

Wow. Do not mess with mom. Moms should take charge of this country for a while.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is a mom. No thanks.

Throw her on top of the sandbag wall of MAGAs.

Anonymous wrote:

Wow.

If cops were getting kids out of that building safely then why were parents screaming to go into rescue their own children?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There were no police in the building … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour.

I'm trying to understand the logistics here. How were they negotiating with him? Yelling from outside the building to inside the building? Did they have phone communication with him?

An hour this went on. Do you know how many kids he killed in under 10 minutes?. They needed to get in there and take him out and if they didn't have the balls to do it they should have at least let the parents in to do their jobs

Did he go classroom to classroom or stay in one classroom?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There were no police in the building … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour.

I'm trying to understand the logistics here. How were they negotiating with him? Yelling from outside the building to inside the building? Did they have phone communication with him?

An hour this went on. Do you know how many kids he killed in under 10 minutes?. They needed to get in there and take him out and if they didn't have the balls to do it they should have at least let the parents in to do their jobs

What is "this?" Were they yelling through the walls, talking on the phone, were there cops in there? The ratio of judgment to available facts is making it tough to figure out what the hell happened. I get that people want to vent their spleens because someone murdered kids and it just feels completely f**king inadequate to blame one dead person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

Ideally, the police keep the public out and then go into the building and deal with the shooter, that's current thinking on what to do in these situations. That's not DCUM experts, that's police experts. T his is easily Googleable, but here's a couple sources (https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/ActiveShooter2018-UpdatedFormat%2007.16.2021_0.pdf, https://www.baltimorecityschools.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/10-18_ActiveShooter.pdf, https://mcp.maryland.gov/Directive%20Manual/13-100.pdf).

In the absence of police doing what they should do, then yes, parents should go in and try. As a father, my duty is to keep my child safe. If my kid is in a building where someone is shooting kids and no one better trained or equipped than I am is able or willing to help, then I go in and do what I can. Same as a burning building. That's the job when you're a parent, even if it might get you killed.

Do we know that there was no law enforcement inside the building as these officers were keeping parents out? Serious question. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just haven't heard anything clear on that point.

Anyone? This whole part of the incident turns on that question. If some cops are outside, keeping civilians out while other cops are on the inside; it's a *completely* different scenario than if cops are outside keeping civilians out while nobody is even trying to do anything about the shooter.

I’d like to know the layout of the school. My friend teaches in a warm climate and a lot of the school classrooms open directly into the courtyard. I remember thinking that the place was very open and vulnerable as a result. So it might not be like here, where there’s a cop walking hallways to get to each of the classrooms. Sounds like kids could be rescued by breaking windows of each classroom from the outside and and getting them out into the courtyard that way. It’s a lot safer for the kids as additional officers can cover the one’s getting the kids out. Having one or two officers inside the school to engage the gunman while others got kids out through the courtyard, and a few guarding the perimeter starts to make more sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There were no police in the building … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour.

I'm trying to understand the logistics here. How were they negotiating with him? Yelling from outside the building to inside the building? Did they have phone communication with him?

An hour this went on. Do you know how many kids he killed in under 10 minutes?. They needed to get in there and take him out and if they didn't have the balls to do it they should have at least let the parents in to do their jobs

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

Ideally, the police keep the public out and then go into the building and deal with the shooter, that's current thinking on what to do in these situations. That's not DCUM experts, that's police experts. T his is easily Googleable, but here's a couple sources (https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/ActiveShooter2018-UpdatedFormat%2007.16.2021_0.pdf, https://www.baltimorecityschools.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/10-18_ActiveShooter.pdf, https://mcp.maryland.gov/Directive%20Manual/13-100.pdf).

In the absence of police doing what they should do, then yes, parents should go in and try. As a father, my duty is to keep my child safe. If my kid is in a building where someone is shooting kids and no one better trained or equipped than I am is able or willing to help, then I go in and do what I can. Same as a burning building. That's the job when you're a parent, even if it might get you killed.

Do we know that there was no law enforcement inside the building as these officers were keeping parents out? Serious question. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just haven't heard anything clear on that point.

Anyone? This whole part of the incident turns on that question. If some cops are outside, keeping civilians out while other cops are on the inside; it's a *completely* different scenario than if cops are outside keeping civilians out while nobody is even trying to do anything about the shooter.

We know at least on state trooper was inside rescuing family friends

What does that even look like? He comes into your classroom and says hey Sally come with me while the other kids and teacher just sit there?? WTF

Yeah, I call bullshit. This assertion has been running rampant, but how are they getting their kids out of the classroom the shooter is holding hostage?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

Ideally, the police keep the public out and then go into the building and deal with the shooter, that's current thinking on what to do in these situations. That's not DCUM experts, that's police experts. T his is easily Googleable, but here's a couple sources (https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/ActiveShooter2018-UpdatedFormat%2007.16.2021_0.pdf, https://www.baltimorecityschools.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/10-18_ActiveShooter.pdf, https://mcp.maryland.gov/Directive%20Manual/13-100.pdf).

In the absence of police doing what they should do, then yes, parents should go in and try. As a father, my duty is to keep my child safe. If my kid is in a building where someone is shooting kids and no one better trained or equipped than I am is able or willing to help, then I go in and do what I can. Same as a burning building. That's the job when you're a parent, even if it might get you killed.

Do we know that there was no law enforcement inside the building as these officers were keeping parents out? Serious question. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just haven't heard anything clear on that point.

Anyone? This whole part of the incident turns on that question. If some cops are outside, keeping civilians out while other cops are on the inside; it's a *completely* different scenario than if cops are outside keeping civilians out while nobody is even trying to do anything about the shooter.

I do not know if you can believe anything the cops are saying. They change their story every hour. There were no police in the building(except for the one getting their own kids out by themselves ie not an organization effort?) … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour. Post Columbine standard practice(ie they train to this) as soon as you have 2-4 officers you go in. If you wait people die.

I thought post-Floyd practice is to de-escalate.

Sure, when it's not a case of an active shooter. What is wrong with you people?

If cops react to every situation the same then they need a hell of a lot more training than I ever thought they did. You can't approach an active school. Shooter the same ways you can. Someone used a fraudulent $5 bill to buy bread.

Anonymous wrote:

There were no police in the building … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour.

I'm trying to understand the logistics here. How were they negotiating with him? Yelling from outside the building to inside the building? Did they have phone communication with him?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely despicable.

So you actually think they should have let her go in?

Ideally, the police keep the public out and then go into the building and deal with the shooter, that's current thinking on what to do in these situations. That's not DCUM experts, that's police experts. T his is easily Googleable, but here's a couple sources (https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/ActiveShooter2018-UpdatedFormat%2007.16.2021_0.pdf, https://www.baltimorecityschools.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/10-18_ActiveShooter.pdf, https://mcp.maryland.gov/Directive%20Manual/13-100.pdf).

In the absence of police doing what they should do, then yes, parents should go in and try. As a father, my duty is to keep my child safe. If my kid is in a building where someone is shooting kids and no one better trained or equipped than I am is able or willing to help, then I go in and do what I can. Same as a burning building. That's the job when you're a parent, even if it might get you killed.

Do we know that there was no law enforcement inside the building as these officers were keeping parents out? Serious question. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just haven't heard anything clear on that point.

Anyone? This whole part of the incident turns on that question. If some cops are outside, keeping civilians out while other cops are on the inside; it's a *completely* different scenario than if cops are outside keeping civilians out while nobody is even trying to do anything about the shooter.

I do not know if you can believe anything the cops are saying. They change their story every hour. There were no police in the building(except for the one getting their own kids out by themselves ie not an organization effort?) … the cops were trying to negotiate with him for an hour. Post Columbine standard practice(ie they train to this) as soon as you have 2-4 officers you go in. If you wait people die.

I thought post-Floyd practice is to de-escalate.

Sure, when it's not a case of an active shooter. What is wrong with you people?

That video of parents in sheer agony as they know their babies are being slaughtered and aren't allowed to do anything about it is horrific.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In the schools where I work, you cannot enter without a badge or being buzzed in after you ID yourself through an intercom/camera (after school starts). Don't all schools have this system now? At the very least, the door should have been locked and there would be time to put the school on lockdown with all classroom doors locked, lights out, etc. (as in the drills). Why didn't this happen?

That only works in campuses with centralized building(s) and very few entrances.

Most campus out west are a number of spread out, one-story buildings where all classrooms have doors that lead outside.

So no, not all schools are the same.

Locks slow people down. So do perimeter fences. So do alarms on perimeter doors.

"Set up a perimeter! That'll do it!" MAGA minds in action.

The goal is deterrence, to slow someone down. Putting in a garden because it’s soothing does nothing.

How about not allowing these not slow, very fast, very powerful killing machines if we want to slow things down.