Anonymous wrote:I want to know why a teacher propped the outer door open and left it that way. Sadly, the teachers who died had not locked their classroom doors in keeping with security protocol. And why was the school resource officer not on the campus when the shooter arrived?

Had those three things been different, the loss of life would likely have been significantly lower.

The commander who kept his cops waiting in the hall is not the only person who made lethal mistakes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Democrats do not want resource officers at school. Schools need better protection. There should be a be partisan fox on this. No gun sales before age 25 when your frontal lobe has been fully developed. Prior to then special license for hunting and parent is responsible for rifle. There are some fixes.

This is completely untrue! President Obama pushed through as much school security as possible in an EO and all Democrats support it.

Please name ONE school security legislation the Tepublicans have even suggested in either house.

Feds dont dictate whether elementary schools here, like in FCPS, have resource officers.

After the Parkland shooting, the suggestion of having resource officers at elementary schools here was met with total disgust as being a right wing thing. Go back and review old threads here. A resource officer shouldn't be partisan. But it is.

It shouldn’t be either police safety officers at schools or gun control. We need both.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Democrats do not want resource officers at school. Schools need better protection. There should be a be partisan fox on this. No gun sales before age 25 when your frontal lobe has been fully developed. Prior to then special license for hunting and parent is responsible for rifle. There are some fixes.

This is completely untrue! President Obama pushed through as much school security as possible in an EO and all Democrats support it.

Please name ONE school security legislation the Tepublicans have even suggested in either house.

Feds dont dictate whether elementary schools here, like in FCPS, have resource officers.

After the Parkland shooting, the suggestion of having resource officers at elementary schools here was met with total disgust as being a right wing thing. Go back and review old threads here. A resource officer shouldn't be partisan. But it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t help anyway. All evidence suggests resource officers don’t want to engage active shooters. So we don’t need them - waste of money.

Then use police officers.

Police weren't much help in this case, were they?

One of my good friends is a police officer. He says it's divided: half of the officers say they would wait around as they did in Texas to form a plan and wait for additional backup. The other half say no, you swore an oath, you go in there even if you are going to die because at least it gives the people you are sworn to protect a chance.

I'm not willing to take that 50/50 gamble with my children's lives. Are you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t help anyway. All evidence suggests resource officers don’t want to engage active shooters. So we don’t need them - waste of money.

Then use police officers.

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn’t help anyway. All evidence suggests resource officers don’t want to engage active shooters. So we don’t need them - waste of money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many Democrats do not want resource officers at school. Schools need better protection. There should be a be partisan fox on this. No gun sales before age 25 when your frontal lobe has been fully developed. Prior to then special license for hunting and parent is responsible for rifle. There are some fixes.

This is completely untrue! President Obama pushed through as much school security as possible in an EO and all Democrats support it.

Please name ONE school security legislation the Tepublicans have even suggested in either house.

Anonymous wrote:This is devastating:

https://www.newyorker.com/science/annals-of-medicine/waiting-at-a-texas-hospital-for-children-who-never-arrive

Waiting at a Texas Hospital for Children Who Never Arrive:
We wanted to have never heard of them, but then we wanted them here.

I am a pediatric hospitalist at the Level 1 trauma center for children in South Texas, the University Hospital in San Antonio, and many of my young patients are recovering from injuries: burns, car wrecks, gunshot wounds.
...
At 12:17, my phone rang. It was Dr. Veronica Armijo-Garcia from the pediatric I.C.U. “This call just came in, and I don’t think it’s hit the news yet. We need to get ready for a pediatric mass casualty.”
...
“We’ll get right on it,” I said. The call lasted a minute. I looked up, and my team was silently staring at me. “We need to get ready for a pediatric mass-casualty event,” I told them. “There is an active shooter at an elementary school in Uvalde.” They were still silent. I realized that I needed to teach these young people how to get ready to care for a huge influx of children with gunshot wounds.

But the children never even made it to the hospital.

Greg Abbott, the Governor, had announced that at least fourteen children were dead. I didn’t believe that, either. Fourteen have been shot, I thought, not fourteen dead—fourteen had been shot, and we were waiting to receive them, patch them up, and save them.
...
We wanted to have never heard of them, for them to never need us. But, when that was no longer possible, we wanted the children stuffed into ambulances and helicopters, winging their way to us, filling our emergency room, spilling their blood in our operating rooms, and surviving to breathe again in the pediatric I.C.U. We wanted them here.
...
Eighteen children dead. Then nineteen. For all our preparation, our exquisite training, and our resources, we could not help them. The shooter used an AR-15-style rifle. He fired bullet after bullet into children’s faces and chests, their soft bellies, their heads. A Level 1 trauma center can do nothing for children whose bodies are so destroyed by bullets. We kept wishing to help them, even as it became clear that they were already dead.

"I got to tell you, we got to think this thing through, because if we tuck tail and run, we're going to be accepting responsibility for what happened out there," says NRA official Jim Land.

"That's one very good argument, Jim," replies PR consultant Tony Makris. "On the other side, if you don't appear to be deferential in honoring the dead, you end up being a tremendous s***head who wouldn't tuck tail and run, you know? So it's a double-edged sword."

...

"You have to go forward," she says. "For NRA to scrap this and the amount of money that we have spent ..."

"We have meeting insurance," LaPierre replies.

"Screw the insurance," says Hammer. "The message that it will send is that even the NRA was brought to its knees, and the media will have a field day with it."

I am a pediatric hospitalist at the Level 1 trauma center for children in South Texas, the University Hospital in San Antonio, and many of my young patients are recovering from injuries: burns, car wrecks, gunshot wounds.
...
At 12:17, my phone rang. It was Dr. Veronica Armijo-Garcia from the pediatric I.C.U. “This call just came in, and I don’t think it’s hit the news yet. We need to get ready for a pediatric mass casualty.”
...
“We’ll get right on it,” I said. The call lasted a minute. I looked up, and my team was silently staring at me. “We need to get ready for a pediatric mass-casualty event,” I told them. “There is an active shooter at an elementary school in Uvalde.” They were still silent. I realized that I needed to teach these young people how to get ready to care for a huge influx of children with gunshot wounds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans (and some Democrats) will shrug this off again.

+1.

It's not the guns. It's the lack of parenting and the internet. Dems like to turn a blind eye and instead go after republicans and guns like blood crazed Pitbulls.

Then explain why other countries aren't dealing with mass shootings on this level as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans (and some Democrats) will shrug this off again.

+1.

It's not the guns. It's the lack of parenting and the internet. Dems like to turn a blind eye and instead go after republicans and guns like blood crazed Pitbulls.

No. It’s the guns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans (and some Democrats) will shrug this off again.

+1.

It's not the guns. It's the lack of parenting and the internet. Dems like to turn a blind eye and instead go after republicans and guns like blood crazed Pitbulls.

No. It’s the guns.

Anonymous wrote:I sincerely don’t understand why guns are banned at the NRA convention. Why don’t they just arm everyone? Lots of good guys with guns? I personally think that would be a bad idea but I genuinely thought pro-gun ppl would do that.