Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

1 classroom. All 19 kids and 2 teachers were from the same class.

It was two adjoining classrooms with a door between. Per a clip of a surviving child recounting the experience.

So many security breaches.

Yep, totally the fault of those teachers and students in school

As Gilliam said, 90% of the schools who hired him to consult did not implement any of his recommendations, citing it would make the kids feel scared, like a prison, etc. So they planted gardens, etc. instead. The only person at fault is the gunman. We can’t keep pretending there is no evil or crazy. This kid screamed it from the rooftops for years and was still dismissed. He decided to get attention in the worst possible way.

Because teaching kids in small prisons is not developmentally appropriate. Republicans just want a privatize schools like they did prisons and we see how all that's working out

Dead kids can’t learn either. Do you lock your own doors and windows? Why or why not? Do you have a fence around your property? Why or why not?

The people who are urging us to barricade all of the schools to stop a few shootings overlap quite a bit with the people who fought masks and vaccinations because we can't live in fear and have to live our lives. I'm getting whiplash.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

You think it makes sense? I don’t. I’m from a small town. If someone shot their grandma then shot at the people working at the funeral home across from the elementary school I went to, the school would’ve been put on lockdown and im pretty sure the cops would’ve been there sooner. But that’s speculation.

They already had someone call and report the grandma being shot, and the wreck, and the shooting outside an elementary school, and it still took cops 14 minutes after the accident to get to the school. Then they retreated and set up a perimeter when the protocol is to go in and take out the shooter and that change was made after columbine, not recently. They didn’t do that. If the reports of random cops going in and saving their own children instead of doing their job, that’s inexcusable, not understandable.

Also, the media is reporting what eyewitnesses and officials are saying. It was a DPS official who said there was a resource officer on site engaging with the shooter as he went into the school, and his department had interviewed the officer. The DPS official doing the conference said there was no such person there. That’s not a media issue. It’s incompetence or lies. It’s a hot mess.

The reporting is a hot mess as well.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

You think it makes sense? I don’t. I’m from a small town. If someone shot their grandma then shot at the people working at the funeral home across from the elementary school I went to, the school would’ve been put on lockdown and im pretty sure the cops would’ve been there sooner. But that’s speculation.

They already had someone call and report the grandma being shot, and the wreck, and the shooting outside an elementary school, and it still took cops 14 minutes after the accident to get to the school. Then they retreated and set up a perimeter when the protocol is to go in and take out the shooter and that change was made after columbine, not recently. They didn’t do that. If the reports of random cops going in and saving their own children instead of doing their job, that’s inexcusable, not understandable.

Also, the media is reporting what eyewitnesses and officials are saying. It was a DPS official who said there was a resource officer on site engaging with the shooter as he went into the school, and his department had interviewed the officer. The DPS official doing the conference said there was no such person there. That’s not a media issue. It’s incompetence or lies. It’s a hot mess.

The reporting is a hot mess as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

1 classroom. All 19 kids and 2 teachers were from the same class.

It was two adjoining classrooms with a door between. Per a clip of a surviving child recounting the experience.

So many security breaches.

Yep, totally the fault of those teachers and students in school

As Gilliam said, 90% of the schools who hired him to consult did not implement any of his recommendations, citing it would make the kids feel scared, like a prison, etc. So they planted gardens, etc. instead. The only person at fault is the gunman. We can’t keep pretending there is no evil or crazy. This kid screamed it from the rooftops for years and was still dismissed. He decided to get attention in the worst possible way.

Because teaching kids in small prisons is not developmentally appropriate. Republicans just want a privatize schools like they did prisons and we see how all that's working out

Dead kids can’t learn either. Do you lock your own doors and windows? Why or why not? Do you have a fence around your property? Why or why not?

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

The social media posts turned out to be another lie. He DM'd a stranger vaguely and DM'd someone else after he shot his grandmother.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

1 classroom. All 19 kids and 2 teachers were from the same class.

It was two adjoining classrooms with a door between. Per a clip of a surviving child recounting the experience.

So many security breaches.

It's a school with 600 kids in east Texas. I can't imagine they have a lot of money for robust security.

You don’t need a lot of money to deter. A lot can be done cheaply. The goal is to slow someone down or make them change their mind because it’s too hard. Do you know how many thieves go to the next house if there’s a sign that says ‘beware of dog’ and a water dish outside? Or how many thieves simply try the door or window and choose an unlocked home?

You don’t need a lot of money to ban AR-15s.

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

You think it makes sense? I don’t. I’m from a small town. If someone shot their grandma then shot at the people working at the funeral home across from the elementary school I went to, the school would’ve been put on lockdown and im pretty sure the cops would’ve been there sooner. But that’s speculation.

They already had someone call and report the grandma being shot, and the wreck, and the shooting outside an elementary school, and it still took cops 14 minutes after the accident to get to the school. Then they retreated and set up a perimeter when the protocol is to go in and take out the shooter and that change was made after columbine, not recently. They didn’t do that. If the reports of random cops going in and saving their own children instead of doing their job, that’s inexcusable, not understandable.

Also, the media is reporting what eyewitnesses and officials are saying. It was a DPS official who said there was a resource officer on site engaging with the shooter as he went into the school, and his department had interviewed the officer. The DPS official doing the conference said there was no such person there. That’s not a media issue. It’s incompetence or lies. It’s a hot mess.

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

The social media posts turned out to be another lie. He DM'd a stranger vaguely and DM'd someone else after he shot his grandmother.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

1 classroom. All 19 kids and 2 teachers were from the same class.

It was two adjoining classrooms with a door between. Per a clip of a surviving child recounting the experience.

So many security breaches.

Yep, totally the fault of those teachers and students in school

As Gilliam said, 90% of the schools who hired him to consult did not implement any of his recommendations, citing it would make the kids feel scared, like a prison, etc. So they planted gardens, etc. instead. The only person at fault is the gunman. We can’t keep pretending there is no evil or crazy. This kid screamed it from the rooftops for years and was still dismissed. He decided to get attention in the worst possible way.

Because teaching kids in small prisons is not developmentally appropriate. Republicans just want a privatize schools like they did prisons and we see how all that's working out

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why I’m for defunding the police. If they are going to be heartless and weak bastards who stand around while a lunatic is killing kids.

But... they established... a... perimeter. #SquadGoals #Heroic

Because I’m sure that letting scores of unarmed parents run into a building with an active shooter would have turned out super well! Are some of you really this stupid? There would have been 50 dead instead of 20, but hey, the iphone experts are never wrong.

Yes, they really are that stupid because this is DCUM, home of the overeducated, know it all desk monkey with a limited world view. Most of these people couldn’t change a tire much less be more effective than trained and armed officers (who by the way were already in the building).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why I’m for defunding the police. If they are going to be heartless and weak bastards who stand around while a lunatic is killing kids.

But... they established... a... perimeter. #SquadGoals #Heroic

Because I’m sure that letting scores of unarmed parents run into a building with an active shooter would have turned out super well! Are some of you really this stupid? There would have been 50 dead instead of 20, but hey, the iphone experts are never wrong.

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

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.

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.

Actually, this makes sense based on witnesses (that he spent 12 minutes shooting at people), that officers engaged, were injured, then set up a perimeter to control the situation. The kid had been posting all over social media engaging with strangers so negotiating means just that - that the gunman was communicating with police. The media is always quick to want to post first, so it also makes sense that some details were incorrect.

This is all very tragic. So was the Vegas shooting and I don’t hear much about that anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

1 classroom. All 19 kids and 2 teachers were from the same class.

It was two adjoining classrooms with a door between. Per a clip of a surviving child recounting the experience.

So many security breaches.

It's a school with 600 kids in east Texas. I can't imagine they have a lot of money for robust security.

You don’t need a lot of money to deter. A lot can be done cheaply. The goal is to slow someone down or make them change their mind because it’s too hard. Do you know how many thieves go to the next house if there’s a sign that says ‘beware of dog’ and a water dish outside? Or how many thieves simply try the door or window and choose an unlocked home?