A shooter is already inside the school...

...what do you do now? According to the democrats you have a teacher that just got a bonus ("we must arm our teachers with more money") go out and inform the 18 years-old sociopath that not only is it illegal for him to have an "assault weapon" but it is also illegal for him to be in a gun free zone.
The republicans (most, but not all) believe that an armed response is the only sane way to fight back. Since an unarmed response is doomed to failure. But who should respond?
According to the democrats, everyone should cower in classroom behind sheet rock walls waiting for the police who will show up at some point and then decide when and where to go into the school, meanwhile...
the shooter is racking up a score.

Defense in depth is the only way. Controlled access points, visible security, and backed up by armed facility. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Two teachers gave up their lives to protect the kids. Had either of those been armed and returned fire, the punk would have shit himself, dropped his gun and ran away.



Is it too much to allow faculty, who are willing, toarm themselves? Obviously it's a horrible idea to make anyone not comfortable with being armed to do so. There are plenty who are comfortable.

Teachers do NOT want to carry guns. Okay, a few do but the overwhelming majority do not want it to be part of their jobs. They are there to TEACH. They are NOT skilled with guns and do not want to be. There was an armed school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas HS and what good did he do? I can only imagine a teacher with a gun who has had a few hours of handgun training trying to figure out what to do when possible gunfire is heard.

I have several family members and relatives who are school teachers and not one of them wants teachers to be armed. I challenge anyone to ask school teachers whether or not they support teachers being armed in the schools in which they teach.

" The president of the 1.7 million-member American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, called arming teachers "one of the worst ideas I have heard in a series of really, really, really bad ideas."" Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

In argyle texas, there's a big fucking sign that says the faculty is armed.

Asked either of the two guys who died protecting students if theyd like to have had a gun.

Go ahead. I'll wait....

Can't ask them? Oh yes, that's right. They were murdered without a chance to fight back.

Two teachers gave up their lives to protect the kids. Had either of those been armed and returned fire, the punk would have shit himself, dropped his gun and ran away. Originally Posted by grean

You have no way of know that. Not only whether the teachers would have "returned fire" or the shooter "shit himself"!

While you're saying that you're also saying a 30-year LE veteran was "scared" to confront the shooter. Both "assumptions"!

So you think a teacher with 10 hours of paper target experience would not be scared when facing a shooter, but a 30-year LE officer would be?

...what do you do now? According to the democrats you have a teacher that just got a bonus ("we must arm our teachers with more money") go out and inform the 18 years-old sociopath that not only is it illegal for him to have an "assault weapon" but it is also illegal for him to be in a gun free zone.
The republicans (most, but not all) believe that an armed response is the only sane way to fight back. Since an unarmed response is doomed to failure. But who should respond?
According to the democrats, everyone should cower in classroom behind sheet rock walls waiting for the police who will show up at some point and then decide when and where to go into the school, meanwhile...
the shooter is racking up a score.

Defense in depth is the only way. Controlled access points, visible security, and backed up by armed facility. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Trump is a democrat now that he wants teachers to have CC guns and be paid a bonus?

You have no way of know that. Not only whether the teachers would have "returned fire" or the shooter "shit himself"!

While you're saying that you're also saying a 30-year LE veteran was "scared" to confront the shooter. Both "assumptions"!

So you think a teacher with 10 hours of paper target experience would not be scared when facing a shooter, but a 30-year LE officer would be? Originally Posted by LexusLover

I think this shooter, unlike others, based on his fleeing instead if killing himself, did not want to die. And actually I made another assumption, you did not point out. I assumed the shooter would be able to run away. They may have blown holes in his chest.

Being scared has nothing to do with it, a cowering dog will bite back when there is no other recourse.

Scared or not , I think they should have has a fighting chance. If anyone is not scared in those situations, they're idiots.

Aren't you making assumptions on the teachers firearm expertise too?

Asked either of the two guys who died protecting students if theyd like to have had a gun.

Go ahead. I'll wait....

Can't ask them? Oh yes, that's right. They were murdered without a chance to fight back. Originally Posted by grean

I guess since we can't ask we won't know.

Do we really know FACTUALLY what happened to them?

There is a lot of speculation going on based on anecdotal media reports and snippets of interviews with traumatized young people.

I'm not saying it "didn't happen," I'm just reflecting on YEARS of media reports that later turned out to be incorrect even with published "witness" interviews.

I've mentioned Darren Wilson of Ferguson PD as an example.

The "Baltimore Six" are also examples.

While you're saying that you're also saying a 30-year LE veteran was "scared" to confront the shooter. Both "assumptions"!

? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Trump said he froze or was a coward.





http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8225296.html

Aren't you making assumptions on the teachers firearm expertise too? Originally Posted by grean

Not really. Not any more than I would with any CC person. To be more specific, and I've preached it before, #1 the typical CHL class is HIGHLY INADEQUATE to train someone to engage in tactical, decision making in a closed, crowded environment AND make an appropriate decision regarding the type of weapon and rounds to carry into that environment to address an active shooting situation.

#2 the typical mindset of the typical teacher lacks an "etched" instinctive response to using deadly force to neutralize an active shooter while at the same time exposing them to death.

That's one reason there are courses developed to train techniques and decision making in potential "first responders" have already been patrol officers for a period of time and have been continually faced with split second decision making on the street and in buildings .... with regular firearms qualification suitable for close quarter confrontations.

Let teachers teach and LE guard the schools.

Each one requires a mindset and skillset that are at times mutually exclusive and contraindicating of success.

But having said that the LE officers who are trained to confront an active shooter situation should be cooperatively dealing with the teachers, staff, and students so that they all know what each other are doing, why, and what is expected to better reach success.

Trump said he froze or was a coward.
Originally Posted by WTF

So?

You said a NONIDENTICAL COURT ORDER was a "standing order"!

Neither one of you know what the actual facts are!

You haven't bothered to look at the NONIDENTICAL ORDERS and he wasn't there!

Well, the FBI, Sheriff's Office, and school district will now be exonerated by the media and public opinion with their scapegoat. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I hope not. I am sick to death of hearing "The FBI let XYZ Slip through the cracks, yet again. Lessons will be learned"..

Is it too much to allow faculty, who are willing, toarm themselves? Obviously it's a horrible idea to make anyone not comfortable with being armed to do so. There are plenty who are comfortable. Originally Posted by grean

And if one looks, Utah, Colorado and Western areas of Texas have allowed armed teachers with CCW permits for years.. AND GEE, no shootings there!

And if one looks, Utah, Colorado and Western areas of Texas have allowed armed teachers with CCW permits for years.. AND GEE, no shootings there! Originally Posted by garhkal

You're "assuming" it's because teachers have CHL. I don't believe you can make that assumption.

John, have you ever met the "typical" peace officer assigned to "school duty" ....?
Originally Posted by LexusLover

I don't know, but every police officer, sheriffs deputy, or state trooper I've come in contact with didn't appear to be a coward.

Why don't you quit blocking for the cowardly deputy sheriff and realize what he did or didn't do. The gutless and cowardly deputy took a 'defensive' position while kids were being killed. By the way, his home is on 24 hour watch by some sort of law enforcement. No doubt in my mind he's the most hated man in Florida.

However don't take my word for it, ask the parents of the kids of that school, and ask the sheriff what they think.

Ask yourself how it would be if your child got murdered and there was an armed law enforcement officer on duty who took a defensive position while your child took .223 rounds. I bet you would be pissed off too.

So?
Originally Posted by LexusLover

So... you said said it was an assumption that the deputy was scared to confront the shooter....Trump said he was a coward or froze.

Is Trump assuming like you scolded others for doing?

You're "assuming" it's because teachers have CHL. I don't believe you can make that assumption. Originally Posted by LexusLover

What else could it be? Those schools have big signs up saying "WE are armed and will protect our kids" = No shootings.
Other schools have big signs saying "COME HERE shoot us, we are a gun free zone" and thus they do??

I don't know, but every police officer, sheriffs deputy, or state trooper I've come in contact with didn't appear to be a coward.

Why don't you quit blocking for the cowardly deputy sheriff and realize what he did or didn't do. The gutless and cowardly deputy took a 'defensive' position while kids were being killed. By the way, his home is on 24 hour watch by some sort of law enforcement. No doubt in my mind he's the most hated man in Florida.
Originally Posted by DEAR_JOHN

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

Why don't you pause until more information appears?

While you're consulting your LE friends and acquaintances and speculating what's going on in people's minds days ago and miles away, ask them if they can think of any reason why AT LEAST FOUR SHERIFF DEPUTIES DID NOT ENTER THE BUILDING BUT REMAINED OUTSIDE ...while shooting was in progress?

waiting to hear "the rest of the story" is not blocking. It's prudent and using one's head rather than their heart/emotions.

If I tell a neighbor to not come into my house under any circumstances, I don't get pissed at him for not coming in when I'm being attacked by an intruder. You might want to pause and listen to the HISTORY of LE as it relates to the DIRECTIONS of the school district administration. And the Sheriff's role in it.

There is conflicting directives from the Sheriff, and unless the radio transmissions are erased on the master recording of the 911 and radio traffic with deputies the conversations between dispatch and fellow officers will explain why FOUR DEPUTIES DIDN'T ENTER: 4 "cowards" or 4 following orders?

Note: Did the Sheriff's Department provide "first responder" training for patrol officers confronted with an active shooter situation, strategies for entering the schools in the country, and drills with the schools in the district, and access to the schools (or were the side doors etc locked) with limited access.

Ask your LE friends this question: Do they hear a lot of criticism from officers who were not at a scene regarding the conduct and behavior of the officers who were? If they say "no," your friends are lying!

Final observation in this post: The Sheriff has announced more "gun" control, which means the "gun" is the issue: So what firearms did he provide in his patrol units and the training to use them to meet the threat of a person armed with an "assault weapon" since the WEAPON IS THE ISSUE and what body armor did the Sheriff provide for his officers so they could more safely make an entry as a first responder to an active shooting situation in which the shooter is using an "assault rifle" to which the Sheriff wants to restrict access because they are so "deadly"?

It's always handy to hold an expendable grunt responsible. Especially an old one!