Crime 19 Children and 2 Adults dead in Texas school shooting.

[HereticBD]

yeah, how the fuck are they supposed to figure out how many shooters are there in a surveillance nation + every kid having a smartphone these days + shooter himself posting online of what he was about to do
its a tough one to figure out

I too, would like law enforcement to ditch their training and assess situations in real time via Twitter and Facebook.

 

[mkess101]

Why do you think you can put some arbitrary time limit on when something should happen in a chaotic situation like this?
It could be 40 minutes or 40 hours until they're able to ascertain the information they need and then put together a plan that will get the kids out safely.
How exactly are they supposed to just "figure out" how many shooters are there?
If the shooter is in a room with a bunch of kids and he has a gun on them, how exactly does storming the building guarantee the safety of the kids?
Again, what if storming the building is the exact action that triggers the shooter to kill the kids. Things can always be worse.

There are always "what ifs" though. I'm not LE, but I have a very close friend who's FBI SWAT. We actually talked about exactly this a few years ago.

Active shooter situations almost always trigger what he called "breach and assess" protocols. Meaning if the Intel they have tends to point not to some sort of hostage scenario, but more just someone with a gun looking to do harm-they enter and gather info on the spot with the thought being they're likely taking out an active shooter.

We actually had it happen at a software company close to where I work a few years back. Employee came in with a handgun firing at coworkers. Cops didn't wait, they went in within iirc 6 minutes or something. Shooter injured 4 people before the cops shot him, thankfully he didn't kill anyone.

I understand your point, but analytics have to play a role here. A situation in a school, you go with the odds based on the (sadly) numerous examples we have to go by. You can't treat it the same that you would for example a group that goes into a bank and pulls out guns. It's likely their motivation is money and not inflicting violence on people. Tragically, in schools, we've seen that the majority of the time the armed person is looking to do damage. Sure, not always widespread to as many as possible. Sometimes it is targeted. But even then, the "breach and assess" model is generally what's supposed to be used from what my buddy said.

 

[pinger]

I

He should never have had access to the school. Most schools have locked doors that are opened by a secretary from behind the desk to prevent unwanted guests.

I mean, given the private incarceration rates that adults face, you may as well get them used to prison early.

 

[deadshot138]

I


I mean, given the private incarceration rates that adults face, you may as well get them used to prison early.

Think you replied to the wrong post, brether
Edit: I’m referring to the entry doors being locked from the inside, not the class rooms.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Every situation is going to be different. There isn't a copy and paste they can just apply to every school shooting situation.
The point of a SWAT team, I would hope, is to try and get people out as safely as they can, not just bumrushing the place and hoping for the best.

You have no idea what is going on in there, or if your actions could make things worse than they already are.
"Just go in!" is just a completely thoughtless move, and it's pretty silly to think that these guys were scared, or they were just standing around because they didn't know what to do.
What if the guy shot one person that made him angry, and then decided to shoot everyone once he saw or heard the police charge in?
You're saying this as if this happened in a glass building where everything was visible to them, and they just refused to help.

You can tell the difference between a hostage situation and an active shooter because you can hear gun fire actively going off.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

cause time is of essence when there is a killer let loose in a school?



yeah, how the fuck are they supposed to figure out how many shooters are there in a surveillance nation + every kid having a smartphone these days + shooter himself posting online of what he was about to do
its a tough one to figure out
I mean how many of these school shootings were done by more than 1 wacko anyways?





SWAT team..

US is fucked.

"Time is of the essence"
This is a statement that means nothing. Which is why you keep ignoring my question and point. It is possible to make the situation worse by rushing in.
You need to know exactly what is going on to know what is the best course of action, otherwise, you're' just taking a chance. If you want to argue that they should just take a chance, cool, but recognize that that comes with risks.

Your comments are just as bad and unrealistic as the people that think it's easy to shoot a gun out of a guy's hand, or shoot him in the leg as he's running towards you.
Was there a surveilance camera inside the classroom? Did we have one of those kids facetiming or instagramliving the event ?
Again, if you think we should just bumrush the places, okay, but let's not act like that doesnt have risks

 

[rocketskates]

Every situation is going to be different. There isn't a copy and paste they can just apply to every school shooting situation.
The point of a SWAT team, I would hope, is to try and get people out as safely as they can, not just bumrushing the place and hoping for the best.

You have no idea what is going on in there, or if your actions could make things worse than they already are.
"Just go in!" is just a completely thoughtless move, and it's pretty silly to think that these guys were scared, or they were just standing around because they didn't know what to do.
What if the guy shot one person that made him angry, and then decided to shoot everyone once he saw or heard the police charge in?
You're saying this as if this happened in a glass building where everything was visible to them, and they just refused to help.

Correct. At the point the gunman was barricaded in a classroom he is now a barricaded subject. You wouldn’t rush in and get into a firefight with him possibly injuring/killing more people with stray rounds. Did they hear active gunfire and standby? If so those cops should be charged abs fired, but I haven’t read that anywhere. Unless more comes out, I’m guessing they had no idea if he had hostages or if he had killed everyone in the classroom (which unfortunately it seems he did). It’s about minimizing casualties at that point, he’s locked down in one spot so you evacuate everyone else before engaging him. The media is making it seem as if the cops stood by while he went classroom to classroom killing people. The fact that he didn’t have ballistic panels in his vest is just pure Monday morning QB bashing by the media as well. They likely didn’t know that until after they killed him.

Also, SWAT teams in small towns don’t just sit around at the PD waiting for callouts. It likely took them 30 min or so to even assemble and get there. I highly doubt a crew of highly trained SWAT guys just waited outside for 40 minutes before entering UNLESS they were waiting to evacuate the rest of the school. Also, no way that cops are going to let parents run into that school and get killed themselves.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Those stats should quell the fears of anyone who's not an overemotional crash dummy.

It's not normal and is highly unlikely to happen to anyone's child. It's statistically rare. Significantly more rare than hitting the fucking lottery, which in an of itself is something people know is more than likely never going to happen.

Gun grabbers and their sensationalist bullshit. They don't care about actual stats, they just want to disarm the citizenry and give the government a monopoly on force. Absolute fools, lemmings, and submissive minions.

The government isn't addressing it properly by developing a mental health approach because they just want the guns. And you and those like you are a bigger danger to the people than school shooters, because you're trying to assist them in achieving that tyrannical goal.

So where's the right wing proposals for mental health?

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Correct. At the point the gunman was barricaded in a classroom he is now a barricaded subject. You wouldn’t rush in and get into a firefight with him possibly injuring/killing more people with stray rounds. Did they hear active gunfire and standby? If so those cops should be charged abs fired, but I haven’t read that anywhere. Unless more comes out, I’m guessing they had no idea if he had hostages or if he had killed everyone in the classroom (which unfortunately it seems he did). It’s about minimizing casualties at that point, he’s locked down in one spot so you evacuate everyone else before engaging him. The media is making it seem as if the cops stood by while he went classroom to classroom killing people. The fact that he didn’t have ballistic panels in his vest is just pure Monday morning QB bashing by the media as well. They likely didn’t know that until after they killed him.

Also, SWAT teams in small towns don’t just sit around at the PD waiting for callouts. It likely took them 30 min or so to even assemble and get there. I highly doubt a crew of highly trained SWAT guys just waited outside for 40 minutes before entering UNLESS they were waiting to evacuate the rest of the school. Also, no way that cops are going to let parents run into that school and get killed themselves.

So why was the resource officer in Florida charged and fired for negligence? In both situations nobody knew wtf was happening yet Florida case everyone was pissed at the officer but in this case your giving an entire swat team a pass

 

[SmilinDesperado]

You can tell the difference between a hostage situation and an active shooter because you can here gun fire actively going off.

Every hostage situation isn't the same. And just hearing gun fire doesn't tell you all of the relevant information you would need to know to make the decision that would save the most lives, especially when dealing with a situation that has that many people/kids involved. Acting based on a sound could cause you to do something that gets more people killed.
Did the shooter fire a bullet as a warning shot ? Did he just kill one person? Did he shoot to kill? There's a shit ton of questions that you don't have answers to.
I'm not saying that we need to have every single piece of information before we act, because that is likely impossible. But this idea that there was an easy answer to this is simply not true. As bad as this was, this situation could most definitely had turned out worse if people just rushed into it

 

[SmilinDesperado]

So why was the resource officer in Florida charged and fired for negligence? In both situations nobody knew wtf was happening yet Florida case everyone was pissed at the officer but in this case your giving an entire swat team a pass

Because....Florida?
Honestly, I haven't looked into that other case to see what the difference is. But did that guy just do nothing, or was he actually following protocol?
Are the Swat team accurately being portrayed to be doing "nothing", or are they following protocol and waiting to make the smart move, instead of a move?

 

[rocketskates]

So why was the resource officer in Florida charged and fired for negligence? In both situations nobody knew wtf was happening yet Florida case everyone was pissed at the officer but in this case your giving an entire swat team a pass

The resource officer in Florida was charged because the shooter was actively shooting and killing kids while he stood outside like a coward. This was proven by video and it was proven that he knew the shooter was active because other cops responded and rushed in immediately while he stood outside. He was a cowardly POS and deserved to be charged.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

Every hostage situation isn't the same. And just hearing gun fire doesn't tell you all of the relevant information you would need to know to make the decision that would save the most lives, especially when dealing with a situation that has that many people/kids involved. Acting based on a sound could cause you to do something that gets more people killed.
Did the shooter fire a bullet as a warning shot ? Did he just kill one person? Did he shoot to kill? There's a shit ton of questions that you don't have answers to.
I'm not saying that we need to have every single piece of information before we act, because that is likely impossible. But this idea that there was an easy answer to this is simply not true. As bad as this was, this situation could most definitely had turned out worse if people just rushed into it

An assault rifle was used to shoot 20+ people.

I don’t think anyone had to try and decide if it was a warning shot

 

[BearGrounds]

So where's the right wing proposals for mental health?

Both sides are lacking in addressing the root cause of this issue. But it's the Dems/left actively and openly making a move for the guns as a scapegoat, and calling for disarmament of the citizenry.

 

[Fanu]

Those stats should quell the fears of anyone who's not an overemotional crash dummy.

It's not normal and is highly unlikely to happen to anyone's child. It's statistically rare. Significantly more rare than hitting the fucking lottery, which in an of itself is something people know is more than likely never going to happen.

Its not normal and highly unlikely to happen, yet its still happening, and has happened 200+ times since 1999.
again, USA is a laughing stock in russia, china and other nations which you fucked with over the years. taking the moral high ground when asserting yourselves in matters concerning those countries yet your own country being a moral cesspool.

Gun grabbers and their sensationalist bullshit. They don't care about actual stats, they just want to disarm the citizenry and give the government a monopoly on force. Absolute fools, lemmings, and submissive minions.

news flash: government already has monopoly on force, on law enforcement and everything else they can think of
government already has absolute power and guns being legal means fuck all.
all the NSA leaks over the years show just how much data is gathered on US citizens - and its all in hands of government agencies which can fuck you over thrice if they so feel like it
also politicians, government officials, corporate&media overlords live in an alternate reality where none of the same laws apply to them as they do for citizens of this country - majority of them live their lives in their gated communities blissfully oblivious to things common people go thru.

btw funny how you draw the line at selling assault rifles to 18 year olds (but they aren't allowed to buy hard liquor until they turn 21) - what a shitty hill to die on in the name of resisting the government monopoly on force.

You are already a fool, lemming and a submissive minion by sheer fact that you take it up the ass by both the republican and democrat party which only care about their own and their corporate overlord interests.

The government isn't addressing it properly by developing a mental health approach because they just want the guns. And you and those like you are a bigger danger to the people than school shooters, because you're trying to assist them in achieving that tyrannical goal.

Again, your government already does what it wants. And has been doing what it wanted ever since JFK was assassinated which opened the flood gates to corruption and consolidation of absolute power.

I too, would like law enforcement to ditch their training and assess situations in real time via Twitter and Facebook.

Their training did not prevent 17 kids from being killed and I don't see how extra situational awareness (by checking social media to figure out what is going on since social media is what everyone is using these days) is a bad thing in situations where you need to act as fast as possible?

 

[SmilinDesperado]

There are always "what ifs" though. I'm not LE, but I have a very close friend who's FBI SWAT. We actually talked about exactly this a few years ago.

Active shooter situations almost always trigger what he called "breach and assess" protocols. Meaning if the Intel they have tends to point not to some sort of hostage scenario, but more just someone with a gun looking to do harm-they enter and gather info on the spot with the thought being they're likely taking out an active shooter.

We actually had it happen at a software company close to where I work a few years back. Employee came in with a handgun firing at coworkers. Cops didn't wait, they went in within iirc 6 minutes or something. Shooter injured 4 people before the cops shot him, thankfully he didn't kill anyone.

I understand your point, but analytics have to play a role here. A situation in a school, you go with the odds based on the (sadly) numerous examples we have to go by. You can't treat it the same that you would for example a group that goes into a bank and pulls out guns. It's likely their motivation is money and not inflicting violence on people. Tragically, in schools, we've seen that the majority of the time the armed person is looking to do damage. Sure, not always widespread to as many as possible. Sometimes it is targeted. But even then, the "breach and assess" model is generally what's supposed to be used from what my buddy said.

I think every situation is going to be different, so I'm not saying we should always wait to know exactly what is happening before any action can take place.
But I imagine that this being an elementary school with kids, is exactly why more caution is going to be taken.
What if the breach and assess is what leads the guy to start killing? This was a situation where a guy barricaded himself inside of a classroom, he's not running around the school looking for people. He had all the leverage.
How are you saving more lives by bumrushing in that situation? You could wind up shooting the kids yourself in friendly fire.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

An assault rifle was used to shoot 20+ people.

I don’t think anyone had to try and decide if it was a warning shot

We didn't know how many people got shot and killed until after the fact.

 

[BearGrounds]

Its not normal and highly unlikely to happen, yet its still happening, and has happened 200+ times since 1999.
again, USA is a laughing stock in russia, china and other nations which you fucked with over the years. taking the moral high ground when asserting yourselves in matters concerning those countries yet your own country being a moral cesspool.

Russia and China? The Chinese were just getting beaten in the streets by their government over COVID, and were forcibly locked within their homes.

Russia not a moral cesspool? Putin has moved that nation back towards authoritarianism, hasn't he?

We're laughing back at both nations, so I'm not really moved by this point.

news flash: government already has monopoly on force, on law enforcement and everything else they can think of
government already has absolute power and guns being legal means fuck all.
all the NSA leaks over the years show just how much data is gathered on US citizens - and its all in hands of government agencies which can fuck you over thrice if they so feel like it
also politicians, government officials, corporate&media overlords live in an alternate reality where none of the same laws apply to them as they do for citizens of this country.

btw funny how you draw the line at selling assault rifles to 18 year olds (but they aren't allowed to buy hard liquor until they turn 21) - what a shitty hill to die on in the name of resisting the government monopoly on force.

You are already a fool, lemming and a submissive minion by sheer fact that you take it up the ass by both the republican and democrat party which only care about their own and their corporate overlord interests.

Again, your government already does what it wants. And has been doing what it wanted ever since JFK was assassinated which opened the flood gates to corruption and consolidation of absolute power.

Not nearly as bad as it could be if we gave up what force we have retained. That's the point. You'd have the populace completely dominated.

We're trying to hold on to what leverage we actually have left. Guns are a huge part of doing so, and thus we cannot give them up.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

I didn't say that, though. I just don't think it's as simple as saying "Look at this country with strict gun laws, there's way less mass shootings than the U.S." Well, yeah, there would be.



A unique problem with mass shootings most likely goes hand in hand with the fact that we have the Second Amendment. If there was a different country with twice as many cars, roads, and highways as the U.S., wouldn't you expect a much higher amount of traffic deaths too? For the record, I'm all about tightening up gun laws that keep them out of the hands of kids like this one and the Buffalo shooter. I'm not in favor of banning them or confiscating them from responsible gun owners, who vastly outnumber criminal gun users.

If people want to harm someone, they will find a way. How about comparing the rate of intentional homicides all together? The U.S. ranks 59th. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Bit late responding to this and working my way through the thread so apologies if you've already been through this but I don't think that list puts the US in good light compared to comparable countries.

You're at 6.3 murders per 100k

If you look at the figures for other major Western nations

New Zealand - 2.6
Canada - 2
UK - 1.2
France - 1.2
Sweden - 1.2 (which I always see people calling dangerous on here)
Australia - 0.9
Germany - 0.8
South Korea - 0.6
Spain - 0.6
Japan - 0.3

 

[FinalFight]

And the gun freaks think a single armed guard is the solution. The same thing happened at sandy Hook. Turns out when faced with a suicidal gunman people freeze and shit themselves .