Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

Texas Shootings

Some other things I have read about the Texas school shooting. The first two officers on the scene trapped/isolated the gunman in one classroom. The gunman barricaded himself in the classroom. This after a teacher propped open a locked door to make a cellphone call and then forgot to close the door. Normally all the school doors are locked and can not be opened from the outside. There was not a school policeman at the school when the gunman entered because the armed school policeman had just left and may have unknowingly passed the gunman as he, the officer, left the area in his vehicle. The school district police policy in place is when there is an incident in which a gunman barricades himself in a room or a school, it becomes a hostage situation and they request a negotiator. Apparently, the chief of school police made this call, which turned out to be wrong. The 20 officers outside the room have been roundly criticized for not storming the classroom but they were under orders not to do so, but the bottom line is they did not have the equipment to get into the room rapidly. They were facing a steel-cased reinforced door ( allegedly bulletproof) that was locked. In addition, the windows in the door and/or adjacent to the door are the wired mesh security glass. The glass may or may not be bulletproof, but if it is not the glass still does not shatter if you shoot through it or hit it with a gun butt. The police could not see the gunman from the hallway or the exterior of the building. It took police a little over half an hour to retrieve a key, a master key which was provided by the US Border Patrol. Once a key was secured, they immediately entered the room and shot the gunman.

So I am scratching my head on this one. Why did the School District Police Department not have any keys to enter the school or the classroom? Surely they have to investigate break-in alarms, so why do they not have a master key? Why didn't they get a master key from the school principal or better yet, the school janitor? Janitors have a key to every locked door on a school campus. Why does the Border Patrol have a key to a US Public School?

There have been claims that local law enforcement officers went into the school to save their own children, but I think that the officers were actually evacuating the remainder of the school. As for the police preventing parents from entering the school of their own volition, there is not a police force in the civilized world that is going to let an armed parent storm anything, much less a school where children are barricaded in a room with a gunman.

This is an epic tragedy and there are multiple points of failure. Clearly, background checks need to include a person's entire criminal history, just not their criminal history as an adult. Teachers must adhere to the safety protocols whether they are a pain in the ass or not. School police departments need master keys to all school district facilities.
 
Last edited:
HOA_KSOP said:
Some other things I have read about the Texas school shooting. The first two officers on the scene trapped/isolated the gunman in one classroom. The gunman barricaded himself in the classroom. This after a teacher propped open a locked door to make a cellphone call and then forgot to close the door. Normally all the school doors are locked and can not be opened from the outside. There was not a school policeman at the school when the gunman entered because the armed school policeman had just left and may have unknowingly passed the gunman as he, the officer, left the area in his vehicle. The school district police policy in place is when there is an incident in which a gunman barricades himself in a room or a school, it becomes a hostage situation and they request a negotiator. Apparently, the chief of school police made this call, which turned out to be wrong. The 20 officers outside the room have been roundly criticized for not storming the classroom but they were under orders not to do so, but the bottom line is they did not have the equipment to get into the room rapidly. They were facing a steel-cased reinforced door ( allegedly bulletproof) that was locked. In addition, the windows in the door and/or adjacent to the door are the wired mesh security glass. The glass may or may not be bulletproof, but if it is not the glass still does not shatter if you shoot through it or hit it with a gun butt. The police could not see the gunman from the hallway or the exterior of the building. It took police a little over half an hour to retrieve a key, a master key which was provided by the US Border Patrol. Once a key was secured, they immediately entered the room and shot the gunman.

So I am scratching my head on this one. Why did the School District Police Department not have any keys to enter the school or the classroom? Surely they have to investigate break-in alarms, so why do they not have a master key? Why didn't they get a master key from the school principal or better yet, the school janitor? Janitors have a key to every locked door on a school campus. Why does the Border Patrol have a key to a US Public School?

There have been claims that local law enforcement officers went into the school to save their own children, but I think that the officers were actually evacuating the remainder of the school. As for the police preventing parents from entering the school of their own volition, there is not a police force in the civilized world that is going to let an armed parent storm anything, much less a school where children are barricaded in a room with a gunman.

This is an epic tragedy and there are multiple points of failure. Clearly, background checks need to include a person's entire criminal history, just not their criminal history as an adult. Teachers must adhere to the safety protocols whether they are a pain in the ass or not. School police departments need master keys to all school district facilities.
Click to expand...
Having defended cops in hundreds of civil rights lawsuits alleging police misconduct, I am confident the evidentiary record will demonstrate that the cops acted reasonably under the totality of the circumstances. Under 4th Amendment law, it is recognized that no one is perfect. The cops do not need to be right when making split-second life-or-death decisions. They just need to be reasonable. Even if it turns out that the police made decisions that ultimately are deemed to be wrong, they will have no liability if their decisions appear to make sense in the moment of time when those decisions were made. However, in times like these, the urge to place blame (which is stoked by the media) appears to be irresistible. So, in today’s climate, I suspect there will be a push to blame the cops … who are the heroes in all of this.
 
Nort said:
Having defended cops in hundreds of civil rights lawsuits alleging police misconduct, I am confident the evidentiary record will demonstrate that the cops acted reasonably under the totality of the circumstances. Under 4th Amendment law, it is recognized that no one is perfect. The cops do not need to be right when making split-second life-or-death decisions. They just need to be reasonable. Even if it turns out that the police made decisions that ultimately are deemed to be wrong, they will have no liability if their decisions appear to make sense in the moment of time when those decisions were made. However, in times like these, the urge to place blame (which is stoked by the media) appears to be irresistible. So, in today’s climate, I suspect there will be a push to blame the cops … who are the heroes in all of this.
Click to expand...
Hundreds?
 
Nort said:
Having defended cops in hundreds of civil rights lawsuits alleging police misconduct, I am confident the evidentiary record will demonstrate that the cops acted reasonably under the totality of the circumstances. Under 4th Amendment law, it is recognized that no one is perfect. The cops do not need to be right when making split-second life-or-death decisions. They just need to be reasonable. Even if it turns out that the police made decisions that ultimately are deemed to be wrong, they will have no liability if their decisions appear to make sense in the moment of time when those decisions were made. However, in times like these, the urge to place blame (which is stoked by the media) appears to be irresistible. So, in today’s climate, I suspect there will be a push to blame the cops … who are the heroes in all of this.
Click to expand...
I would say that, in this case, the "legal or reasonable" thing is different from the "right thing." So the officers may not be punished, but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be punished.

If you are a policeman, it is your job to run to the sound of the guns. You signed up for this. Active shooter doctrine is NOT to wait until you have backup, but to engage (or at least restrict the movement of) the shooter.

It takes a special kind of coward to try to restrain parents while someone is murdering kids.

I understand that all of this is easier said than done. And who knows how they will react under real gunfire? But the officers involved have now PROVEN that they are likely to "stand on the sidelines" in any dangerous situation. They are thus unfit for service and should be fired at a minimum.

I am a huge supporter of law enforcement, but they are not above scrutiny. In fact, they wield tremendous power and should be put under a microscope and held to a high standard.
 
Nort said:
Having defended cops in hundreds of civil rights lawsuits alleging police misconduct, I am confident the evidentiary record will demonstrate that the cops acted reasonably under the totality of the circumstances. Under 4th Amendment law, it is recognized that no one is perfect. The cops do not need to be right when making split-second life-or-death decisions. They just need to be reasonable. Even if it turns out that the police made decisions that ultimately are deemed to be wrong, they will have no liability if their decisions appear to make sense in the moment of time when those decisions were made. However, in times like these, the urge to place blame (which is stoked by the media) appears to be irresistible. So, in today’s climate, I suspect there will be a push to blame the cops … who are the heroes in all of this.
Click to expand...

That is well spoken, as a lawyer, but I don't believe the police are blameless, in this circumstance. The accounts that I have so far seen are that the police delayed engaging the shooter, which goes against every "active shooter' doctrine currently on the books.

Now, explain that to the parents.

This was not the time for police officers to be standing around in tactical gear drinking from water bottles. This was the time to ACT.

They failed to act.
 
Meat Grinder said:
That is well spoken, as a lawyer, but I don't believe the police are blameless, in this circumstance. The accounts that I have so far seen are that the police delayed engaging the shooter, which goes against every "active shooter' doctrine currently on the books.

Now, explain that to the parents.

This was not the time for police officers to be standing around in tactical gear drinking from water bottles. This was the time to ACT.

They failed to act.
Click to expand...
@Meat Grinder @HOA_KSOP

Morally, I agree with you. However, legally the police have no duty to act. If the cops ignored the shooting incident entirely, they would have been acting well within the law. If the police voluntary elect to act, then they have to do so reasonably and without negligence. When the cops get sued … and they will … the civil litigation will focus not on the issue of delay, but rather once the officers began to act, did they do so reasonably. I suppose another issue that will be litigated is when was the exact moment the police “began to act.” (e.g., was it when they arrived on scene, when they suited up in the locker room, when they made entry?)
 
Nort said:
@Meat Grinder @HOA_KSOP

If the cops ignored the shooting incident entirely, they would have been acting well within the law.
Click to expand...

I watched our local PD (Walnut Creek--right near both of us) do nothing during the 2020 riots. You probably saw the same thing.

This is exactly why people need the 2A option to be armed. The police helping you is apparently optional. Which may be the law, but it is wrong....since paying taxes is certainly not optional.

Incidents like the Texas shooting and Walnut Creek 2020 have me not trusting the police or legal system at all.
 
There is a video now showing kids climbing out of windows at the school. If the kids could get out, I would have thought the police could have gotten in. An unfortunate situation indeed.

So @Nort, when the police swear to uphold the law, that does not mean they have to enforce the law? I mean, then what's the point of having police?

Perhaps we should pay them by piece rate? You stop a crime, you get paid. You don't get involved, no pay.
 
Nort said:
@Meat Grinder @HOA_KSOP

Morally, I agree with you. However, legally the police have no duty to act. If the cops ignored the shooting incident entirely, they would have been acting well within the law. If the police voluntary elect to act, then they have to do so reasonably and without negligence. When the cops get sued … and they will … the civil litigation will focus not on the issue of delay, but rather once the officers began to act, did they do so reasonably. I suppose another issue that will be litigated is when was the exact moment the police “began to act.” (e.g., was it when they arrived on scene, when they suited up in the locker room, when they made entry?)
Click to expand...

I understand the point you are making. The police, legally, have no duty to protect us. They are armed only to protect themselves.
 
When Charles Swab from the World Economic Forum says you will own nothing and be happy you should take notice.... Your Fav MSM news channel won't cover it...
 
The Great White North said:
They when on and on about new cases.... Yah with a 99.98% recovery rate... But they have yet to give us numbers on the amount of small business failures and mortgage defaults/ bankruptcies...

We've been played... Bill gates can't even keep viruses off his software... WTF does he know about health...

BTW He is the largest private donor to the World Health (DEATH) Organization...
Click to expand...
Speaking of the WHO, what's the status of that agreement with them Biden is negotiating. I am not sure it's a good thing to let an organization that takes its marching orders from China have anything to do with the US health system.
 
Okay, now we are finding out the woman who propped the door open closed it and pulled it shut, but the door didn't lock. That is strange unless the door wasn't locked to begin with.
 
Just tidied up some posts that were reported. As per the Bootie's post earlier, this discussion has for 90% of the time been pretty good and civil. Difference of opinion but surprisingly good honest debate by internet standards. :D But then some of us decided to go cross the Rubicon and go into 4chan territory. That isn't what the FGM is about.

Taylor Swift is providing the last warning. :)
taylor-swift-bad-blood-video-youtube_1290_832.jpg
 
Last edited:
Doing the social media rounds (thanks @Rico ). Italian photographer went around a few years ago taking photos of different American families and their gun collection. This is just insane from where I sit here in "Hippy Australia". I mean honestly, replace every gun in the photo below with a bottle of alcohol everyone would be screaming "Get help for being an alcoholic" and there wouldn't be a debate. This photo (and others in the collection) show not evidence of an inalienable right, which most of the developed world disagrees with, but an addiction at the individual and a household level to things that go bang. Or some people don't realise you can actually reload a gun. :)

1654093232813.png

The silly thing in all this is that I appreciate the hobbyists and the history buffs keeping history alive in a safe manner like in this old video below. There is nothing wrong with this* if there are heavy restrictions/regulations to ensure it's only the right people and the weaponry can't be used for illegal/harmful purposes. If that can't be enacted and enforced by the government and the community then there shouldn't by the capacity for those same weapons to be in people's homes.

* Okay the minigun, mortar and AT Guns maybe a touch too much but it does look impressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top