Flightmare wrote:Scot Peterson reminds me of Bowe Bergdahl. In both cases, someone whose job is to protect and defend decided to allow others to die.
I actually think Bergdahl is worse. He actively deserted his post. It would be similar if the Deputy had seen the shooter and then ran away. However, it was still Peterson's duty to go in to see if he could save people, and he didn't. But I still think Bergdahl is worse. I still think he should have been executed.
Well, Bergdahl as bad as he is didn't desert while his buddies were under fire.
He just snuck off in the dark of night when all was quiet.
He should have been hung or gotten life but at least he wasn't hiding while his buddies were under fire and dying.
Word is, those kids looked up to and admired Peterson and no doubt were wondering where he was while they were bleeding and dying.
And that is why I think this deputy is worse than Bergdahl.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016. NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
Columbine released some of the school security video. If we had that and the exterior school security video for the Florida school we could probably see what Peterson would have had to do to engage Cruz. The sheriff said he looked at some of the video and decided to fire Peterson.
And the lessons law enforcement learned at Columbine were...
Please know and follow the rules of firearms safety.
I still wonder why school doors are not locked between starting and stopping time with a single point of controlled entrance during the day? I'm pretty sure all exit doors have panic hardware in the event of fire, etc.
Oldgringo wrote:I still wonder why school doors are not locked between starting and stopping time with a single point of controlled entrance during the day? I'm pretty sure all exit doors have panic hardware in the event of fire, etc.
Unless you can get kids and staff to stop propping doors open because... lazy..
Unless you make all the glass impack/bullet resistant....
Unless you put up bollards/barriers to stop a car from driving through...
It's mostly just "inconvenience", not "security".
And... Unless you have people inside or nearby prepared to fight back, crazy people will keep killing.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.! Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek
[The] Campus Monitor...observed Cruz, who he recognized as a former troubled student, arrive at the high school... Cruz was wearing a maroon shirt, black pants and a black hat...carrying a black duffel bag and wearing a black backpack... radioed his coworker ...that Cruz was walking purposefully towards the 1200 building... stated that within a minute he heard gunshots and called a "Code Red"
Compare Deputy Peterson's actions to the actions of the 3 Americans in "Gun Free" France who had to take on a psychopathic terrorist with an AK47, pistol, 300 rounds of ammo, and knife using only their bare hands link.
JOIN NRA TODAY!, NRA Benefactor Life, TSRA Defender Life, Gun Owners of America Life, SAF, VCDL Member
LTC/SSC Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, CRSO
The last hope of human liberty in this world rests on us. -Thomas Jefferson
I don't understand why schools have not gone to a system of magnetic locks. You are not allowed access to the building until you have had your ID and purpose of being there verified and having being logged in before you are granted access. I know this would be a substantial cost with the need to retrofit schools and the need to do multiple buildings on a single campus..... Bet hey they are our future.
Two years ago, according to a newly released timeline of interactions with Cruz’s family, a deputy investigated a report that Cruz “planned to shoot up the school” — intelligence that was forwarded to the school’s resource officer, with no apparent result.
Looks like Deputy Peterson was warned 2 years ago that Cruz “planned to shoot up the school”... and then watched the expelled kid arrive at the school, prohibited bags in tow, and sat by while Cruz did the shooting, even though Peterson had the drop on Cruz.
JOIN NRA TODAY!, NRA Benefactor Life, TSRA Defender Life, Gun Owners of America Life, SAF, VCDL Member
LTC/SSC Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, CRSO
The last hope of human liberty in this world rests on us. -Thomas Jefferson
Oldgringo wrote:I still wonder why school doors are not locked between starting and stopping time with a single point of controlled entrance during the day? I'm pretty sure all exit doors have panic hardware in the event of fire, etc.
Unless you can get kids and staff to stop propping doors open because... lazy..
Unless you make all the glass impack/bullet resistant....
Unless you put up bollards/barriers to stop a car from driving through...
It's mostly just "inconvenience", not "security".
And... Unless you have people inside or nearby prepared to fight back, crazy people will keep killing.
Exactly - security is not a serious concern. It does not require great expense, it requires a new attitude. If the school administration and local law enforcement want secure campuses, then they can make it happen. This should not be a federal, or even state regulated issue. That only adds more bureaucratic complication to an already overly complicated system. More boxes to check, and more finger pointing when it fails to work.
First, in the interest of full transparency, I did not read all of the posts on five pages, I skimmed them and read the ones I thought looked interesting.
There seems to be a discussion in some circles of what the true responsibility of an armed person is in a case like the school shooting in Parkland. In my opinion, it differs by the person and why they are carrying. I carry as a retired peace officer. I no longer have any obligation to charge in to a shooting. But as Charles pointed out, some of us are wired to run to the sound of guns and there is little doubt in my mind that, assuming I was there for some reason, I would go try to engage the shooter. I doubt anyone could find fault in me if I did not do so though.
If you have an LTC, I believe you have no obligation to defend anyone else other than yourself. I would not find any fault in any LTC who did not charge in, and would consider the ones who do when not required to be heroes. You are just wired that way, I guess, and I have no problem with that.
A police officer on duty has an obligation to charge in. In this case, I agree that it is not his being a hero, but him doing the job he is paid to do. I never agreed with the secure the perimeter training we received in the past and am glad studies after Columbine said to do otherwise. The ALERRT program at Texas State has professors who researched this and say the best way to end a shooting is for the first responders to get in there and challenge the shooter. In most cases, the shooter will suicide rather than face the police though this is not a guaranteed response. The shooter might really shoot back at the police and the first responder who goes in might die. But he saves lives while doing so even if it is just by distracting the shooter while more of the victims get away.
And one of the thinks that bothers me right now is the news coverage all focusing on the deputies who did not go in. We are missing the chance to honor a true hero. There was a man there who was not armed and was never expected to respond to a shooter the way he did. But the football coach, who helped out as a part-time security officer on campus, knew what he was doing and put himself between the shooter and students. Aaron Feis died while being a hero. I don't want us to focus on the cowards and not remember to honor the true heroes.
srothstein wrote:First, in the interest of full transparency, I did not read all of the posts on five pages, I skimmed them and read the ones I thought looked interesting.
There seems to be a discussion in some circles of what the true responsibility of an armed person is in a case like the school shooting in Parkland. In my opinion, it differs by the person and why they are carrying. I carry as a retired peace officer. I no longer have any obligation to charge in to a shooting. But as Charles pointed out, some of us are wired to run to the sound of guns and there is little doubt in my mind that, assuming I was there for some reason, I would go try to engage the shooter. I doubt anyone could find fault in me if I did not do so though.
If you have an LTC, I believe you have no obligation to defend anyone else other than yourself. I would not find any fault in any LTC who did not charge in, and would consider the ones who do when not required to be heroes. You are just wired that way, I guess, and I have no problem with that.
A police officer on duty has an obligation to charge in. In this case, I agree that it is not his being a hero, but him doing the job he is paid to do. I never agreed with the secure the perimeter training we received in the past and am glad studies after Columbine said to do otherwise. The ALERRT program at Texas State has professors who researched this and say the best way to end a shooting is for the first responders to get in there and challenge the shooter. In most cases, the shooter will suicide rather than face the police though this is not a guaranteed response. The shooter might really shoot back at the police and the first responder who goes in might die. But he saves lives while doing so even if it is just by distracting the shooter while more of the victims get away.
And one of the thinks that bothers me right now is the news coverage all focusing on the deputies who did not go in. We are missing the chance to honor a true hero. There was a man there who was not armed and was never expected to respond to a shooter the way he did. But the football coach, who helped out as a part-time security officer on campus, knew what he was doing and put himself between the shooter and students. Aaron Feis died while being a hero. I don't want us to focus on the cowards and not remember to honor the true heroes.
Amen! Very, very well said!!!
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams
He was a lousy coward of the worst kind. Period. I hope to God the other stories of more than one sheriff cowering is wrong. This sickens me to the core this coward deserves no excuses. He could have cut short this rampage, lousy piece of filth. How many other times did this happen when people were in need. I will leave this as it is before I really state how I feel.
srothstein wrote:First, in the interest of full transparency, I did not read all of the posts on five pages, I skimmed them and read the ones I thought looked interesting.
There seems to be a discussion in some circles of what the true responsibility of an armed person is in a case like the school shooting in Parkland. In my opinion, it differs by the person and why they are carrying. I carry as a retired peace officer. I no longer have any obligation to charge in to a shooting. But as Charles pointed out, some of us are wired to run to the sound of guns and there is little doubt in my mind that, assuming I was there for some reason, I would go try to engage the shooter. I doubt anyone could find fault in me if I did not do so though.
If you have an LTC, I believe you have no obligation to defend anyone else other than yourself. I would not find any fault in any LTC who did not charge in, and would consider the ones who do when not required to be heroes. You are just wired that way, I guess, and I have no problem with that.
A police officer on duty has an obligation to charge in. In this case, I agree that it is not his being a hero, but him doing the job he is paid to do. I never agreed with the secure the perimeter training we received in the past and am glad studies after Columbine said to do otherwise. The ALERRT program at Texas State has professors who researched this and say the best way to end a shooting is for the first responders to get in there and challenge the shooter. In most cases, the shooter will suicide rather than face the police though this is not a guaranteed response. The shooter might really shoot back at the police and the first responder who goes in might die. But he saves lives while doing so even if it is just by distracting the shooter while more of the victims get away.
And one of the thinks that bothers me right now is the news coverage all focusing on the deputies who did not go in. We are missing the chance to honor a true hero. There was a man there who was not armed and was never expected to respond to a shooter the way he did. But the football coach, who helped out as a part-time security officer on campus, knew what he was doing and put himself between the shooter and students. Aaron Feis died while being a hero. I don't want us to focus on the cowards and not remember to honor the true heroes.
Where is this obligation defined?
His job is to "charge in" to a rifle while armed with a pistol?
OlBill wrote:We're mad at him for not being a hero.
Doing the job you are paid to do doesn't make you a hero, regardless how dangerous that job may be. We're mad at him for not doing his job because he's the worst kind of coward.
Chas.
With all respect, he's not paid to die. He's not paid to fight a rifle with a pistol. Any other outcome would have been pure luck.
