TexasCHLforum.com

Vol Texan wrote:Gosh everyone!

I know what I’d do. You know what you’d do. Some know what others would do. But we all know one thing - none of us were there.

This thread is about what the deputy(ies) failed to do, not about what we’d have done.

Can we get back on topic, please?

Bravo!

And no one really cares anyway - internet talk is cheap - especially when it comes to boasting.

I should have made it more clear in original post but I see this as Sheriff Israel failed. Failed his men and those children by setting them all up for failure. Israel needs to go.

1911 Raptor wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

1911 Raptor wrote: Those words are hard to hide from especially when criticizing others!

You obviously didn't read my response and see that this was whether I'd be willing to kill or die for gun rights.

You aren’t fooling anyone on this board except yourself. Keep on spinning.

Who's trying to fool who? You'd go in? You have the skills? You're specially trained physically fit mentally sharp guy. Nothing like that evident in your reading comprehension.

1911 Raptor wrote: Those words are hard to hide from especially when criticizing others!

You obviously didn't read my response and see that this was whether I'd be willing to kill or die for gun rights.

jason812 wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

rotor wrote:
I don't know if this is in reference to me or not. I personally as an LTC holder with my standard .380 would not consider myself capable to do more than protect me or mine. That's the reason I carry. I am not a LEO. I haven't been paid a salary for 30+ years to "protect and serve". I don't know what I would have done in this situation. If it was at my grandson's school I would have charged in. For a stranger I don't know. At least I am honest. I really don't know.

Nah rotor - it's directed at me. Misquoted though.

And I agree - I haven't taken an oath or pledge, I am not the same 25 year old that almost got stabbed in France helping a stranger get back their stolen purse. (If the perp had a gun the sun setting over the Med would have been my final sight)

I'd like to think I'd do the right thing for a stranger and know I'd do the right thing for my son and wife. That's all I wrote the other day and someone now is misquoting/misinterpreting that.

TheFriscoKid wrote: I have a life, loved ones, people that I love and love me. A lot to live for and a lot of life lived. The only thing I'd kill or die for would be to protect my wife and son.

Guns are a part of my life, they are not my life.

https://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic ... 1#p1187961

Your words

Those are my words in the context of the greater discussion of whether others or myself would fight and die for the right to keep weapons "the cold dead hands" argument.

I stand by those words.

I also stand by the words of a post and thread that's been removed since where I wrote that no one knows for certain what they will do when their moment comes but I hope that I would do the right thing and have a track record of doing the right thing.

People posture and bluff online but one can't know until that moment comes.

I know for certain I would defend my wife and child. I'd like to think that I'd do the right thing, the courageous thing, when it came to others. Mentally and morally I am courageous (as would most self-assess). But the reality is I don't have the same tools I did when I was younger.

A good example might be my willingness to not back down from a fight. I fought maybe 50 times before I was 30. School yards, streets, bars, whatever. I had a pretty good record, big and strong with some martial arts training from one of the best known in the world at that time.

But after 40, the same declines began happening to me that happen to most. Loss of muscle no matter how much I trained, loss of speed and sharpness, and as I got older, a few injuries and more atrophy.

I had all of the courage it took to enter a fray at 25, by 50 less than 50% remained. And then there are the other problems - everyone is armed and/or highly trained. Just from my sheer size, I can not approach another driver and politely tell them I don't like the way they're driving. I'd get shot in a NY second. And then there's the MMA guys - they are all over the place now. Strong, fast, trained - not a chance.

I like to boast and brag about my skills with a firearm which are actually quite high but that goes with the usual caveat that no one is shooting back at me. And I don't deceive myself about other facts.

How fast I can run from one place to another, how fast I can conceal and cover, steady my aim under fire.. all of those things are under doubt and unknowns for those that have never done it and for almost all that have even more so.

And as happens to most, mental acuity also wanes with age. Have you really assessed the situation correctly? Do you understand what you're up against? Your own faults and liabilities?

Here's a mock situation using airsoft guns - watch it for a little bit and other than the muzzle cover of his teamate's back this guy (German SWAT equivalent) moves and shoots better than 99.999% of the population. https://youtu.be/5Dejnlz2bqg?t=1m23s

Yeah. I have a good life. Despite all of the aging I still have the body of a 30 year old. Just so happens that body is my wife's.

dlh wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

dlh wrote:
These are my comments:

Remember Garland--a city police officer used his service handgun to take out two charging Jihadis armed with AK47 rifles... So much for disparate fire-power.

You're incorrect. The initial reports mistakenly identified Officer Gregory Stevens as killing the two gunmen. The post mortem showed that the lethal shots were all done by 4 SWAT team members.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2218538

" Two gunman shot dead after opening fire outside a controversial Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas earlier this month were killed by SWAT team members and not a single traffic officer as initially reported, police said Monday.

The correction by Garland Police Chief Mitch Bates follows officials initially lauding a single Garland police officer for eliminating Elton Simpson, 31, and Nadir Soofi, 34, after police say they stormed the Curtis Culwell Center armed with assault rifles.

Bates, speaking at a press conference, said that traffic officer did shoot and wound the suspects but that it was four members of the SWAT Tactical Response Team that killed the armed duo during the May 3 attack."

You mis-characterized what I said. He, in fact, did take em out. SWAT fired the lethal rounds AFTER they were down as far as I can tell. Of course, it would be nice to have the offense reports and coroner's report to review. For a detailed account of what happened read this:

https://www.policeone.com/active-shoote ... or-attack/

The two accounts are in conflict with each other. Fog of war and truce.

rotor wrote:
I don't know if this is in reference to me or not. I personally as an LTC holder with my standard .380 would not consider myself capable to do more than protect me or mine. That's the reason I carry. I am not a LEO. I haven't been paid a salary for 30+ years to "protect and serve". I don't know what I would have done in this situation. If it was at my grandson's school I would have charged in. For a stranger I don't know. At least I am honest. I really don't know.

Nah rotor - it's directed at me. Misquoted though.

And I agree - I haven't taken an oath or pledge, I am not the same 25 year old that almost got stabbed in France helping a stranger get back their stolen purse. (If the perp had a gun the sun setting over the Med would have been my final sight)

I'd like to think I'd do the right thing for a stranger and know I'd do the right thing for my son and wife. That's all I wrote the other day and someone now is misquoting/misinterpreting that.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:He was a despicable coward who traded the lives of 17 people for his own. I don't care about his armor or armament he should have gone in and either killed the murderer or died trying. The fact that he is now claiming he did a good job because he called for help and gave the murder's location makes his cowardice even worse. Apparently the help that came also stayed outside; I guess Peterson needed consoling. Reports indicated that city police offers are the ones that went in as soon as they arrived. They too are disgusted at the cowardice exhibited by the deputy(ies).

I realize that some people naturally run to the sound of gunfire while others run away. The former are not fool-hearty and the latter are not cowards. That's just the way they are wired. If you put on the badge you better darn well be the kind of person that runs toward the gunfire. Peterson and three other deputies apparently were not and the body count was higher as a result of their cowardice.

You can double the size of your post trying to "analyze" Peterson's conduct and it won't justify his failure to act. His response should have been to instinctively run to save lives with no time for "reflection" as you attempt. I guess his response was instinctive for him; stay outside and listen to innocent kids and teachers die. Every hour he spent walking the campus wearing his uniform, badge and gun, he wasn't a peace officer, he was a fraud. People believed he would protect them to the best of his ability should the need ever arise, but he deceived everyone. He was nothing more than movie prop. His last day on the job was also his most important day on the job and he failed miserably.

May Jesus forgive me for feeling the way I do about Peterson and the other sorry excuses for men.
Chas.

I agree with everything you wrote but with nuances.

Being well equipped, well trained, and physically capable gives one the confidence that separates courageousness from fool-hearty.

The 'good job' self assessment by Peterson was the turning point for me from being empathetic to a person I think that would be most certainly the 18th victim of this event to one I don't give a damn about. As you wrote he is a fraud, lived as a fraud and as a movie prop and he failed miserably.

I wasn't trying to make an excuse for Peterson but to present the idea that the system failed and its clear to see. If I walked into that school the day before I would have laughed out loud when introduced to the 'security guard'.

1911 Raptor wrote:

TheFriscoKid wrote:

rotor wrote: I would guess he is a high suicide risk.

I too thought he would be the 18th victim until I read that he felt he did a "good job" that day.

His analysis of his performance sickens me almost as much as his failure.

Only thing worse than a coward is a delusional coward.

https://nypost.com/2018/02/22/deputy-wh ... -good-job/

The parents of the dead and injured children will be paying for his retirement.

"schlub" is a good term. ( talentless, unattractive, boorish person, clumsy, or oafish)

I don’t think you have any room to criticize since in another thread you stated you wouldn’t help anyone unless they were a family member. You also stated you would turn in your guns if asked to do so by the government. Maybe you and the deputy share the same beliefs when it comes to risking lives when it isn’t a family member who is involved.

Are you going to delete this thread as well since someone remembers your previous statements regarding not getting involved and defending someone who might be in trouble?

You're not quoting me correctly. What I wrote earlier was that like many "I hope so" and believe I'd do the right thing when called to do it and especially if it was a pledge I made to 'protect and serve' others.

What I wrote was that in the context of my life and family is that my number one duty is protect my family. This could unfold in many ways, if that means to take the shot or engage the assailant then that's what I would do. I never wrote that I wouldn't defend others because I have in the past and have almost paid the price for it.

I agree with everything Charles wrote - the guy was a fraud - but that fraud should have been apparent to anyone that knew Peterson. He clearly wasn't equipped and in the mental or psychological state to live up the the responsibility he'd been given. He should have seen it and his supervisors should have seen it.

But he had a cush job, hanging out with kids from the right side of the fence and collecting hazard pay while other deputies raided drug dealers, dealt with the random dangers of traffic stops and domestic disputes. Nope - just the schools.

But most of all I stopped feeling any empathy for the guy when after the fact he felt he did a 'good job'.

dlh wrote:
These are my comments:

Remember Garland--a city police officer used his service handgun to take out two charging Jihadis armed with AK47 rifles... So much for disparate fire-power.

You're incorrect. The initial reports mistakenly identified Officer Gregory Stevens as killing the two gunmen. The post mortem showed that the lethal shots were all done by 4 SWAT team members.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.2218538

" Two gunman shot dead after opening fire outside a controversial Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas earlier this month were killed by SWAT team members and not a single traffic officer as initially reported, police said Monday.

The correction by Garland Police Chief Mitch Bates follows officials initially lauding a single Garland police officer for eliminating Elton Simpson, 31, and Nadir Soofi, 34, after police say they stormed the Curtis Culwell Center armed with assault rifles.

Bates, speaking at a press conference, said that traffic officer did shoot and wound the suspects but that it was four members of the SWAT Tactical Response Team that killed the armed duo during the May 3 attack."

boxermoose wrote:To serve and protect?

Yep. To serve himself another donut and to protect his retirement.

Chaparral wrote: The sherrif and his training staff need to be fired, as well as all deputies involved.

Agreed strongly!!! The sheriff is equally to blame for all of the shortcomings noted above.

rotor wrote: I would guess he is a high suicide risk.

I too thought he would be the 18th victim until I read that he felt he did a "good job" that day.

His analysis of his performance sickens me almost as much as his failure.

Only thing worse than a coward is a delusional coward.

https://nypost.com/2018/02/22/deputy-wh ... -good-job/

The parents of the dead and injured children will be paying for his retirement.

"schlub" is a good term. ( talentless, unattractive, boorish person, clumsy, or oafish)

I've tried to see all sides of the failure of Scot Peterson to enter the high school on Valentines day. Playing the devil's advocate for a while brings up at least some points worth considering on what really comprises a "good guy with a gun".

First, I would say tactical/strategical.

To defend against any high powered weapon body armor under and including 3A is insufficient. Hard plates and helmets are a minimum. The deputy - to the best of my knowledge - was not equipped.

As well, an equivalent weapon is needed to engage. We often joke about those that bring a knife to a gun fight but bringing a 9mm to a .223 fight is almost as futile.

Next we have psychological.

In hindsight, maybe a 54 year old making at least $80k a year and can soon retire with 75% of those wages and benefits isn't the ideal 'nothing to lose' candidate for the front line of deadly incident.

In the same breath - physical condition.

None of the biathalon skiers in the Olympics have bodies like Peterson's. It takes great fitness to move rapidly, find concealment and cover (with the heavy gear and arms outlined above) and then to be effective and accurate in shooting. The deputy would have been considerably out of breath after running 30 yards and up one flight of stairs.

Numbers.

While it might be known in real time this was a single shooter incident, in the fog of war there is often real confusion and doubt. Columbine had two armed shooters. The incident in Beslan a few years ago featured 'several dozen' armed attackers. 1 on 1 doesn't give the defender or the students the odds they deserve.

My initial thought about Scot Peterson was that he failed those kids and failed his duty. He should have been at least in place to take advantage of a clip reload. You wait for your opportunity and then take your shot.

He should have at least been trained enough and capable of that. Maybe he never had it, maybe he reached his breaking point, who knows? But we do know this, several other 1st responders (Broward County) hesitated/failed that day also and are now on leave and review.

This is further complicated because police were watching surveillance video that was 20 minutes delayed and believed the shooting was still live for some time after it had stopped. Bad intel never helps.

https://www.policeone.com/active-shoote ... -shooting/

All of the above combined lends one to see this more as a systemic error.

Sheriff Israel and anyone that saw Peterson should have sussed him out to be a kind of 'good hearted schlub'. Maybe good at high fiving the kids in the hallway and knowing where the donuts were in the teachers lounge but NOT the guy to have the tools, skills, psychology and conditioning to effectively counter an armed attack with a high powered rifle.

Like someone else wrote here "he wasn't a good guy with a gun, he was just a guy with a gun".

If school guards are going to be effective they need all of the essential elements stacked in their favor: the right tools, the right skills, the right psychology, and the right conditioning along with the numbers to proceed without hesitation against 1 or more attackers.