Active Shooter at High School in Parkland, FL

[crusse10]

Even that is too many. He failed to do what he is paid for and allowed children to die because of it. The football coach had more guts

I didn't say he did the right thing. I said that probably felt that he was undermatched compared to the firepower inside the school and didn't go on a suicide mission. I assume that he was waiting for backup because then he'd have a better chance at successfully stopping the shooter and living.

 

[crusse10]

No more nonsense than people without any clue about guns making their claims about them.

I disagree. It's much more nonsensical to claim you would run into an active shooter situation without any weapon when your first televised words after witnessing 9/11 were used to say that you now have the tallest building in New York

 

[utvolpj]

I didn't say he did the right thing. I said that probably felt that he was undermatched compared to the firepower inside the school and didn't go on a suicide mission. I assume that he was waiting for backup because then he'd have a better chance at successfully stopping the shooter and living.

Do you really think the ar is some super powerful weapon? Do you also think the cops don't have access to the same weapons?

His backup arrived and followed his lead. Guess no one thought to bring a super powerful gun with them

 

[utvolpj]

I disagree. It's much more nonsensical to claim you would run into an active shooter situation without any weapon when your first televised words after witnessing 9/11 were used to say that you now have the tallest building in New York

What he said is irrelevant to the situation being discussed. Those making up complete lies about guns in order to frame legislation are more dangerous. You seem to believe some of those based on your comments

 

[crusse10]

Do you really think the ar is some super powerful weapon? Do you also think the cops don't have access to the same weapons?

His backup arrived and followed his lead. Guess no one thought to bring a super powerful gun with them

I think that he didn't 100% know what weaponry the kid had in the school. So just going in John McClane-style was not the *smart* decision.

 

[utvolpj]

I think that he didn't 100% know what weaponry the kid had in the school. So just going in John McClane-style was not the *smart* decision.

It's what he is paid to do. He failed at his job and it's likely children died because of it. He had a gun that was plenty to do the job

 

[crusse10]

It's what he is paid to do. He failed at his job and it's likely children died because of it. He had a gun that was plenty to do the job

I don't know what he was doing while he was waiting. If he was assessing the situation and figuring out what the shooter had, where he was located, if he had hostages, etc, then he was theoretically doing his job. If he was just standing outside pissing his pants? Different story.

 

[utvolpj]

I don't know what he was doing while he was waiting. If he was assessing the situation and figuring out what the shooter had, where he was located, if he had hostages, etc, then he was theoretically doing his job. If he was just standing outside pissing his pants? Different story.

4 well trained men with guns chose to sit outside and "assess the situation" while children were being murdered. That's your different story since at that point any excuse is irrelevant. What was the last school shooting that involved hostages?

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

I don't think it's far-fetched to think a teacher could snap and grab the gun in their room and use it, either on students or other teachers. I think that simply by the gun not being there, the impulse to pick it up and make an immediate decision will not be acted upon.

Again, many of these mass shooters are legally purchasing firearms and living lives as law-abiding citizens until they aim those guns at others and start pulling the trigger.

As for the way in which he bought his gun compared to what I was saying, it was just me listing off one way (in some cases the easiest way) to quickly purchase a weapon. It doesn't matter how he got the gun. What matters is that he was legally able to get the gun.

Also, if he didn't have a gun with the strength that that gun had, it's possible that the overmatched cop who didn't run in would have gone in to confront the shooter. As it was, he'd have just run in to his death and not had much of a chance at stopping the kid.

In these mass shootings the shooters are cowards. Anytime confronted with resistance they almost always kill their self or surrender.

 

[crusse10]

4 well trained men with guns chose to sit outside and "assess the situation" while children were being murdered. That's your different story since at that point any excuse is irrelevant. What was the last school shooting that involved hostages?

That's fair. I, again, am only speaking to the info of it being 1 officer. 4 is a different story.

I still think that the shooter should not have had access to weapons that can kill with such ease.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

If the shooter only had a handgun in the school, I am guessing that the cop would have been more likely to go in. Do I know that? No. But I am assuming that. Going into a school with an active shooter with basically no information of what he's armed with or what room he's in, by yourself, is just asking to get killed without even getting a shot off.

I've been in armed security/law enforcement for almost 15 years. I can say I GUARANTEE you that any of the men or women on my dept would have went in ALONE in a heartbeat. Like I said either in this thread or the other one 99% of the time these cowards kill their self or surrender as soon as they meet resistance. That's why these happen in GUN FREE ZONES. I don't care if I'm only armed with with my 2 9mm that I carry on me or what the "shooter" is armed with....I'd rather try to stop the attack and die trying than to have to live with the fact I stayed outside like a coward while kids or anyone was being murdered.

 

[crusse10]

In these mass shootings the shooters are cowards. Anytime confronted with resistance they almost always kill their self or surrender.

I agree. The gun is their source of power. I could just also see the kid turning and firing wildly toward one cop.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

And to add on my point the officer that worked the school I'd would almost with dead certainty say had his department issued car at the school. Not sure what Broward County's policy is but I can almost guarantee he had an AR or at the very least a 12ga shotgun in the car.....go get it and enter!

 

[crusse10]

I've been in armed security/law enforcement for almost 15 years. I can say I GUARANTEE you that any of the men or women on my dept would have went in ALONE in a heartbeat. Like I said either in this thread or the other one 99% of the time these cowards kill their self or surrender as soon as they meet resistance. That's why these happen in GUN FREE ZONES. I don't care if I'm only armed with with my 2 9mm that I carry on me or what the "shooter" is armed with....I'd rather try to stop the attack and die trying than to have to live with the fact I stayed outside like a coward while kids or anyone was being murdered.

The fact that the shooting happened in a school where there are many rooms is what makes me think he didn't want to walk in because there's no guarantee of what room the shooter was in. I'm not saying this from a LEO point of view, but more of a logical "if I don't know where the shooter is, I'm a sitting duck" mentality

 

[crusse10]

And to add on my point the officer that worked the school I'd would almost with dead certainty say had his department issued car at the school. Not sure what Broward County's policy is but I can almost guarantee he had an AR or at the very least a 12ga shotgun in the car.....go get it and enter!

fair enough

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

The fact that the shooting happened in a school where there are many rooms is what makes me think he didn't want to walk in because there's no guarantee of what room the shooter was in. I'm not saying this from a LEO point of view, but more of a logical "if I don't know where the shooter is, I'm a sitting duck" mentality

Understand completely what your saying but honestly that is half the shooting calls we respond too.

 

[Grand Vol]

I think that he didn't 100% know what weaponry the kid had in the school. So just going in John McClane-style was not the *smart* decision.

Good grief, no. You're pretty much saying a firefighter shouldn't rush into a burning building because there might be a propane tank close to exploding.

You wear a badge, you get paid to run to the gunfire.

 

[Hoosier_Vol]

Good grief, no. You're pretty much saying a firefighter shouldn't rush into a burning building because there might be a propane tank close to exploding.

You wear a badge, you get paid to run to the gunfire.

That is a GREAT analogy my friend!! :rock:

 

[bignewt]

All those are legitimate questions. The student would have to know which teachers were armed if their goal was to take the weapon. I think most would use the gun as a last resort. There was a video posted over in the political forum. It showed a mother and a daughter being robbed by a guy with a sawed off shotgun. They let the robber take the money and he appeared to leave. They took a defensive position behind the counter on the floor and grabbed a revolver. Thee gunman returns and finds them behind the counter. As he raises his gun she points hers and closes her eyes and starts pulling the trigger. You could tell she wasn't skilled or composed but it was her or the gunman at this point. He hits him and then runs out. Evidently he gets angry and returns to get revenge. The mother and the gunman set into a physical altercation and wrestles the gun away but during the struggle the daughter retrieves another handgun. While struggling with the mom the daughter shoots him. It was a very dangerous time to take the shot as it could have easily hit the mother. The gunman gets the gun away but it must have been empty, I guess that's why the mother didn't shoot when he came back. The guy was shot four times but managed to survive. The ladies escaped after the daughter got her shot off. My point in telling this is that neither of the women were skilled but as a life or death situation they were able to successfully defend themselves with a firearm. I realize this is just one case.

Edit: after watching another video I hadn't seen before, it appears the women locked the door where he could not leave.

[youtube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UKZ55m2KBaY[/youtube]


I don't know that arming teachers is the answer but having the threat of an armed teacher has to be a concern for a shooter.

If that daughter had missed the guy and shot and killed her mom then been killed by the guy you would not have a very good example. All I am saying is if all things are equal more bad than good can come from teachers being strapped IMO. I would rather have armed guards(vets who have passed strict psychological evals) roaming the school.

 

[InVOLuntary]

If that daughter had missed the guy and shot and killed her mom then been killed by the guy you would not have a very good example. All I am saying is if all things are equal more bad than good can come from teachers being strapped IMO. I would rather have armed guards(vets who have passed strict psychological evals) roaming the school.

Ideally you're correct. I think in certain situations arming certain teachers would be ok. I wouldn't want those women carrying if they were teachers but my point was that while it wasn't pretty, they were able to defend themselves when they were forced to. They should have just let the dude go instead of locking him in. It would have been nice if they had been able to lock him in in the alcove and had bullet proof glass.

 

[hog88]

I think the Second Amendment received the same treatment that the NFL gave to catches. In the past, with the same rules, common sense was used. Then the NRA changed its course back in the 70s (I think?) and made everything very political. It went from being an organization focused on safety to rewriting what the word safety meant.

The Second Amendment is there so that way you have the right to protect yourself and the intended freedom of fellow Americans from a tyrannical government. Not to protect yourself from fellow citizens. It never even says that "arms" are being protected for hunting.

I have no problem with the way the Second Amendment was interpreted until the 1970s. I have a problem with the way it's interpreted now, because of the refocusing of the NRA.

I want Americans to start using common sense regarding the Second Amendment instead of whatever the hell we're doing now.

I can't make heads nor tails out of this. The bold really confuses me.

 

[bignewt]

Ideally you're correct. I think in certain situations arming certain teachers would be ok. I wouldn't want those women carrying if they were teachers but my point was that while it wasn't pretty, they were able to defend themselves when they were forced to. They should have just let the dude go instead of locking him in. It would have been nice if they had been able to lock him in in the alcove and had bullet proof glass.

9/11 happened we created air marshals. Can we not create school marshals?

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

I think the Second Amendment received the same treatment that the NFL gave to catches. In the past, with the same rules, common sense was used. Then the NRA changed its course back in the 70s (I think?) and made everything very political. It went from being an organization focused on safety to rewriting what the word safety meant.

The Second Amendment is there so that way you have the right to protect yourself and the intended freedom of fellow Americans from a tyrannical government. Not to protect yourself from fellow citizens. It never even says that "arms" are being protected for hunting.

I have no problem with the way the Second Amendment was interpreted until the 1970s. I have a problem with the way it's interpreted now, because of the refocusing of the NRA.

I want Americans to start using common sense regarding the Second Amendment instead of whatever the hell we're doing now.

Well I agree with most of what you said, except for the defending yourself against fellow citizens. I think that was thought of as a given. The main reason I own guns is to protect my family from criminals who would do them harm. I am not a avid shooter or hunter anymore. I go squirrel or rabbit hunting every once in a while. I would usually rather take pictures of animals myself, but I will adamantly defend hunting and the right to bear arms.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

I didn't say he did the right thing. I said that probably felt that he was undermatched compared to the firepower inside the school and didn't go on a suicide mission. I assume that he was waiting for backup because then he'd have a better chance at successfully stopping the shooter and living.

Yeah...like everybody is saying...he was a coward. I have put myself in harms way to protect others before you go on about I don't know what I would do.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

I think that he didn't 100% know what weaponry the kid had in the school. So just going in John McClane-style was not the *smart* decision.

.