All we need is more gun control.

Are we all forgetting the fact that the police who were on the scene at the time of the shooting did not go in to stop the shooter? Are we just going to ignore the fact that they took an oath to protect and serve and they just sat back and let that psycho shoot up a high school? Yeah we should have adequate security for our schools, but first we need to hold these people accountable for the billionth time they failed us and our kids. This shooting should have been prevented first, but they failed to act upon the warning signs, then when it happened the cops on the scene who were there the very second it happened should have put their own lives on the line to mitigate the carnage, but they didn’t so they all blame easy access to guns and ignore the fact that every actor in this Greek tragedy lacked a modicum of responsibility for their actions. I for one am tired of this country, this nation of failing our kids every step of the way. We should hang all of them from the rafters and start fresh because it’s not doing the country any good letting them mediocritize the education system to the point it’s better off letting the internet educate our kids. As for safety, we should at least have common sense take the wheel and maybe train proper individuals to actually protect our kids while they are in school and spend they money the crooks in Washington are pocketing on that instead of safe injection sites and TVs for inmates. It won’t be perfect but it’s a start.

No, we've been talking about it for 9 pages here, and on other threads.

A couple things...

1. USSC said it's not the responsibility of the police to protect people.
2. While it may be policy to 'go in first', it's not law. They'll probably be pressured to quit.
3. I find it funny that I have posted numerous times that it's LE responsibility to hold their fire unless they have a clear shot, when only themselves are in danger, as killing/injuring an innocent member of the public to save their own ass was an egregious violation of the trust put in them. The most outrageous example came from NYPD who injured 9 bystanders after a man with a weapon confronted officers.... Yet, here we are, the people who were adamant that I was a POS for suggesting cops become a bullet sponge to protect the public they've been trusted with, are here yelling about how they had a duty to go in there, even if it was by themselves, to become a bullet sponge.. lol.. I just find that humorous. Ignore my logic and rationale until you find a situation which you believe it applies.
4. This issue presents a couple of issues that need to be addressed.
4a. Dems will claim that having armed guards/teachers will be useless, pointing out these men that refused to go in and saying 'see, that didn't work!'
4b. We can use this as a platform to launch our own 'See, this is why we NEED guns, because police refuse to protect us'.. But, as true as it is, there are holster sniffers and badge bunnies who would kill themselves before admitting that police aren't the perfect, amazing, super hero , god-like creatures that they've put on a pedestal. This means that people will be making excuses for this behavior, 'They would have died needlessly' , 'they shouldn't have put themselves in danger', 'they have a right to live too'.. etc.
4c. This may be used as an excuse to further militarize the police. If the cops are going to claim they were outgunned/not safe/whatever, laws/policies may be put in place that further jeopardize the public.. You know 'officer safety', which is where a lot of tyrannical policy comes from. If the reason given is 'officer safety', you can bet your ass it's an excuse to justify some action that otherwise wouldn't have been justified, like tackling someone who was video recording you... 'His phone could have been a weaponz! OMGZ I had to cuz 'officer safetyz!'...

LOTS of shit is going on, and of course, I don't want cops dying needlessly, they're people too (most of them, anyway), but if they sign up to run headfirst into danger, and the public is relying on them to do so, then it needs to be done. How many fewer lives could have been impacted if these fucksticks ran in there? MOST of these situations end when they're confronted with force, whose to say the guy wouldn't have put a hole in his own head as soon as he got pinned down by fire from cops?

As mentioned before, there is another issue of 'acceptable casualties', optimally, none would be great, however the reality is, with hundreds of people around the shooter, and only one (or 2) shooter(s), odds are, an errant round from a cop will cause an injury/fatality. While this is horrible, and NOT acceptable if the officer is only one in danger (IMHO), I think that an injury/fatality may be ...understandable (?)... given the situation, provided that the target is neutralized. Accidentally killing one person, or even 2 people, to stop the murder of 20 more people..is... a hard pill to swallow... but also the logical course of action.

The problem holds at, children involved. A centralized area with a confined and controlled place that held kids. That in itself, should be the only reason to forgo any self preservation.
Gang shooting at a mall or a gunfight in the bad part of town is completely different from kids getting shot in their classrooms.
There's a line that must be crossed when children are involved, regardless of your own safety. At least that's my thought, my opinion and my first hand experience.
What those officers did at the school, is absolute dereliction of duty and complicity to murder, again at least in my opinion.

I'm heavy pro LEO, Dad's retired SPD even, I honestly hope the cowards of Broward County loss everything and become raging alcoholics living on the streets waiting on their reservations to that special place in hell.

Won't happen. They are in a union.

Isn't there some kind of law that is used against some people who know about a crime, but do nothing to stop it?

For instance, if I knew someone was planning to rob a convenience store, and I did nothing to stop it. The perp kills the clerk. Now I can be charged with accessory to murder because I 'aided and abetted' by not doing what I could, to stop it...

Didn't at least the RSO do pretty much that?

Accessory to murder, if you ask me. FULL accessory, in this case. He didn't just not stop the guy, he made it easier for the guy to kill more, by removing himself and his gun, from the scene, to hide outside for his own safety...

Might as well have pulled the trigger himself, for most of the killings.

I see where you are going with that... I personally wouldn't try to charge him with a crime related to the deaths, but rather I would look for every possibility for dereliction of duty etc.

Cowardice is one thing, accessory to murder is something else. IMHO.

Before we shred this coward, I'd like to know if he (or any of the Broward County deputies) have been trained properly.
What if, just what if they really hadn't gotten the memo about how to respond to an active shooter in a school?
I feel silly even typing that. Gah.
But before Columbine, it was SOP to take up positions outside and try to negotiate with the shooters.

None of us know this Scot Peterson personally, I'm guessing.
Try to picture what he will be living with for the rest of his life. Besides retirement and a fat paycheck. Yeah, I'm angry, but I still want to know if BCSO had the proper training.

I'm sure that all of that would come out, in a trial.

Just as sure that it will all disappear/be covered up/igored if no trial.

And this is my biggest concern...
This continual lack of accountability for .Gov employees and politicians is just mind blowing.
I'm out of my head with frustration.

I would as well. Reading some of the comments here I can see how gun control gets passed in this state with the support of many gun owners. Amazing. Ok to have an opinion, but many have no clue regarding armed response, defense, offense, and reality judging from some of the comments. I recommend before they take action that may shut down effective response that they seek the qualified opinions of those that do this as a job and have actual experience under fire. I do not care what solution is chosen, but we need one and it needs to be effective unlike Jay's commitment to the safety and success of school shooters by ensuring no on site armed response.

I will be accessing my child's school with a body cam and walking through with a narrative timeline to reveal the ugly and terrifying truth regarding how oir school are an open invitation to the next armed psycho.

I'd recommend doing that anonymously, or not at all.

They'll figure out some way that this was an actual and credible threat, and throw you away for good...

So I don’t have the time to read through all these responses, but I’ll throw In my 5 cents as an actual armed guard.

First off those of us out here would be more than willing to go back and pull security at schools, keeping kids safe is definitely a higher priority in our eyes. And 90% of them would probably do a good job. The other 10% would probably freeze up or lose their shit. The biggest issue we run into when talking about this is all the little details that could cause major issues.

Let’s say our company somehow got a contract to pull said security, are we going to be doing this for every school in America? A select few? What’s the criteria that allows a school to fall under our guard? What kind of presence are we supposed to provide, a friendly guy in a polo or a heavily armed security member? What’s our use of force policy supposed to be? Do we react to every fight and altercation or are we simply waiting for a guy/gal with a gun?

The list can go on and on. Like I said, me and everyone I work with would be totally down to do this kind of work, but we need to what it is that people actually want.

I was using a figure of speech, obviously nothing always works.