Sheriff's deputy did 'nothing' as gunman hunted students during Florida shooting

[ansible]

A school resource officer assigned to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., remained outside of the high school when a shooter opened fire on students and teachers last week and did not engage the shooter. Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said video footage showed the deputy, Scot Peterson, arrive on the west side of the high school’s freshman building and take up a position. Peterson, though, did not enter the school.

Israel said Peterson was armed and in uniform but did "nothing." "What I saw was a deputy arrive at the west side of Building 12, take up a position and he never went in," Israel said." When asked what Peterson should have done, Israel said the deputy should have, “Went in, addressed the killer, killed the killer.”

“Devastated. Sick to my stomach. There are no words,” Israel told reporters Thursday. The video showing Peterson will not be disclosed at this time, and Israel said it may never be made public “depending on the prosecution and the criminal case.” Israel said he suspended Peterson without pay pending an internal investigation, but Peterson then resigned.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sheriffs-deputy-did-nothing-as-gunman-hunted-students-during-florida-shooting/article/2649807

[temporary311]

1. Meanwhile, some people expect

the home ec. teacher to be Rambo.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. But some 100 pound, 5 foot tall little teacher lady is supposed to defend her

whole class against an active shooter. Right, 45*?

[elehhhhna]

90. Let's remember the whole horrific deal took only three minutes.

The sheriff's comments are reckless imo. Easy to second guess when you think your RAMBO.

[atreides1]

101. 6 minutes not 3!!!

The time of the shooting was 6 minutes and Peterson remained outside for 4 of those 6 minutes!!!

[Straw Man]

128. I guess she's going to have to.

But some 100 pound, 5 foot tall little teacher lady is supposed to defend her

whole class against an active shooter.

She has no choice. The cop isn't going to do it. He's hunkered down outside so that he won't get hurt.

[uponit7771]

3. Hang gun vs assault rifle ? I'm not 100 % blaming him off the top of my head

[CozyMystery]

5. Me either.

I asked my husband if he'd bring a handgun to an AR-15 fight, and he said no. I explained the situation -- my husband said that the cop would have died.

I don't blame the cop for not taking that very significant risk because it would have done no good.

[nocalflea]

28. My first thought.

But, he was paid to protect those kids, so I understand the anger.

[jberryhill]

34. Nobody is paid to get killed

[nocalflea]

38. He was paid to put himself between that gunman and those children.

Right or wrong, that's society's expectation of those who "protect and serve" (especially when it comes to kids).

[CreekDog]

44. not saying he was a good cop or following the rules, but he's not required to do suicide missions

if you can find some job language or contract description that says he was required to stand between an active shooter and the people being shot at, you'd win the argument in 1 second here.

so you should post it, but it probably doesn't exist.

[nocalflea]

74. "stand between was figurative.

I am speaking of societal expectations. I should have been more clear.

Understanding these expectations , I am not suprised by the anger being thrown that officer's way, with emotions being so raw . I don't share that anger.

I agree with you. He is being scapegoated and I feel the Sheriff may have something to hide that he's deflecting from, given his rush to judgement and all. We are told in these cases not to rush to judgement, "give us time to ascertain the facts". This sheriff is not acting professionally here. Why not ?

[FarPoint]

72. He had more than anyone else did....

Secondly to that of the shooter.

[customerserviceguy]

112. So

what was he paid $75K a year to do? File reports after the carnage?

If these "resource officers" (a bullshit term if I ever heard one) are not supposed to deal with active shooter situations, then WHY THE FUCK HAVE THEM??????

I hope I've made myself clear here.

[yardwork]

54. What are SRO supposed to do? It's never been clear to me.

[christx30]

116. Bust kids for pot. Deal with fights.

Flip uncooperative kids out of their desks.
But actual police work that might put them in danger? No. Cops are tax collectors and post-crime investigators. There's no actual expectation of them putting their lives on the line to protect us. As long as they are there to arrest my murderer, and help get them prosecuted, they're doing their job.

[Squinch]

52. Me either. I imagine a regular cop, seeing that disparity in fire power, would call for assistance

as well.

[FarPoint]

71. Well...

No one else had a weapon as in a gun....all they had was creative thinking...not much time for that either....

He could of made a difference....He gave his word, his duty to Protect..he made that commitment as a Deputy....his job...

Similar to a combat solider....you do your duty...

[uponit7771]

93. It was NOT his job to charge an assault rifle with a hand gun. There's a thread on what

... ar-15s do to humans.

I blame the access to an AR-15, if the kid had a shot gun or hand gun charge his ass but an assault rifle that can kill him at a far distance vs a close in hand gun.

Maybe he could've gotten in closer and put some shots out without hitting a kid in those 4 mins but who knows.

[FarPoint]

96. I disagree....

I understand your thinking, I have always wanted AR-15s out of the street. Only for War Zones ...yet disagree overall regarding the Deputy duty to protect.

[Straw Man]

132. Um. Yes it was. Otherwise, why was he there?

I blame the access to an AR-15, if the kid had a shot gun or hand gun charge his ass but an assault rifle that can kill him at a far distance vs a close in hand gun.

Any rifle can kill at a greater distance than a handgun. Armed only with a handgun, I'd rather face an AR than a scoped bolt-action deer rifle. One of those can kill you from a distance where you wouldn't even see the shooter, much less be able to hit him with a handgun.

Maybe he could've gotten in closer and put some shots out without hitting a kid in those 4 mins but who knows.

It was his job to find out.

[lpbk2713]

4. The softball coach could have whacked the shooter with a bat.

[hatrack]

10. Yes, and the math teacher could have lobbed a right triangle at him . . .

.

[GulfCoast66]

16. And had as much chance as a middle aged cop

With a 9mm handgun.

[Volaris]

48. Can we let this be the argument that destroys the 'good guy with a gun' bullshit?

It's always been bullshit, but now we have proof.

[GulfCoast66]

69. Totally agree

But not if we let it become about a coward cop which assumes anyone else would have ended the situation.

If a cop freezes what chance dies an 8th grade science teacher have?

[customerserviceguy]

113. Maybe

it doesn't take a good guy with a gun, it might take a brave guy. We sure didn't have that here, we had some doughnut-eater trying to make some easy money for doing nothing, and banking on the statistical fact that there was an extremely low chance of an active shooter incident at the school he was making over $75K a year to "defend". Then, when the shit hit the fan, he cowered in fear, while unarmed people died, thinking that a "resource officer" was there to keep them safe.

What a bullshit waste of money.

[Straw Man]

125. So let me get this straight.

Can we let this be the argument that destroys the 'good guy with a gun' bullshit?

It's always been bullshit, but now we have proof.

Teachers shouldn't be armed because that's a job for trained professionals, and it's OK for the trained professionals to hunker down in safety when the shit hits the fan because otherwise they might get hurt.

Does that about sum up your position?

[Volaris]

130. Pretty much.

Because you're right wr wouldn't want the trained professionals to get hurt, but HELLZ YEAH teachers should defend their own classrooms. Because Bootstraps or somesuch...

Like I said, it was always a bullshit argument.

[Straw Man]

131. I would draw a different conclusion.

Because you're right wr wouldn't want the trained professionals to get hurt, but HELLZ YEAH teachers should defend their own classrooms. Because Bootstraps or somesuch...

It seems to me that armed professionals are abdicating their responsibility to provide protection, while at the same time the powers-that-be are denying teachers the right to self-defense. So teachers and students are fucked, unless you can make all guns magically disappear tomorrow. Which you can't.

People seem to think it isn't fair to have expected the resource officer to face an AR-15 with his service pistol while the people inside were facing one with nothing but their bare hands and maybe a pair of scissors. Oh well ... No price too great to pay in the service of ideological purity, eh? Just collateral damage on the way to a gun-free America. They took one for the team. Is that how you see it?

[Volaris]

133. Allowing the General Populace access to assault weapons

Doesn't absolve police officers from their responsibility of keeping us safe. Do I blame the officer for not wanting to get himself killed?
Of course not. The variable I have a problem with is 'the general populace has access to assault weapons'. As long as that remains, even the supposed good guys with guns, don't really stand a chance...as clearly demonstrated by this instance.

[Straw Man]

134. Absolution?

Allowing the General Populace access to assault weapons

Doesn't absolve police officers from their responsibility of keeping us safe.

Correct. But the part I have trouble with is the notion that unless and until assault weapons disappear, nothing else can be done or even advocated, because that would detract from the overall mission of achieving a ban. That's what I've been hearing here, over and over.

I do blame the officer for "not wanting to get himself killed." He was the only one on the scene who had a fighting chance. He chose not to take that chance. He might have been able to save lives; he chose not to even try.

The variable I have a problem with is 'the general populace has access to assault weapons'. As long as that remains, even the supposed good guys with guns, don't really stand a chance...as clearly demonstrated by this instance.

This demonstrates nothing of the kind. The man didn't even try. Guns are not magic talismans. They have to be actually used to have any effect.

So shall I sign you up for the "do nothing to protect the children because the only thing that will work is a ban" option?

[Volaris]

135. Not at all, and please allow me to clarify:

Subjectively, no I don't blame the cop. OBJECTIVELY, he didn't do the job he signed up to do. That his job, at any given time, would require him to face down an opponent/criminal with superior firepower is going to be a fact of life as long as we keep letting it be that way.
And if the police, as a whole, have a problem with that, perhaps they should be more vocal about the necessity of limiting that superior firepower, as well.

[Straw Man]

136. Thanks for the clarification. The misunderstanding was mine.

I think we may be coming from different places, but what you say makes sense.

[Volaris]

138. Sorry if it was initially confusing.

More difficult to type long form paragraphs from my phone today than it otherwise would be.

[Squinch]

53. The lunch ladies could have stabbed him in the jugular with a spork!

These ridiculous scenarios are generally what the republicans are suggesting when they call for arming teachers.

[brooklynite]

82. I was listening to a radio show where the RW host said the wrestling team should have tackled him...

[Demsrule86]

6. I can't say I blame him. He had a pistol no doubt or a rifle at best...up against an AR 15.

[gejohnston]

25. AR 15s are rifles,

the cop should have had one and a shotgun.

[Squinch]

55. .

[cwydro]

85. Ditto to your emoji.

[Squinch]

86. They're caracatures of themselves at this point.

[yardwork]

56. Yeah. Let's have SWAT teams roam our schools. Great idea.

[gejohnston]

91. no, every cop in the US and Canada

has one in their patrol car and have for years. Back in the day, my grandpa and older brothers had had a pump shotgun on the dashboard.

[Demsrule86]

60. No one outside of the military should own an AR or any assault weapon period. I refuese to live

like this anymore. I have believed in background checks and sensible gun control for years...but now it is an issue that I vote on. I don't blame the cop...he would have died for nothing...his actions or lack there of showed how stupid the NRA arguments about arming teachers and others are...the gun manufacturer criminals just want to sell more of their death products. ..time to end this assault on our schools and our towns ...perpetrated by the NRA and gun humpers.

[gejohnston]

92. I simply made a statement of fact

most if not all police patrol cars in the US and Canada have them and have since about the 1980s. In Florida, many have both a rifle and shotgun.
As for living like this, the corporate media is just as responsible.
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2016/08/media-contagion-effect.pdf

[Demsrule86]

97. I blame the manufacturers...there is no reason to own an AR 15...I am sick of guns...and I would

bet I am not alone.

[gejohnston]

111. I blame four cowards

who cowered behind patrol cars, and the ass-covering POS sheriff who wants more power. I blame the county policy of sweeping violent crimes by high schoolers under the rug until it got to this. This was not the killer's first violent crime, just his worst.
Oh, and I blame the fucking media. If he used a Luty submachine gun, CNN and Fox would drone on for weeks on what parts to get at Home Depot.

[Pachamama]

129. [phone]

Completely Agree.....

Americans need to rise up and refuse to live like this with mass shootings committed with weapons of war on American Soil.

Background checks that are thorough and coordinated between law enforcement agencies and longer waiting periods. Ban all assault and rapid fire weapons and any accessories that aide them.

I don't blame the SRO or any cop if they are only armed with a handgun and are up against an Assault Rifle and have no rifle of their own.

No arming teachers either....

[sarah FAILIN]

7. This is what I've been telling my coworker today

Even before we knew it, I asked him would he want his teacher wife going against an AR15 with a handgun. My 9mm will hold 8 total. The only way I would have a chance would be to sneak up behind him while he was shooting others

[njhoneybadger]

8. This is why assault rifles should be banned. They scare the shit out of people

If a deputy freezes up so would teachers. People make mistakes and when some wack job slips through the cracks they shouldn't have a battlefield weapon that can tear 10-20-50 children apart in minutes.

[OhNo-Really]

9. Peterson was scared shitless and froze, which kills the argument for Armed Guards at Schools

Like the Vet said in another post.

No one knows how they will react until under fire. Peterson was not up to his job. Mall cop maybe, but not School Cop.

[customerserviceguy]

114. Exactly

and pulling down some pretty hefty bucks for sitting there with his thumb up his ass, shooter or no shooter.

[mopinko]

11. these jobs are dumping grounds for shitty cops to sit around until

they can retire.

[Kaleva]

12. That's probably why he was there.

[customerserviceguy]

115. Clearly

it's considered low priority by police agencies. They know that a tiny fraction of one percent of schools will have an active shooter situation, so it's easy money to "work" at doing nothing more than shaking a finger at those "smokin' in the boys room" as the rock and roll song put it. Nice cushy job for old cops who have had too many doughnuts to actually chase down a perp.

And society honors these mall cops when nothing goes wrong. So, it's time to vilify one when he fucks up at doing the one thing that he is supposedly there to do. "Establishing a perimeter" is cop-speak for "I didn't do shit."

[lostnfound]

13. Actually Ive heard students speak well of him

Maybe he was good at de-escalating or calming, but failed the class in instant martyrdom
.

[Kaleva]

15. He shouldn't have been armed.

As the gun served no purpose. I read at a website that in the future, SROs will have access to rifles.

"The day before Peterson’s resignation, Sheriff Israel announced that in future, his SROs will be armed with rifles on school premises. Those rifles will be locked in a secure patrol car until needed. Sheriff Israel said his decree is supported by the school superintendent. "

https://heavy.com/news/2018/02/deputy-sro-scot-scott-peterson/

[GulfCoast66]

17. That kid all his shooting in 6 minutes.

I can’t find my keys, go out to my truck in the driveway, get my dirty coffee mug and bring it back to the kitchen in 6 minutes.

That rifle may as be a headquarters for all the good it will do locked in a patrol car at a school for 2000 students.

[Kaleva]

19. I agree.

[Calculating]

14. Cowardly

Yeah he might have died, but he also might have taken down the shooter or at least saved some lives. Don't take a job that requires you to carry a gun if you can't handle the thought of needing it some day. Most of these shooters don't have any training and expect easy prey. It's entirely possibly he could have taken the shooter down with his 9mm despite being outgunned.

[GulfCoast66]

18. Cops do not sign up for and are not expected to charge battle rifles with a pistol

Especially when they do not know if it is one or 5 killers. Even soldiers are not expected to do that kind of shit. Cause once you are dead, you are no help.

And BTW, the kid was apparently a great shot according to his NRA training class.

[Kaleva]

20. Then he shouldn't have been fired or forced to resign.

The sheriff himself said he should have entered the building and taken on the shooter.

[GulfCoast66]

22. Scapegoat. You think the Sheriff would have run in there.

They want something to blame besides letting an 18 year old buy a battle rifle. Liberals on DU should not make their job easier.

[Kaleva]

26. An unarmed security guard guard used his own body to protect kids.

He died.

[GulfCoast66]

33. He was in the midst of it all when the shooting started

Teachers and others often make sacrifices when the gun is pointed at them and their kids. Human nature. Look death in the face, accept your fate, have nowhere to run, and make a selfless decision.

I do not remember a single story of a teacher or anyone running from a place of safety to an almost certain death. Except in combat and those that do are awarded our nations highest awards. Often posthumously.

Blaming this guy is Bullshit. But it helps deflect from the real tradegy of an 18 year old being able to buy that rifle.

[Kaleva]

36. Where did I ever say I blame him?

I did say he shouldn't have been armed because having a weapon did no good as shown.

For what reason was he armed then? Was it only for self protection? The sheriff is of the opinion that the gun was for protecting the staff and children of the school. You may argue otherwise.

Geography teacher Scott Beigel died leaving a place of safety, a locked classroom, to save several students. The teacher was gunned down in the doorway. Because of his sacrifice, several students survived.

Edit: Had Scott Beigel maintained a defensive position inside of his locked classroom like the armed deupty did outside, he'd be alive today just like the deputy. There might have been several dead students outside of the locked door of his classroom but the teacher would be alive.

[GulfCoast66]

39. The sheriff is full of shit.

The teacher was brave and was in the building with kids he knew being shot. Would he have run in from outside? I will honor his bravery as assume so.

And last I heard the shooting only went on for 6 minutes and then he effectively blended in with other kids. Unless that narrative has changed then no one could stop him.

So now the sheriff is going to have the officers have their own ARs...locked in their car in the parking lot at a school for thousands.

All this talk just destracts from the real problem. That an 18 year old was able to walk in and buy a weapon of war.

The attack on this guy is meant to serve the rights goals. Cause they are really frightened of what they have seen the last couple of days.

[Straw Man]

124. Tragedy.

Last edited Sun Feb 25, 2018, 01:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Blaming this guy is Bullshit. But it helps deflect from the real tradegy of an 18 year old being able to buy that rifle.

How about the tragedy of an 18-year-old being killed in military service before being able to enjoy the full rights of a citizen? Doesn't that strike you as ironic? If we raise the age to purchase a firearm to 21, we should raise the minimum age for military service correspondingly. Anything less is rank hypocrisy.

[ecstatic]

27. In fairness, he doesn't know what he'd do. Sometimes the same person

can be a hero and a coward depending on the day and other factors.

[Kaleva]

30. I wouldn't know what I'd do in such a situation until it happens if I lacked training.

This is why training is so important. In a crisis situation, thinking rationally is almost impossible and one falls back to their training if they have it. If not, they freeze up.

[yardwork]

58. The sheriff sounds like a moran, to me.

[Demsrule86]

62. Very unlikely he would have taken down the shooter...and he would have died...he called for backup

and followed reasonable protocols...too much TV makes people believe this nonsense...where the good guy takes out the bad guy with a handgun while the bad guy fires an automatic weapon but hits nothing...too much TV. Guns need to go.

[johnpowdy]

21. I feel bad for the poor officer. This is why Assault Weapons need to be banned.

He was probably terrified

[Corgigal]

23. He probably would have been

slaughtered when he opened the door. Especially if he only had a hand gun.

[ecstatic]

24. My initial reaction--he didn't feel like dying that day

Clearly, he felt no connection or sense of responsibility for the people inside. He probably was aware of the type of weapon being fired, and decided he was outgunned. And with a name like "Scot Peterson," he's pretty much Google proof, despite the weird spelling of "Scot." So no biggie for him.

[GulfCoast66]

35. You really fucking think he was thinking about the fallout?

That’s just Bullshit. He was looking death in the face. The time he stood doing both probably felt like seconds and hours at the same time. We do not train cops or soldiers to charge battle rifles with handguns. Cause they will just die.

Even SWAT teams get organized before heading in. And the kid only shot for 6 minutes then dropped his gun. No security guard was stopping him.

The NRA are going to try to scapegoat this guy to distract from the real issue of this kid being able to buy a battle rifle. DU members should not help them.

But you have figured out he had no sense of responsibility for these kids?

This is one of the most non-DU worthy post I have read for a long time. No biggie to him. Just go home and have a beer, right?

[ecstatic]

100. I get that he was outgunned, and I understand his actions.

I'll grant you that I shouldn't have said "no biggie," as I'm sure this will haunt him for the rest of his life.

But the reason why I said he felt no obligation/responsibility is that when you really care about someone, your fears & personal safety no longer matter. I know from personal experience of having to run down the hall to my son's room when the security alarm went off in the middle of the night. I didn't have a plan. No training. No weapons. Had it just been me at home, I would have once again hid in the closet, paralyzed by fear. But my son was down the hall and I had to protect him. That meant leaving the safety of my room and passing the stairs where an intruder could have been waiting. In situations like that, all phobias are cast aside, adrenaline takes over, and you act.

[Straw Man]

127. Who knows what he was thinking about.

He was looking death in the face.

No, actually, he wasn't, because he didn't enter the building.

We do not train cops or soldiers to charge battle rifles with handguns.

Your assumption that he would necessarily be "charging a battle rifle" is unfounded. There's no way of really telling how the encounter would have unfolded. He might have walked right into certain death, or he might have been able to find cover and pin the shooter down with return fire. We will never know because he didn't enter the building.

The NRA are going to try to scapegoat this guy to distract from the real issue of this kid being able to buy a battle rifle. DU members should not help them.

So your position is that nothing should stand in the way of an assault weapon ban? We shouldn't advocate for real-time protection of school children, because that would detract from the goal? I question your priorities. Even if a ban happened tomorrow, it would be literally years before AR-15 rifles would cease to be available. In the meantime, we should excuse armed professionals from putting their own safety over that of those they are sworn to protect?

[Luciferous]

29. So much for that good guy with a gun plan!

[canfeild123]

89. So much

For relying on cops to keep us safe.

[Luciferous]

94. After the past couple of years I don't count on that anyway.

[SharonClark]

31. I agree with many of the comments from 'he was scared' to 'he didn't want to die that day'

but, wash"t that his job - to protect the kids? What did he think he had a gun for?

[GulfCoast66]

37. No, it is not his job.

We do not train people to charge assault rifles with handguns. Because they will just be dead. Even if a SWAT had arrived they would have coordinated before entering. They would not just sprint in one at a time the minute they jumped off the truck.

But let’s help make him the scapegoat and deflect from the real problem of the shooting having an assault rifle.

[Lee-Lee]

46. Actually we do train people for that and it was his job

His job was to close with the shooter and engage him.

Period.

That is the only thing that stops these kinds of things.

Pistol vs rifle, well indoors at close range it’s actually not that disparite a match. Were he out in the open he would have been outgunned. Indoors at ranges of 50 feet or less it would simply come down to who can hit who first, regardless of what weapon they have, and that would be a matter of skill and training that determines that.

He was a coward, not deserving of the badge and the public trust that comes with it.

[Demsrule86]

64. No it wasn't. Not when the shooter had an automatic weapon and if any that

train people that way need to go too. To much cowboy mentality these days.

[Lee-Lee]

75. You dont have a clue what your talking about

The shooter didn’t have an “automatic weapon” he had a semi-auto. And so did the deputy.

His delay allowed the killer to keep killing with no resistance. How you can think that was the best way to go boggles the mind.

[Sailor65x1]

108. It absolutely was

Not just his job; it was his sworn duty.

And we do train that way, and with good reason. It works. It isn't cowboy mentality, it's simple reality. Redirect the shooter's attention from the intended targets and put it on you.

That kind of training isn't going to "Go away," because "Serve and Protect," to those who actually understand it, is not just a catchy slogan on the side of a car.

The other thing you (And sadly, the bulk of DU) are not considering is this; it always has been, and always will be, the responsibility of the stronger to protect the weaker. It doesn't get much weaker than a bunch of school children. Tbis guy chise to take the role of the strong and them turned himself into a spectator while the weak were being killed.

I won't bother with the "Automatic weapon" comment, since DU is not known for being particularly well educated, except to say that the cop's weapon fed ammo exactly the same way as the shooter's. No advantage to either side.

[Sailor65x1]

102. Yes, it was precisely his job

And his sworn duty. It doesnt fit the DU screaming narrative, but he chose to forego his duty, and more people died as a result.

[bullimiami]

32. Since when does an officer charge in to a live fire situation without backup?

This is not the movies.

[GulfCoast66]

40. Thanks. The narrative is now going to be about blaming this guy

And not the fact that the killer could so easily buy that gun. Not a surprising tactic.

What is disappointing is so many on DU helping with the narrative.

[bullimiami]

41. People need to stop and think. That sheriff, his boss, should be ashamed.

The first officer on the scene would never have charged in.
They would have waited for backup and a plan.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

73. No. Unless training down their is drastically different from most other areas

Current active shooter training is, and has been for years now, to immediately track down and engage the shooter as soon as possible. The reason is attract the attention of the shooter away from the crowds and onto the responding officer, force the shooter to go from offense to defense, and, in many cases, a lot of these shooters off themselves when they get confronted. Remember, 99% of these shooters have zero training, they are shooting fish in a barrel and can just as easily panic themselves when being shot at. Is it risky? Highly, last numbers I heard is 1 in 3 first responding cops get shot. Police aren't rambo, but neither are these shooters. Having a rifle doesnt make you a highly skilled assassin who stays calm and cool under fire. Many retreat and fold when facing a gun themselves because they themselves are cowards.

Also, this isn't new training. Police nationwide starting shifting to this after Columbine. when it took nearly an hour after the shooting started before the police entered the school. Immediate engagement doesn't prevent all deaths and injuries and is a high risk for the cop or cops, but its better then just sitting around and letting the shooter decide when the shooting is over.

[Sailor65x1]

103. Exactly right

We have been training people your way for many years. Engaging a shooter from cover is the quickest way to derail his path and force him to pay attention to you instead. No guarantees for your own safety obviously, but duty is duty where innocents are involved.

[MichMary]

87. Maybe the "narrative" should be

that this kid was clearly a risk and no one did anything about it. I read a Miami Herald article this a.m. that listed eight separate complaints against him going back a couple of years. Four of those specifically mentioned a possibility of a school shooting. Not one person, local cops, FBI, no one, took it seriously enough to intervene in any meaningful way.

This was a failure by authorities from the bottom up.

[Lee-Lee]

47. Thats exactly what you do when your on scene when a shooting starts

Move to the person doing the shooting and stop them.

[Demsrule86]

65. I call BS on that.

And more students could have been killed in any cross fire...New York cops hit civilians all the time. They had a shoot out on the street where it was found that everyone shot had been shot by a 'good guy' bullet.

[Lee-Lee]

77. Ive trained for this very situation

Yes, a student could have died in the crossfire.

Guess what? MORE STUDENTS DIED WHEN HE WAS ALLOWED TO KEEP KILLING UNOPPOSED!!’n

By the time someone is killing people there is no option that doesn’t have risks.

Moving in an engaging the killer is the only right answer.

The absolute worst thing you can do is stay away and let them keep killing without opposition.

You move to the them and make contact. And then one of 4 things happens:

The killer gives up.
The killer commits suicide( most common on these cases)
The killer is killed by the people responding.
The killer starts engaging and shooting at the he intended victims and shoots at the responders. In this case that at least draws the fire away from the intended victims and means fewer of them get shot and more have time to escape.

At the worst even had the deputy been shot while engaging he still would have disrupted the shooters attack and stopped him from shooting kids for at least a while, saving some lives.

That was his job. He failed.

[AwakeAtLast]

42. He's already been labeled as a Democrat

They will stop at nothing!

[irisblue]

43. I hope someone is keeping a suicide watch on him.

I cannot imagine how he and his family are feeling.

[Cha]

45. I guess the training for Resource Officers

doesn't prepare them.. that there might be a kid with an AK15?

Wasn't something like that rifle, that slaughtered the poor babies, used at Sandy Hook?

[Lee-Lee]

49. Either he was an absolute coward or this was a training failure

For all of you saying he did nothing wrong- you are wrong.

He was already on scene. Experience tell us that the sooner youngake armed resistance to the shooter the sooner you stop them. So the person assigned to that school had one job and one job only- move to the sound of the shooting, find the shooter, kill him.

That was his job at that moment, and nothing else.

For those saying he couldn’t do anything with just a pistol- had this been outdoors where there was distance between them, maybe so. But indoors at ranges of 50-75 feet or less it isn’t a big disparity. In those situations it won’t matter who has the pistol or rifle, it only matters who can hit who first. Training and skill will determine that along with a bit of luck, so he had no excuse on that front.

He was not deserving of the trust the pubic and the students placed in him in that position.

[Demsrule86]

66. My brother in law is a cop and he said in that situation calling for backup is what you do.

[Lee-Lee]

78. Then his department is training for failure

The “wait for backup” mentality went away after Columbine, where doing just that let them kill for an extended period.

By the time someone is killing people there is no option that doesn’t have risks.

Moving in an engaging the killer is the only right answer. As rapidly as possible. Since he was on the scene he wasn’t a responders going in- he was there.

The absolute worst thing you can do is stay away and let them keep killing without opposition.

You move to the them and make contact. And then one of 4 things happens:

The killer gives up.
The killer commits suicide( most common on these cases)
The killer is killed by the person/persons responding.
The killer starts engaging and shooting at the he intended victims and shoots at the responders. In this case that at least draws the fire away from the intended victims and means fewer of them get shot and more have time to escape.

At the worst even had the deputy been shot while engaging he still would have disrupted the shooters attack and stopped him from shooting kids for at least a while, saving some lives.

That was his job. He failed.

[Demsrule86]

98. He is a New York City decorated cop...for 9-11...I can assure you...they are trained.

You don't run into a building where there is a shooter like a cowboy without backup when you are massively outgunned.

[Straw Man]

117. With all due respect to your brother ...

... NYPD protocols have changed, as with most police departments in the US:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nypd-policy-neutralize-active-shooter-delay-article-1.1734913

[Demsrule86]

122. And not for the better. But with all due respect...he is not retired.

I do not expect a policeman to run into a building with a handgun against and AR 15. It is madness. And several deputies didn't go in either...and Cadet Bone (Trump) spurs called the cops cowards. We need to regulate guns not send police to certain death and arm teachers. I tell you the truth...we don't want to live this way and if the NRA keeps it up, at some point they will lose it all.

[Straw Man]

123. I never inferred that he was retired.

Where did you get that?

I do not expect a policeman to run into a building with a handgun against and AR 15.

Nevertheless, that is what their departments increasingly expect them to do. It's a dangerous job. Anyone unwilling to do that should find another line of work.

Under what circumstances to you expect armed officers to face an active shooter? Should they hold back if they think the shooter has a shotgun? A handgun with more capacity than their duty weapon? Where do you draw the line?

[Vinca]

50. Some people who enter law enforcement apparently don't give adequate thought to the notion

of having to kill or be killed. The job (as I know first hand) is long hours of boredom with spurts of sheer terror. You never know for sure how you'll react until a situation arises. I kind of sympathize with the deputy, but at the same time I can't imagine what the hell he was thinking. Most cops would act reflexively and be in the school in a nanosecond.

[aikoaiko]

51. Active shooter protocols are to engage the shooter.

Last edited Fri Feb 23, 2018, 08:45 AM - Edit history (1)

That's not the same thing as a suicide mission as some sympathizers for the coward are saying in this thread. LEO can engage from positions of cover.

From my reading, active shooters often run, hide, and shoot themselves when engaged by LEO.

The sheriff is correct. This LEO failed those children.

[obamanut2012]

61. Thanks for teh snark directed at me

Your opinion has no more weight or validity tahn mine.

[Lee-Lee]

80. Actually that post was backed up by fact

Active shooter protocols are in fact to engage the shooter as fast as you can. Because as soon as you do that stops them from shooting the intended victims.

Every single second delayed in engaging them is a second more they have to kill.

This guy gave him 4+ minutes.

[Sailor65x1]

105. That post was correct

Which gives it full validity. It didn't really seem like snark.

This was a sad example of a cop doing a job rather than his duty. Almost all training we give now is to engage as quickly as possible, from cover when possible, to redirect the shooter's attention. And like another clearly well trained poster has pointed out, this very often results in the shooter fleeing, giving up, or committing suicide.

It is not guaranteed to end well for the responder but again, that's the difference between doing a job and doing your duty.

[FarPoint]

57. I'm probably stupid...

But, if I was armed and that was my primary job...I would of gone in....

[HockeyMom]

59. Call for Backup

That is what the lone Deputy did at our school with real lockdown and armed escaped criminal. Elementary school far smaller than a big HS. Yes, go into the building but not be expected to handle it all alone.

Some staff always carried radios and we could hear the police reports over it. When the all clear was issued, I saw three other squad cars there. This was just an escaped criminal not an active shooter on campus. BTW, this happened ins SW Florida.

There must be protocol for these situations. Obviously, this Deputy did not follow it.

[FarPoint]

70. Yes.. immediately call for backup...

I assume the officer had direct radio contact capabilities......

[Lee-Lee]

84. Calling for backup happens as you move to engage

That is not an either/or situation.

[HopeAgain]

63. The coach who died protecting students didn't sign up knowing

he might have to put his life on the line. The cop did.

[Mike Nelson]

67. It's difficult...

...when you're only one person, and outgunned. If you're not lucky to be in a spot with a clear shot, you're in a tough spot.

[tymorial]

68. So many keyboard warriors stating what the officer should have done

[Hortensis]

76. Yes. Guidelines are generally AS SOON AS 2 or 3 are on scene

(not 1) they heroically go straight in and engage without waiting for additional support. Or so someone who knows explained.

The rationale for so few to go up against even automatic weapons fire is that when confronted by this authority almost all of these mass killers either surrender or kill themselves, so that the confrontation usually ends the slaughter. Officers put at grave risk to do this fastest.

But the guideline is not for one person to go in, so apparently that has not been found to have the same effect.

[Lee-Lee]

83. That guideline is for officers responding from off scene, not ones already there

He was at the scene. In that situation yes he should have gone in.

And the wait for 2-3 officers all depends on a number of factors, including how far away they are. When I worked often the nearest backup was 5 minutes away on a good day and 15+ on some days in some places. I wouldn’t wait 5, much less 15.

We trained both ways. Because every second you wait before engaging is another second they are free to kill. If killing is actively happening you need to engage as soon as possible even if that’s alone. 2 or 3 is better, but not so much better as to let a bunch more people die while you wait.

[Hortensis]

88. Ah, okay. I did check your previous post and just

assumed from the partial explanation that it must be different for only one person.
Otherwise why wouldn't one go in just as the "2 or 3" would?

Never assume. I also didn't look hard enough to see if you were on this one, though I did glance. I'm glad you're adding some expertise to this thread.

So this guy did not do well, to put it mildly. Derelict and yet also another victim whose life may be destroyed by this.

[Lee-Lee]

81. I was a deputy for 11 years and trained for this

What are your qualifications?

[Shemp Howard]

95. Thank you for posting.

There are usually two sides to every story. In this case, cop did nothing wrong vs. cop was a coward.

You took the time (and took the heat) to fully present one side. Too often DU - like most websites - is an echo chamber. Thanks for posting your perspective here.

[Demsrule86]

99. It would have been suicide...I don't blame the cop...too many people watching cop shows on TV

and think that is how it really is.

[Sailor65x1]

110. Some of us have been there, or still are

After I was out of it directly, I took up training. Like the other poster you are probably referring to, i/we teach this stuff to the public and private sector on a regular basis. Although "Keyboard warriors" is certainly a statistically accurate depiction of the typical DUer, it doesn't apply to everyone.

[tymorial]

120. I was referring to the general response not anyone in particular.

I expect there are some here (like you) who are trained. That most certainly does not represent the majority.

I look at it this way, the officer was expected to perform his duty and attempt to stop the shooter. I do actually accept that this was his duty. Perhaps he wasn't up to the task. Perhaps he was afraid to die. Maybe he froze. I don't know and quote frankly no one else does either. Vilifying him serves no purpose. It lends credence to the notion that arming people (even if trained) will provide a safer environment. It's bullshit.

How many LEOs are trained and recertified but never fire their weapon in the line of duty... they encounter this situation. What percentage attempt to stop the active shooter alone without backup? Are we supposed to believe this was a single unfortunate failure to act and most police officers would respond?

Perhaps I'm too cynical but I think too many people have been watching too many cop shows.

I would also like to point out that there is no right to expect the police to protect and serve. Local municipalities may have those rules in place but most don't. The Supreme Court did away with that about 10 years ago. The individual has no right to expect police protection. I may disagree with that personally but it is federal law (I can't speak to every state)

[Straw Man]

119. Yeah, how dare they ...

... expect the officer to "protect and serve"!

[spanone]

79. maybe he didn't receive his bonus on time?

[GaYellowDawg]

106. MAYBE HE HAD BONE SPURS

Well, that's how Trump got out of action.

[Takket]

107. Police are taught to engage.........

In American policing, confronting active shooters is divided into two eras: before Columbine, and after Columbine. Before the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado, police strategy was to wait for the SWAT team to arrive and then attack en masse with precise force. But after the two shooters in Columbine roamed the school for nearly 50 minutes, killing 13 and wounding 21, the police approach changed: Enter now. Whoever is there with a gun, whether a school resource officer or the first patrol officer to arrive, should go after the shooter.

“We teach that the first priority when you come on scene is to stop the killing,” said Pete Blair, executive director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University and one of the nation’s top experts on active shooter training. “The number one driving force is gunfire. If there’s gunfire, we teach the officers to isolate, distract and neutralize. We want people to go directly to the sounds of the gunfire.”

But as a teenager armed with an AR-15 rifle was blasting away at students and teachers inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida last week, school resource officer Scot Peterson remained outside and did not engage the shooter, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said. Fourteen students and three teachers were killed. Peterson, who spent 27 of his 32 years in law enforcement as a school resource officer, has resigned, Israel said.

Peterson should have “went in,” Israel said. “Addressed the killer. Killed the killer. … There are no words. I mean these families lost their children. We lost coaches,” Israel said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/02/23/police-are-trained-to-attack-active-shooters-but-parkland-officer-didnt-would-armed-teachers-help/?utm_term=.639d8ef1a1bf

You can argue the policy but you can't argue the fact he didn't do his job.

[Liberal In Texas]

109. And maybe it's a good example of why a good guy with a gun...

won't necessarily stop a bad guy with a gun.

The whole attack when one is taken by surprise is over in just 2 or 3 minutes. Who's to know how long it takes a person to figure out what's going on and what to do?

This isn't like the movies or TV. More guns isn't the option. NO GUNS is.

[DVRacer]

118. For those that want to know

I have more training in CQB than most police. (Close Quarters Battle) I fired both expert in rifle and pistol while serving. I don’t feel the need to go on further about my qualifications to give my point of view.

1. The reason that the platform of M-16/AR-15 was phased out in the military was because it was less effective in close quarters. The barrel length of 18-20” was difficult to bring on target quickly. This brought about the M-4 with a 10” barrel which is not legal for sale even in semi-auto as it falls into the category of SBR. (Yes with certain special permits same as pre 1986 full auto) So the perceived power advantage is limited by mobility of the shooter.

2. The very best CQB firearm (in my experience and others) was chambered in 9mm same as or less than the Deputy was in possession of at the time. This is the HK MP5 mine was the MP5SD2 which was suppressed further reducing the muzzle velocity.

3. He was wearing a bullet resistant vest which provides a good level of protection especially if he also had a trauma plate in.

4. Intelligence is key in any type of situation from a rear position he could not give any information to dispatch short of there’s a shooting going on. He was equipped to advance alone and even if he couldn’t engage to provide better information as to movement and number of individuals. He failed all training post Columbine as to dealing with an active shooter.

5. The cascade of failure that lead to this travesty needs to be examined. An independent outside agency needs to review it all and a public report issued. It wasn’t all on the one Deputy but a hard honest look at everything that lead up to, during and after.

[treestar]

121. This is a distraction, designed to make us forget we want to ban

the weapons of war. He could have been "the good guy with the gun" and saved everybody, so we don't need to ban the war weapons.

[rainin]

126. This whole conversation pisses me off. It's a pile on. It's scapegoating.

There were other officers who arrived and took up positions outside the school. We are supposed to be the rationale side. Let an investigation take place before we vilify this officer.

[struggle4progress]

137. After this clusterfuck, we need somebody to scapegoat!

Uncountable warning signs were ignored

The kid could get plenty of guns and ammo

His foster parents didn't think that was a problem

Uber happily delivered him with his semiautomatic to the school

And he walked into the building easily -- and pulled the fire alarm to create chaos

The school hooked law enforcement into a video feed with a 26 minute delay, which law enforcement thought was live: that means he'd been gone at least 20 minutes when misinformed police started dispatches based on his supposedly-current activities inside the building

Intelligent responses require accurate information, but nobody outside really knew what was happening

And the sheriff who blames the SRO? His office was ignoring warning signs long before the final tragedy. Blaming the SRO is just another Roger-Stone style dirty trick