|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
At least one kid is dead very directly as a result of what the police did, we can say that.
+ Show Spoiler +
The story of the cops has changed multiple times so far, now apparently they didn't exchange gunfire before he entered the classroom, and now they're saying once again that he's the one who barricaded himself in. I don't think it's very likely that cops couldn't have done a better job than they did, and if it turns out later that I'm wrong and I shouldn't have assumed, I'm fine with that.
- I do believe it takes a whole lot of time to gun down 22 people, even with an AR-15.
- Bunch of others were injured too, including 11 children. I don't know where they were, if they were in the classroom that was a whole lot of minutes where he could have decided to shoot them more times and kill them, if they were elsewhere then that's... worse? I think?
|
On May 27 2022 02:35 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2022 02:20 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 01:55 JimmiC wrote:On May 26 2022 23:12 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:What is more disheartening is the statement by the police: The bottom line is law enforcement was there,” McCraw said. “They did engage immediately. They did contain (Ramos) in the classroom. They contained the shooter in a classroom full of children he could murder so there was no point going in. Blue lives matter more than children apparently. I'm not sure there was much to be done, how long does it take to kill a room full kids with a AR? And then if the couple who were there get shot by him by rushing in how many more can kill? So you're saying that you wouldn't help children because they're probably already dead so no point risking your life? I find that a distasteful attitude for a police force. + Show Spoiler +When your police force is pulling tasers on concerned parents I think that is a problem. Nope I'm saying I do not know exactly what happened so I'm not going to make any assumptions. It is not helpful to assume the worst.
I'm using the available evidence to decide that the police force had terrible messaging and took more action against concerned parents than an active shooter murdering children. This is an internet forum for discussion. If you don't want to do any speculation I suggest you never post again.
and it's now confirmed by the police that officers were brave enough to go and rescue their own children. Too bad for everyone else I guess. [1:14 to skip to the statement]
|
On May 27 2022 02:37 JimmiC wrote:
To the policy question I do not know the exact answers but the answers are pretty easy to find. You would just need to have some policy experts review the 10 countries you believe it do it best. Set meetings with them and ask what has worked well what has not and also ask about some of the rules that might not make sense on first read, there may be a purpose. After that is done from those take the best parts and make your own. Set meetings to have them review and give you feedback.
It might not be perfect be us humans are ultra complicated but it would be 1 million times better than now.
But but the US is exceptional and what works elsewhere could never work in the US because ...reasons?
Gotta keep doing the thing we do that everyone else is not doing and which doesn't work harder until it starts working!
|
Police in the US are proven liars, theyre almost definitely to blame in some capacity
|
|
|
|
|
On May 27 2022 04:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2022 02:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 02:35 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 02:20 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 01:55 JimmiC wrote:On May 26 2022 23:12 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:What is more disheartening is the statement by the police: The bottom line is law enforcement was there,” McCraw said. “They did engage immediately. They did contain (Ramos) in the classroom. They contained the shooter in a classroom full of children he could murder so there was no point going in. Blue lives matter more than children apparently. I'm not sure there was much to be done, how long does it take to kill a room full kids with a AR? And then if the couple who were there get shot by him by rushing in how many more can kill? So you're saying that you wouldn't help children because they're probably already dead so no point risking your life? I find that a distasteful attitude for a police force. + Show Spoiler +When your police force is pulling tasers on concerned parents I think that is a problem. Nope I'm saying I do not know exactly what happened so I'm not going to make any assumptions. It is not helpful to assume the worst. I'm using the available evidence to decide that the police force had terrible messaging and took more action against concerned parents than an active shooter murdering children. This is an internet forum for discussion. If you don't want to do any speculation I suggest you never post again. and it's now confirmed by the police that officers were brave enough to go and rescue their own children. Too bad for everyone else I guess. [1:14 to skip to the statement] https://twitter.com/_sir_perfluous/status/1529584296415186952 Speculation involves words like "maybe" and "I think" or "perhaps". What you are saying is you want to make conclusions and it angers you that I would like to wait for complete information to make mine. This is a discussion board, so I thought it was appropriate to discuss why I thought it might make sense to wait on the conclusion.
I'm not angry that you want to wait for complete information. I'm dismayed that you think I'm assuming the worst instead of drawing conclusions based on the evidence in my posts. The fact that I don't hedge every statement with an I think or maybe or perhaps is just a joke, no one does that.
If it turns out that I'm wrong and police officers saved lives by brandishing tasers at concerned parents I'll change my opinion on the matter. My view point isn't set in stone and can change when more information is available.
|
But it's only a rush to judgement if you rhetorically call it that. So far the information collected points in a direction, I have no reason to distrust it, so I follow that direction. If later I get some other information then I will update my opinion. There's nothing wrong with that, it's how information works.
|
Hearing more news about what the police did during the shooting, I am sadly not surprised that my bar for police officers can go even lower. At least they were good enough to threaten concerned parents from not rushing in themselves.
EDIT: I'm specifically only referring to cops preventing adults from rushing into the school to save their kids. All that other stuff the cops did is not something I am defending.
|
|
|
On May 27 2022 05:41 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2022 05:08 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 04:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 02:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 02:35 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 02:20 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 01:55 JimmiC wrote:On May 26 2022 23:12 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:What is more disheartening is the statement by the police: The bottom line is law enforcement was there,” McCraw said. “They did engage immediately. They did contain (Ramos) in the classroom. They contained the shooter in a classroom full of children he could murder so there was no point going in. Blue lives matter more than children apparently. I'm not sure there was much to be done, how long does it take to kill a room full kids with a AR? And then if the couple who were there get shot by him by rushing in how many more can kill? So you're saying that you wouldn't help children because they're probably already dead so no point risking your life? I find that a distasteful attitude for a police force. + Show Spoiler +When your police force is pulling tasers on concerned parents I think that is a problem. Nope I'm saying I do not know exactly what happened so I'm not going to make any assumptions. It is not helpful to assume the worst. I'm using the available evidence to decide that the police force had terrible messaging and took more action against concerned parents than an active shooter murdering children. This is an internet forum for discussion. If you don't want to do any speculation I suggest you never post again. and it's now confirmed by the police that officers were brave enough to go and rescue their own children. Too bad for everyone else I guess. [1:14 to skip to the statement] https://twitter.com/_sir_perfluous/status/1529584296415186952 Speculation involves words like "maybe" and "I think" or "perhaps". What you are saying is you want to make conclusions and it angers you that I would like to wait for complete information to make mine. This is a discussion board, so I thought it was appropriate to discuss why I thought it might make sense to wait on the conclusion. I'm not angry that you want to wait for complete information. I'm dismayed that you think I'm assuming the worst instead of drawing conclusions based on the evidence in my posts. The fact that I don't hedge every statement with an I think or maybe or perhaps is just a joke, no one does that. If it turns out that I'm wrong and police officers saved lives by brandishing tasers at concerned parents I'll change my opinion on the matter. My view point isn't set in stone and can change when more information is available. No my issue was that you edited the context out of my point and then accused me of saying something I clearly did not. It is not hedging BTW it is english, one is how you state things you think the others is how you state things you know. All I have said is to wait for complete information to come to conclusions.
The fundamental fact of the situation is that the police likely followed police procedure. The question is this trolley problem:
You have to decide if you can potentially save one child or some number of police officers. If you do kill the police officers the child might have been already dead and sacrificed them for nothing. I'm pulling that lever every time because the police officer signed up for that risk. It is their job.
I took the first sentence that everyone would read in your post and asked for clarification. Feel free to answer my trolley problem instead that is asking the exact same question, but phrased nicer.
|
|
|
On May 27 2022 06:12 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2022 05:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 05:41 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 05:08 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 04:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 02:47 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 02:35 JimmiC wrote:On May 27 2022 02:20 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 01:55 JimmiC wrote:On May 26 2022 23:12 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
What is more disheartening is the statement by the police:
[quote]
They contained the shooter in a classroom full of children he could murder so there was no point going in. Blue lives matter more than children apparently. I'm not sure there was much to be done, how long does it take to kill a room full kids with a AR? And then if the couple who were there get shot by him by rushing in how many more can kill? So you're saying that you wouldn't help children because they're probably already dead so no point risking your life? I find that a distasteful attitude for a police force. + Show Spoiler +When your police force is pulling tasers on concerned parents I think that is a problem. Nope I'm saying I do not know exactly what happened so I'm not going to make any assumptions. It is not helpful to assume the worst. I'm using the available evidence to decide that the police force had terrible messaging and took more action against concerned parents than an active shooter murdering children. This is an internet forum for discussion. If you don't want to do any speculation I suggest you never post again. and it's now confirmed by the police that officers were brave enough to go and rescue their own children. Too bad for everyone else I guess. [1:14 to skip to the statement] https://twitter.com/_sir_perfluous/status/1529584296415186952 Speculation involves words like "maybe" and "I think" or "perhaps". What you are saying is you want to make conclusions and it angers you that I would like to wait for complete information to make mine. This is a discussion board, so I thought it was appropriate to discuss why I thought it might make sense to wait on the conclusion. I'm not angry that you want to wait for complete information. I'm dismayed that you think I'm assuming the worst instead of drawing conclusions based on the evidence in my posts. The fact that I don't hedge every statement with an I think or maybe or perhaps is just a joke, no one does that. If it turns out that I'm wrong and police officers saved lives by brandishing tasers at concerned parents I'll change my opinion on the matter. My view point isn't set in stone and can change when more information is available. No my issue was that you edited the context out of my point and then accused me of saying something I clearly did not. It is not hedging BTW it is english, one is how you state things you think the others is how you state things you know. All I have said is to wait for complete information to come to conclusions. The fundamental fact of the situation is that the police likely followed police procedure. The question is this trolley problem: You have to decide if you can potentially save one child or some number of police officers. If you do kill the police officers the child might have been already dead and sacrificed them for nothing. I'm pulling that lever every time because the police officer signed up for that risk. It is their job. I took the first sentence that everyone would read in your post and asked for clarification. Feel free to answer my trolley problem instead that is asking the exact same question, but phrased nicer. It is not at all the trolley problem. You are completely discounting what happens if the resource officer charges in dies and now the kid has the whole school until the rest show up.
The police have reported that the SRO engaged the shooter and that he didn't show up until after the shooter was in the building so it is hard to say what Schroders' police officer(s) should have done. From my understanding of what should happen in an active shooter drill. You stack up with what you have immediately and engage the shooter. Worst case scenario is that you distract him from killing kids which is what I'm advocating for. There is a lot of weasel words in the media where the police say they engaged the shooter immediately. What does that mean exactly?
Five (or more) children have died in the hospital so far from their injuries. I'm not going to say they could all have been saved by faster action, but I'm going to assume that getting medical attention faster would have helped.
source on texas protocol
Seems pretty clear that it should be a 'push' and not a 'hold' to me according to this and all the reports I've read.
|
|
|
It is unclear whether the cops locked him in that classroom or not, the story keeps alternating. When the big boys finally showed up to take care of the shooter they apparently had trouble opening the door, which would be weird if they were the ones who locked him in in the first place. But this part we don't know for sure yet.
Also there's a huge interval between the moment he gets locked in (or locks himself in) and the moment where the intervention happens, something like 40 minutes. During those 40 minutes it's not just the first responder, who then could run the risk of letting him loose inside all of the school. There are tons of other people outside, doing nothing, while bullets are heard being shot.
In the latest reports apparently he was shooting outside the school alone for 12 minutes before he entered, when previously they were telling us that police officers exchanged gunfire with him outside.
|
On May 27 2022 07:18 Nebuchad wrote:
It is unclear whether the cops locked him in that classroom or not, the story keeps alternating. When the big boys finally showed up to take care of the shooter they apparently had trouble opening the door, which would be weird if they were the ones who locked him in in the first place. But this part we don't know for sure yet.
Also there's a huge interval between the moment he gets locked in (or locks himself in) and the moment where the intervention happens, something like 40 minutes. During those 40 minutes it's not just the first responder, who then could run the risk of letting him loose inside all of the school. There are tons of other people outside, doing nothing, while bullets are heard being shot.
In the latest reports apparently he was shooting outside the school alone for 12 minutes before he entered, when previously they were telling us that police officers exchanged gunfire with him outside.
He crashed his car 100 yards away and shot at people who called 911. This wasn't a stealth insert. This is also why Jimmy's storyline where the SRO peacefully talks to the shooter doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
|
|
On May 27 2022 07:53 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2022 07:35 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:On May 27 2022 07:18 Nebuchad wrote:
It is unclear whether the cops locked him in that classroom or not, the story keeps alternating. When the big boys finally showed up to take care of the shooter they apparently had trouble opening the door, which would be weird if they were the ones who locked him in in the first place. But this part we don't know for sure yet.
Also there's a huge interval between the moment he gets locked in (or locks himself in) and the moment where the intervention happens, something like 40 minutes. During those 40 minutes it's not just the first responder, who then could run the risk of letting him loose inside all of the school. There are tons of other people outside, doing nothing, while bullets are heard being shot.
In the latest reports apparently he was shooting outside the school alone for 12 minutes before he entered, when previously they were telling us that police officers exchanged gunfire with him outside. He crashed his car 100 yards away and shot at people who called 911. This wasn't a stealth insert. This is also why Jimmy's storyline where the SRO peacefully talks to the shooter doesn't make any sense. I didnt say he peacefully talked to the shooter, but I mean its 2 posts above yours and like 5 mins old so hard to remember. By why start having an honest discussion now. Show nested quote +My understanding was Reasource officer sees kids talks to him yells at him whatever he runs drops bag of ammo and gets in to building
You also wrote that you didn't want to speculate today and now you're posting drivel like this. I'm mocking you yes. I explained the proper police protocol asking you a direct question and then you invented some alternate timeline to support your lone hero theory. There's no discussion happening here at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/r0mf1nE.jpg)
