Parkland Florida School Shooting

[HCM]

Well, no, not quite.

Grabbing your rifle and plate carrier from the trunk is generally considered good practice when responding to an active shooter. If you can stay in the fight longer, and project more firepower, that's a good thing. If you're worried about the lives that might be lost in the 1 minute it takes to don a PC and unlatch a rifle, it's time to realize that people are going to die regardless. Accept that.

We have a duty. We're allowed to exercise prudence within that duty, with a goal of rapid response. That doesn't require we act recklessly.

Situationally dependant.

As Feudist said, if you are in / responding from your car grabbing your long gun and plate carriers is reasonable. If you are an SRO like feudist, running out to the car or office at the opposite end of the school is a non starter.

[TGS]

Situationally dependant.

Just to clarify if you are in / responding from your car grabbing your long gun and plate carriers is reasonable. If you are an SRO like feudist, running out to the car or office at the opposite end of the school is a non starter.

We beat you by a half a day on establishing that

[HCM]

We beat you by a half a day on establishing that

Ironically I spent the morning on the range with an ISD (Independsnt School District) Police Officer we work with, who had never shot a rifle before. Suffice to say after shooting the same course of fire (FBI bullseye COF) with a handgun and an RDS equipped M4, he now wants a POW rifle and wants to shoot an RDS pistol next range day..

One convert at a time....,

[Bart Carter]

Thanks to everyone that responded to my thoughts on this. I for sure didn't know that now the proper response is to rush in to limit the number of possible casualties. Makes perfect sense. Now if we can only get the uninformed to let good guys carry. The fact that most school shootings end with the shooter taking his life when confronted should be enough to justify it.

[BehindBlueI's]

However, it is an antigun statement because - why should we allow campus carry? If police are not able to deal with a long arm shooter - why should one expect civilians or armed teachers to be able to? So, screw you - campus carry/ CCW types?.

Well, it's two different things. Sort of like Infantry vs Resistance. When officers come in, it's unlikely to be sneaky. A bunch of sirens preceded our arrival. We're probably making a lot of noise. We're easily distinguished from the crowd due to uniforms. We are actively seeking the shooter.

Compare that to the ability to barricade and set up an ambush while protecting a room of your students while each teacher does the same in their room. Or being one of umpteen students (if a university) who isn't easily picked out from the compliant. That's frankly, easier to do.

Thanks to everyone that responded to my thoughts on this. I for sure didn't know that now the proper response is to rush in to limit the number of possible casualties. Makes perfect sense. Now if we can only get the uninformed to let good guys carry. The fact that most school shootings end with the shooter taking his life when confronted should be enough to justify it.

Some places have caught on. Others never will.

[HCM]

Some places have caught on. Others never will.

Some will surprise you. I just listened to a CT Kindergarten teacher involved in post newtown school security reviews. She freely admitted she hated the idea of arming school staff and would not, herself, be a viable armed teacher. However, to her credit she clearly laid out the logical case for armed school staff onsite due to the duration of most active shootings vs LE response times.

[Chemsoldier]

Looks like there has been a decision from a judge that the BCSO had no duty to protect. In other words, they can be completely wrong in how they responded but they had no duty to protect in a way that exposes them to liability.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...land-students/

[HCM]

Looks like there has been a decision from a judge that the BCSO had no duty to protect. In other words, they can be completely wrong in how they responded but they had no duty to protect in a way that exposes them to liability.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...land-students/

This is not a surprise and entirely consistent with the long standing US Supreme Court case law established in Warren v. District of Columbia.

[idahojess]

The Federal case is a 1983 case, which is likely why the US District Court reached a different result than the state court, which is dealing with common law tort claims. I can't find the US District Court order, but here was the complaint.

https://media.local10.com/document_d...849_ver1.0.pdf

[Coyotesfan97]

Another little twat suicided today as soon as he was cornered by the police in Richmond, Indiana.

Cops responded to a tip and confronted the 14 year old. A shootout ensued and he killed himself.

L.E. MUST respond at flank speed full frontal assault without regard to gearing up, staging, uparmoring, going for the rifle...nada. Grab balls and go.

And shoot until there are brains on the floor.

Ill be taking the extra second to grab my rifle and my “zombie” pack of six mags before moving in. You don’t move faster than you can think and you move to the sounds of the guns.

ETA I didn’t see the later post clarifying this. I agree if you’re the SRO you go with what you have. You the cavalry and the speed bump rolled into one.