17 thoughts on “Rants! and Raves! 2-24-18

  1. I do NOT know how people who behave in such a way (and in many other accounts of dereliction of duty) live with themselves.

    I’d hazard a guess for Rickey that this may be why people voted for Trump–he at least would fire incompetents.


  2. Yes, it was wrong. Is it possible that fear took over? I don’t know how I would react in a similar situation and hope to never learn. If they did not do their jobs, they ought to be removed. Should they hate themselves for life and be hated by others? No. Forgiveness is available. Christ died for people like me.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Mumsee, should he hate himself for life, absolutely not. But if people die on “your watch” that is truly serious. And a man who fails to do his job in such a serious way shouldn’t be able simply to retire with a pension. I understand people being angry.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “If our investigation shows that our deputies made no mistakes or did things right, or it’s not corroborated, there will be no issue,” Israel said.

    “If we find out, as we did with Peterson, that our deputies made mistakes and didn’t go in, I’ll handle it like I always have. I’ll handle any violations of policy or procedures or whatever accordingly.”

    That sounds like the system is set up to handle these things. Not everybody who signs up to be a guard is a hero. And I am certain it is a devastating discovery to the person, and the thought that he or they might have been able to save some lives will go with them for life. Being angry about it does no good.

    We have a society of people who think it is okay to be angry about the strangest things. It it was one of my children that was shot, I don’t know my reaction. If it was my child who was the shooter, I don’t know my reaction. If it was my friend who was the guard who did not go in, I would try to direct them to Christ. If it was my friend who was the guard who did go in, I would try to direct them to Christ. I cannot imagine the thoughts of self loathing to “I did what was best under the circumstances even though people hate me” these guys may be entertaining. But I know I am a sinner and God has forgiven me, I can offer them no less.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Mumsee, I don’t think it’s “strange” at all for people to be angry at realizing that their kids went off to school and were put in others’ care . . . and those others failed to do their jobs, and that failure allowed your child to be raped or murdered or to drown. If you find out that the reason two children drowned in the school pool was that the lifeguards were having a party and no one was watching the pool while the children’s play got more and more daring, being angry is a natural and even appropriate reaction. If a youth pastor is known to have molested several teens, but it is covered up and he is given a new youth group of kids, and he molests several of those children too, being angry is a natural and appropriate reaction.

    Not all anger is godly anger, and even godly anger must be given back to God to recognize that only He has the right to vengeance. (Though sometimes earthly justice is wholly appropriate.) But there is such a thing as righteous anger, and being angry at those who destroy children, and those whose job is to protect children but who fail reasonable standards in doing so, is appropriate anger.

    I don’t know any of the people affected by this; I don’t feel anger about it. But I do think that the town’s anger here is justified.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Probably a different perspective. I would be angry with the perpetrator. But, he too, can be forgiven.
    There is no way one or two or three deputies could have prevented what happened though they might have limited the damage. If a crazy person gets into our local school with just around one hundred students, I would expect he could do a lot of damage before being stopped. Though if several of the teachers are armed, it would probably be less.
    In that situation, a lot of force converged to stop it and there were some weak spots. That is a horrible burden to bear.
    “It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no knowing where you might be swept off to.” And that also applies to the things that can happen, or as I have often told my children as they stepped out the door, don’t let a comet fall on your head. We do what we can to protect each other but stuff happens. Fear can be debilitating and if you don’t know it is there, how do you prevent it. Meanwhile, the system will go along with its inquiries and investigations and the penalty will be enforced. But the people are still human beings. The dead, the scared, the angry, and those who may not have done what they should have.
    There are probably many survivors who are kicking themselves for not doing more. It is all very painful.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Police squads who deal with hostage situations and other crises which involve armed criminals threatening innocent civilians undergo extensive and continuous training to deal with such situations with as little loss of life as possible. Even with that training, sometimes things do not go right, and I strongly doubt the school guard had any such training. Having a gun and knowing how to shoot it does not mean one is capable of taking down a madman with an military grade weapon who doesn’t care what happens to him so long as he takes out as many people as possible. A rifle or handgun is no match for the fire power of a machine gun, while if the guard (or the teachers) were armed with machine guns, that would mean a spray of bullets coming from all directions – since bullet ricochet and change directions, making students trying to find cover much more likely to be hit. In such a case, ballistics tests on the bullets pulled out of bodies would probably reveal that not a few were victims of friendly fire. There is a reason that in a hostage situation, negotiations are preferred over going in with a SWAT team – it isn’t just the hostage takers’ bullets that the hostages are in danger from.


  8. Over on the news thread, HRW wrote that it is standard procedure for the police to not enter a building during an active shooting. (His comment is at 4:34 pm, if you want to read the whole thing.)

    Even so, many people are going to blame this guard who did not go in, and he is probably going to have a lot of guilt, justified or not, to deal with. May God save him and his family, and protect them.


  9. That is what I thought when you were talking about spraying automatic fire through the crowds. A sniper is a one shot person. With the shot to kill.


  10. After Columbine, police procedure in many jurisdictions was changed such that police responders *don’t* wait so long to enter a situation like Parkland.

    I’m sure the SRO had some training on a gunman situation like this.

    The Parkland SRO failed in his duty. It is starting to look like the first sheriff’s officers on scene did, also.

    The shooter didn’t use a “machine gun.”

    Nobody is advocating forcing teachers to carry weapons at all, let alone “machine guns.”

    Nobody is advocating arming teachers with AR-15s.

    An AR-15 isn’t a military grade weapon.


  11. From Slate:

    “And the final practical lesson of Columbine is a revolution in police response tactics. Cops followed the old book at Columbine: surround the building, set up a perimeter, contain the damage. That approach has been replaced by the “active shooter protocol.” Optimally, it calls for a four-person team to advance in a diamond-shaped wedge. (If there isn’t time to gather four officers, a single officer should charge in alone.)” … http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history_lesson/2009/04/the_four_most_important_lessons_of_columbine.html

    From WaPo:

    “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.” … 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=.45bb7fe590fa


  12. I haven’t read in depth about the officer and the situation but I, too, would like to know more about his training, orders, expectations, his decision not to enter the school, etc., before passing hard and fast judgement.

    Hair-on-fire social media threads tend to go on a tear with these stories and the presumed scenario, true or not, becomes written in stone all too quickly.

    Perhaps he was negligent. It would seem that way on the surface. But ? My sense is there’s more to this story to come.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Mumsee, a sniper is generally concealed and often in a completely different area/building than the gunman – in this incident, the sniper shot from about 90 feet away: https://www.policeone.com/swat/articles/91899-Toronto-Police-Sharp-Shooter-Was-Right-To-Shoot-Hostage-Taker-SIU-Finds/. In order to get the shot right, they often rely on accurate information on the location and position of the shooter from a spotter. A lot of training is needed for that kind of intervention: http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/etf/courses.pdf


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.