Texas School Slaughter...

[Gondwanaland]

Supposedly, the incident commander explained that the shots being fired were at them (by a barricaded subject), and he wrongly supposed that no children were alive.

I don't think you can even imagine how chaotic such a situation can be, and adrenaline pumping like crazy, and knowing full well you may be shot.

Yeah, that sounds a bit like CYA to me. Especially given he's already shown he's willing to provide false (or at least misleading) information to the public and to Abbott (or so Abbott claims).
It will be interesting to see the investigation (if they manage to do it without covering for people). Especially how much in contact with dispatch/911 services they were (and if not, then why not). Either way there are serious problems.

[Gondwanaland]

Lemme take a second swing at this --- I have said all along that - in MY opinion - one of the BIGGEST problems with Police Departments these days is POLICE UNIONS -- protecting the bad cops at pretty much any cost. That's pretty much the fabric of "the blue wall" --- and I have CLEARLY been opposed to protecting bad cops - JUST LIKE I'm against the TEACHERS UNIONS protecting bad teachers.

It is a very entrenched system, and it DOES take courage for somebody to stand against it.

Unlike the "teacher union" situation, when a cop fails to support another cop, even in a bad situation, the cop fully realizes that his very LIFE may be in the hands of the cop he stood against or exposed.

Police unions are certainly a problem. But the wall of blue extends far beyond that. For example, I may be wrong but I rather doubt that this chief belongs to the same union as the DPS spokesperson who stuck his foot in his mouth about 'well they might have been shot!' if they'd gone in. The unions may well contribute to the Blue Wall, but it's a far more pervasive and insidious problem that goes far deeper than simply police unions. (which I think your last sentence points to - it's far more than just a union thing).

[Mountain Man]

Yeah, that sounds a bit like CYA to me. Especially given he's already shown he's willing to provide false (or at least misleading) information to the public and to Abbott (or so Abbott claims).
It will be interesting to see the investigation (if they manage to do it without covering for people). Especially how much in contact with dispatch/911 services they were (and if not, then why not). Either way there are serious problems.

I expect any investigation into this fiasco to have an air of "We have carefully examined ourselves and found no wrongdoing."

[seanD]

Two fronts: mental health and school security.

We need better access to mental health treatment, and we need more effective red flag laws. In my own state, the system is broken and even if someone like this school shooter was involuntarily committed, the system would have spat him out after a few days without actually trying to fix his underlying issues (because of money, frankly).

I'm not a big supporter of arming teachers, but I do support increasing school security. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman has a lot of excellent suggestions. Stuff like single point of entry with an armed guard of some sort (SRO/security/whatever), metal detectors at the single point of entry, the receptionist with a panic button that triggers police notification and an alarm to put the school into lockdown. Randomized searches of students for weapons (since searching all would be just impractical). Ballistic resistant tint on the windows of classroom doors. Easily accessible master keys for police responding to a shooting. But you know, all this would require forethought, planning, and money. And most people would prefer to think "it won't happen here". Maybe we can't eliminate such school shootings, but we can make them less likely to happen and limit the body count when it does.

And the frustrating thing is, our governments could implement all of these steps without tackling the gun control issue. Whether or not we desire to see greater gun control in the US, we should admit that it's a difficult topic to get traction on and maybe we should work on the things more likely to garner bi-partisan support instead of doing nothing as children keep dying.

Nah, I don't support red flag laws AT ALL. God help us if Republicans get on board that train. I know Trump threw the suggestion out there. That has exploitation written all over it.

I agree with arming teachers because I think it will serve as a deterrent more than anything. Since most of these mass shooters -- whether psychotic or just evil -- aren't crazy enough not to be calculative about what they do (most plan it days if not weeks or months in advance), if they know they'll confront a bunch of armed teachers before they have a chance to reach a desirable body count, chances are pretty good they'll avoid schools and look for different gun free zones. It also may or may not deter random gang violence, but it won't likely make it any worse.

I don't believe increased security procedures as you mention will work much at all. Folks get lax or careless, like a teacher propping open a locked door.

[Ronson]

Nah, I don't support red flag laws AT ALL. God help us if Republicans get on board that train.

Not really any need for a "law", I wouldn't think. It's already a crime to make threats against peoples' lives, so if someone is spotted doing so online then they can expect a visit from the FBI (seen it happen once already - remember "Darin", NorrinRadd ?)

[rogue06]

Yeah, that's the new buzzword --- Kamala was just droning on about "weapons of war". You'll see that repeated over and over again.

"military-style" was one I heard repeated several times this weekend. I wonder if any of these people can provide a list of functional differences between an AR-15 and the average semiautomatic rifle commonly used by hunters.

[seanD]

"military-style" was one I heard repeated several times this weekend. I wonder if any of these people can provide a list of functional differences between an AR-15 and the average semiautomatic rifle commonly used by hunters.

It's just like the term "hate speech." They intentionally use these nebulous terms because they know their political base is dumb for one, and that "hate speech" has a broad range of meanings and can include all speech they don't like, just as "assault weapon" can include any weapon they want it to include, including a bat.

[Alien]

THIS type of nonsense is what REALLY sells guns. It's clear that every time the liberals start their gun grabbing campaigns, gun sales go through the roof.
So maybe she should be sending this letter to herself.

So, let's examine (in general terms) this catch-22 you have set up. There's something that someone perceives as bad and wants to regulate. What to do? Suggest regulations or don't. If you do, it will, temporarily at least, boost what you are trying to suppress as people stockpile whatever it is. If you don't suggest regulations, nothing is going to happen, because there will be no chance of regulations being set up. So from your (CP) pov the answer is to do nothing and put up with the bad thing, whatever it may be.

Pick an example where you do support regulations and explain how you would get round this apparent impasse. My suggestion is that if you are convinced that the regulations are required, then propose them. If it works, the temporary surge will be negated by the regulations. If it doesn't, then at least you tried, and maybe next time you will succeed. In no case give up because people don't like what you are suggesting.

[seanD]

So, let's examine (in general terms) this catch-22 you have set up. There's something that someone perceives as bad and wants to regulate. What to do? Suggest regulations or don't. If you do, it will, temporarily at least, boost what you are trying to suppress as people stockpile whatever it is. If you don't suggest regulations, nothing is going to happen, because there will be no chance of regulations being set up. So from your (CP) pov the answer is to do nothing and put up with the bad thing, whatever it may be.

Pick an example where you do support regulations and explain how you would get round this apparent impasse. My suggestion is that if you are convinced that the regulations are required, then propose them. If it works, the temporary surge will be negated by the regulations. If it doesn't, then at least you tried, and maybe next time you will succeed. In no case give up because people don't like what you are suggesting.

Because their policies fail to pass every time. What's the definition of doing something over and over expecting different results? It likely fails probably because it's a bad look trying to push gun control policy every time there's a mass shooting. It looks gross and opportunistic. Dems also know that even if they managed a miracle to pass something, it would likely get shot down by the courts. So they do it anyway, likely for political strategy, which looks even more disgusting.

[DesertBerean]

Did anyone mention how the shooter was able to buy all his weapons body armor etc? I'm hearing around $6,000 worth...although I understand the body armor wasn't full?

[Cow Poke]

Did anyone mention how the shooter was able to buy all his weapons body armor etc? I'm hearing around $6,000 worth...although I understand the body armor wasn't full?

Several have asked, no solid answers -- supposedly, he used a DEBIT card, which means he had that much money in the bank.

[DesertBerean]

Several have asked, no solid answers -- supposedly, he used a DEBIT card, which means he had that much money in the bank.

Hm, ok.

[Cow Poke]

Somewhat different circumstances, but there was an office rampage shooting in California some 15 years ago. I saw a photo layout of the floor where it happened and it was similar to where I worked at the time. So, I processed the event in my head had it happened at my office; escape or hide or attack - depending on where the shooter came in, how he was armed, where I was at the time, who all was present, etc. Just over and over. I feel I was prepared for that situation had it occurred. I wouldn't need to process much on the fly.

Of course, it's not possible for officers to anticipate every situation, but school shootings (in general) seems like an obvious one.

For Churches, public theaters, etc... one of the BIGGEST problems is people seem to have it fixed in their minds that they have to exit the same door they entered, and if that door is blocked, or is where the attacker is, they're stuck.

ALWAYS look for alternate exits and do what you're saying --- play the scenario --- if bad stuff happened, what would I do, where would I go, etc...

[Cow Poke]

Police unions are certainly a problem. But the wall of blue extends far beyond that.

I never disputed that, Gondy. Sheeeesh!

For example, I may be wrong but I rather doubt that this chief belongs to the same union as the DPS spokesperson who stuck his foot in his mouth about 'well they might have been shot!' if they'd gone in. The unions may well contribute to the Blue Wall, but it's a far more pervasive and insidious problem that goes far deeper than simply police unions. (which I think your last sentence points to - it's far more than just a union thing).

Here's the deal -- and it's really really quite simple. Police, by the very nature of their work, have to trust each other 100% for their very LIVES..... if I get in a bind, and need help, I want other officers to come racing to my aid. If I've ticked them off, or ratted them out, they can simply be busy, or be very slow to respond, or otherwise leave me hanging out to dry.

It's ugly and unfortunate, but that's how it is. My final resignation from my department many years ago was largely because I found myself in a position where I would either have to lie in court or testify against other officers. It STINKS, but it was how it was.

If you have a suggesting for changing that, the world would love to hear it.

[Cow Poke]

I expect any investigation into this fiasco to have an air of "We have carefully examined ourselves and found no wrongdoing."

I really don't think that will wash, and I'll go on record here as saying there will be a number of "this is what went wrong" findings.
Obviously, such things as simply keeping a door closed and locked.
But the whole 'chain of command' thing relative to the designation of an "on scene commander" is already a hot issue.