Another School Shooting

[Shockm]

That's not at all what my statement says. But the bad ones like Chauvin are protected more often than not by their thin blue line family which spreads some of the blame around. Most cops mean well. Most cops also back the bad cops be sure they have an us vs them mentality which leads to public distrust and only empowers the bad cops who will continue to abuse their power. If they truly policed their own and took care of thr **** heads law enforcement would be in a much better place.

No, you didn't mention Chauvin, but you talked about policemen in terms of "they", and "people defend them even when they are wrong", etc. I defend them because the ones I know are good people that do a dangerous job. I don't appreciate it when many people criticize (both police and military fighting overseas), but would never do that job themselves, often because of that danger.

If you go back to the Floyd incident, most people (everyone that I knew) said that Chauvin was wrong. Many police departments, and Congressional Republicans led by Tim Scott were in favor of reigning in police, and even changing how police unions protect bad cops. However, the Democrats wouldn't go for the reforms that were suggested because of politics.

Bad policemen need to be fired. The police I personally know are good people. But you fail to admit that being a policeman is a dangerous job. Even just wearing the uniform can bring out a person who has a problem with authority to assassinate them. Police families (wives and children) that I know, often have their police scanner on, just to keep track of their loved ones. They worry that they won't come home that night.

Another issue is that even the most righteous people in All Jobs, make mistakes, and police are no different. There is no room for racist cops and they should be "drummed" out of the police department immediately when that is known (with verified proof), not just a charge for example by a criminal, but there needs to be a little room for mistakes (not racism).

I agree with a lot of what you said. However, you seem to have it in for cops. How about a little "grace" for the 99% good cops we have instead of of the vitriol for the few bad ones.

[Kung Wu]

You shouldn't be sent off to die for your country. Or for other people's countries that have no real importance to Americans

Agreed. The smaller a country is (population wise), the lower the age needs to be to join the forces. 21 should be the new bar for the US military.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Once again this issue is becoming more about the politics and less about addressing real issues. Seems like this is yet another instance where we will lose sight of the real task at hand to focus on self-serving grandstanding. From Beto (Robert Francis) and Schumer to Abbott and Scott and all in between. No real solutions just bickering and selfishness. We should all be ashamed...

[SubGod22]

No, you didn't mention Chauvin, but you talked about policemen in terms of "they", and "people defend them even when they are wrong", etc. I defend them because the ones I know are good people that do a dangerous job. I don't appreciate it when many people criticize (both police and military fighting overseas), but would never do that job themselves, often because of that danger.

If you go back to the Floyd incident, most people (everyone that I knew) said that Chauvin was wrong. Many police departments, and Congressional Republicans led by Tim Scott were in favor of reigning in police, and even changing how police unions protect bad cops. However, the Democrats wouldn't go for the reforms that were suggested because of politics.

Bad policemen need to be fired. The police I personally know are good people. But you fail to admit that being a policeman is a dangerous job. Even just wearing the uniform can bring out a person who has a problem with authority to assassinate them. Police families (wives and children) that I know, often have their police scanner on, just to keep track of their loved ones. They worry that they won't come home that night.

Another issue is that even the most righteous people in All Jobs, make mistakes, and police are no different. There is no room for racist cops and they should be "drummed" out of the police department immediately when that is known (with verified proof), not just a charge for example by a criminal, but there needs to be a little room for mistakes (not racism).

I agree with a lot of what you said. However, you seem to have it in for cops. How about a little "grace" for the 99% good cops we have instead of of the vitriol for the few bad ones.

They. As in those that were at the scene. They didn't give a ****. And I saw a lot of people defend them.

I've said many ****ing times over many threads on such topics that most officers are in it for the right reasons. They still protect bad cops, or their departments do, way too much. I'm also friends with a number of officers, including a couple chiefs of police. You either have never been involved in any of these discussions on here, have a horrible memory, or are blatantly obtuse about it. I don't know which it is but I'm not going to let you paint me with a broad bullshit brush when I've been very consistent on a number of different threads about this.

Being a police officer isn't inherently dangerous. Statistics show that. Some areas are worse than others. Most cops don't have a reason to fear for their lives at any point during their careers. Some do. Some put themselves in bad situations, or their departments do, that are unnecessary. I've had police friends that completely agree with that and have adamantly opposed certain actions and activities that seem to be standard practice in some places.

I defend good cops. I call out bad ones.

The cops in Texas this week were cowardly assholes that didn't do ****. They were more focused on parents wanting to protect their kids than actually protecting kids. Some of those that died this week may have survived if they weren't left there to bleed out while these "brave officers" avoided going in to protect or save them. And I see a lot of people calling them brave and heroic because heaven forbid we have actual standards on such things. A badge doesn't make you brave. It doesn't make you heroic. You either are or aren't and the badge means nothing in that regard.

[SB Shock]

Once again this issue is becoming more about the politics and less about addressing real issues. Seems like this is yet another instance where we will lose sight of the real task at hand to focus on self-serving grandstanding. From Beto (Robert Francis) and Schumer to Abbott and Scott and all in between. No real solutions just bickering and selfishness.

What do you think the solution is?

We should all be ashamed...

Why should I be ashamed? Is there something I did?

This is just leftest mumbo jumbo playbook rhetoric.

[shock]

OK, McCandless.

Lol. I had to look that up. You are calling me John Wayne, right?

This happened a few miles from me.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/05/20/us/alaska-bear-mauling-trnd/index.html

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

What do you think the solution is?



Why should I be ashamed? Is there something I did?

This is just leftest mumbo jumbo playbook rhetoric.

Leftist??? LOL!!! How cute.

Not blaming anyone but our woefully inept politicians. Maybe ashamed wasn't the right choice of words but don't get all ruffled there with your assumptions.

I don't know exactly what the solution is but I know its not pointing fingers. I am fully behind the 2nd amendment and don't advocate any changes to the rights and freedoms it protects. Please do some research on my posts before coming on here all puffed up slick.

I would support stricter background checks but most of all I think resources need to be put in to mental health treatments and in particular identifying early signs in youth. I think that is the single biggest root cause of this madness. Also, apparently police need to be trained to get their a$$es in to the building when there is an active shooter. You would think this would be self explanatory but I guess not.

[shock]

Leftist??? LOL!!! How cute.

Not blaming anyone but our woefully inept politicians. Maybe ashamed wasn't the right choice of words but don't get all ruffled there with your assumptions.

I don't know exactly what the solution is but I know its not pointing fingers. I am fully behind the 2nd amendment and don't advocate any changes to the rights and freedoms it protects. Please do some research on my posts before coming on here all puffed up slick.

I would support stricter background checks but most of all I think resources need to be put in to mental health treatments and in particular identifying early signs in youth. I think that is the single biggest root cause of this madness. Also, apparently police need to be trained to get their a$$es in to the building when there is an active shooter. You would think this would be self explanatory but I guess not.

When you say stricter background checks, what exactly do you mean? What specifically would you include that isn’t?

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

When you say stricter background checks, what exactly do you mean? What specifically would you include that isn’t?

That is a broad question. I think a couple of areas that can be enhanced would be universal background checks and closing of loopholes. I think some version of a red flag law might be a good idea as well. I think there needs to be expanded methods to identify when someone is a potential risk. This is a hard one for me to swallow as I have always been on the side of more loose restrictions, but I think it's time to at least explore ways to enhance these checks. Now, obviously this is not going to stop gun violence as the majority of those who perpetrate gun violence obtain their guns illegally. But as a legal gun owner I would have no issue if it took me 10 days to clear a background check rather than 7 and if I felt the new enhancements make sense.

One case in particular of the background check flaws is the Charleston shooter. The seller of the gun never caught the dudes previous arrest because the wrong arresting agency was listed in the records and after three days he was able to sell the idiot the gun.

[BOBB]

The real timeline is starting to emerge. What an absolute clusterfack of indecision, ineptitude, and cowardice. As SHOCKvalue said, these officers can no longer live in this community. They will be despised forever.

[ShockerFever]

This incident has very little to do with gun control and more to do with authoritative ineptitude. It’s pretty obvious that there were several routine steps that could have and should’ve been addressed that could have prevented or significantly reduced the magnitude of this tragedy. And that doesn’t even address the mental health/broken home aspect of it. Harsher gun laws or not, that has nothing to do with this instance. This loon was gonna get his weapons either way.

It’s embarrassing that politicians have used this tragedy to push their stupid ass agendas that have nothing to do with what happened. They’re about as slimy and sick as the police officers that failed the community.

[Ted Lasso's Neighbor]

Current breakdown of the timeline from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/9952923002/

Texas Department of Public Safety chief details timeline


The gunman crashed his vehicle into a ditch near the school at 11:28 a.m. and began firing after two men from a nearby funeral home approached, according to a timeline McCraw detailed Friday. A school resource officer arrived at the school but confronted a teacher, not the shooter, at the back of the school, McCraw said.

The gunman fired shots at the school, then he entered the building through a door a teacher had left propped open and began shooting into the adjoining classrooms where the massacre occurred at 11:33 a.m., McCraw said. At least 100 rounds were fired, investigators determined based on audio evidence.

Three police officers from the Uvalde Police Department entered the school within two minutes and were followed by four others, three from the police department and one sheriff's deputy, McCraw said.

Two of the officers who first entered the school received grazing wounds from the suspect in an initial encounter with him, and after that, police did not engage the suspect for over an hour, according to McCraw's timeline.

The gunman fired at 11:37 a.m., 11:38 a.m., 11:40 a.m. and 11:44 a.m., McCraw said. More police arrived by 11:51 a.m. and by 12:03 p.m. — as many as 19 police officers were in the school hallway, he added. Before they breached, officers acquired keys from a janitor because the two classroom doors were locked, McCraw said.

Members of the Border Patrol Tactical Unit arrived at 12:15 p.m. At 12:21, the same time McCraw said the suspect is believed to have fired at the door, police moved down the hallway. They breached and killed the suspect at 12:50 p.m. in Room 111, McCraw said.

[AZ Shocker]

How is it that Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and I'm assuming most social media platforms can have algorithms in place to censor certain key words in a person's post when the post is generally politically worded...BUT the same type of technology isn't being used properly to identify these demons posting about what their about to do??? Maybe work on that some more and send out a "red flag" team to intervene that individual before its too late.

[SB Shock]

That is a broad question. I think a couple of areas that can be enhanced would be universal background checks and closing of loopholes.

Do you even know what a universal background check is?

It is a national gun registry. And the only thing it affects is law abiding citizens as criminals don't do any type of background checks generally.


What loop holes are you talking about?

I think some version of a red flag law might be a good idea as well.

Pre-crime.

I think there needs to be expanded methods to identify when someone is a potential risk.

How would this be accomplished and what would be the guidelines?

Now, obviously this is not going to stop gun violence as the majority of those who perpetrate gun violence obtain their guns illegally.

So you are proposing a solution that you admit is actually not solution.

But as a legal gun owner I would have no issue if it took me 10 days to clear a background check rather than 7 and if I felt the new enhancements make sense.

Why does in your world a background check need to take 7 or even 10 days. Background checks are almost instantaneous. You are either eligible or you are not. What does the 7 or 10 days buy you? Do you think the Government is going to allocate an FBI agent to go to your neighbors and interview them?

One case in particular of the background check flaws is the Charleston shooter. The seller of the gun never caught the dudes previous arrest because the wrong arresting agency was listed in the records and after three days he was able to sell the idiot the gun.

How does anything you proposed solve the issue of government incompetence?

[SubGod22]

How is it that Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and I'm assuming most social media platforms can have algorithms in place to censor certain key words in a person's post when the post is generally politically worded...BUT the same type of technology isn't being used properly to identify these demons posting about what their about to do??? Maybe work on that some more and send out a "red flag" team to intervene that individual before its too late.

Do we trust social media to do this and do it effectively and not without an agenda?

I haven't followed a lot of this closely. I know the shooter had a long history of issues in multiple areas that were well known to pretty much everyone, so I'm not sure how FB or whoever could have done anything. But had he posted stuff online about doing something like this? I know some shooters will upload something right before they do something, which wouldn't give much time to prevent it. Are their cases of people posting things over long periods that would be obvious? Or do these posts just become obvious after the fact? I'm not trying to be an ass, I'm generally curious. I know after the fact certain things can look a lot worse than they did before, because you know of a particular outcome. But I'm guessing there are people who vent or post some bullshit that may be horrible that haven't done anything and probably wouldn't, but their posts may look similar to or even worse than some of the things that these shooters may post.

I simply have never cared much about the shooters in this regard and only hear things in passing most of the time. I may catch something in an article here and there as well but I definitely don't spend time in researching them, but I'm sure some do. I do know that a lot of PDs monitor social media, especially those they know or feel may be an issue at some point. I'm not entirely sure that's a good thing in all cases, but if you post publicly that's on you. And for the record, most of my social media posts are public. Spreading the word of liberty and the love of Shelties that all that come across it. As well as a lot of Shocker talk.

Anytime I hear Red Flag in cases like this I approach it cautiously. What you're talking about is a little different than some of the horrible Red Flag Laws we've seen in some areas, that have been weaponized by people with agendas against law abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong but then have to jump through numerous hoops and probably pay way too much in "processing fees" or some sort to get their guns back. But we should always be careful. Some say if it stops just one bad guy it's worth it, but the countless others it negatively impacts may disagree and trusting big tech to not politicize or weaponize such a thing is a trust bridge I'm not ready to travel.