I think it depends largely upon the department as far as expectations regarding whether they move in immediately during an active shooter situation. When I was a police officer, our chief made it explicitly clear to us that we would move in quickly to gain a foothold on the interior of the building and attempt to direct people outside the building, gleaning intelligence on description and whereabouts of the shooter(s), and passing to follow-on units to coordinate the assault. We treated it very much like a military urban combat environment. Our chief said very bluntly that anyone who hesitated to make entry would be disciplined, because the expectation of us was to put an end to the situation as rapidly as possible. This was also in Texas. Therefore, making a blanket statement about all law enforcement entities as if they are all the same is not helpful, much the same as the fact that it's not helpful to make a blanket policy about all shooting situations as if they're all the same. There is always nuance.
Give it a read and mull it over. Everyone has opinions and strong feelings, but are oftentimes incapable of objectivity and seeing things through a different lens.
I totally agree with the author's assessment on the 2A considerations involved in this discussion. I don't agree with Russell Brand's take completely either - but I'm willing to hear him out. At the end of the day, no one seems to truly have any idea whatsoever on how to solve complex issues like those we face today. But, if something works for you (or doesn't), share the knowledge you gained from the experience. All I ask is for people to talk about it, discuss it at length, and have an open mind and open heart when it comes to searching for answers and meaning in everything we're experiencing.
I did criminal defense law for 20 years. I've come into contact with people and situations which the vast majority of people never have any exposure to, and God willing, they won't, and I've seen things which I can't un-see. The guy who wrote that piece is disgusting, he's unfit to be a cop, he has unbridled contempt for those people who aren't cops - and he may be on a force which lets people get shot and die, and then he comes in and takes the pictures and does the reports. I've lived in a place like that, with a pussy police force too afraid to come in after dark - and in the daytime, they came in in armored vehicles - usually three of them - and came out locked and loaded and pointing their guns at everyone they saw. In the daytime, they were bullies, after dark, yellow cowards. I'm used to hearing automatic weapons fire overhead, too, and diving down behind cover if I could find it, and that wasn't Afghanistan, it was Over the Rhine in Cincinnati, before it got gentrified, and the Crips were effectively the police force, when they weren't shooting it out with the Bloods. Actually, if you demonstrated that you were worthy of respect, you could walk down the street - down Ravine Street, where Charles Manson and Glenn Danzig grew up - at two in the morning and be perfectly safe - if you had situational awareness... And I've been living in a place with good policing right now and have been for 17 years, and it's a lot less stress...
What happened in Uvalde was despicable cowardice by the local police - all of them that showed up and corraled parents whose kids were being shot dead or wounded. They ought to be fired and relieved of pensions and benefits, but I'll bet they have a really strong police union, which means that bad cops face no consequences and officer discipline is non-existent. If I were a citizen there, I'd be up in arms. My opinions come from my personal experiences over the years, so there's that. There are some real assholes out there, and the only way to deal with them is force - most people have no idea, you might. And if they're guilty, and want a jury trial, it's their right - and it's my duty to protect and uphold the Bill of Rights... and my duty to give zealous representation, and not to allow my client to lie to the court or participate in lying to the court. It's interesting, but sometimes it's a bitch kitty. And that's enough for now, it's getting late.
Just a bit more - my response under fire is just weird to me, I had panic attacks before tests in school - and in my doctoral dissertation defense - but with bullets snapping overhead, I'm calm and collected, time slows way down, can't hear much of anything else - it's the strangest thing... Not that I'd want to repeat it...
Sure, it depends on the police culture: the department, the chief, the district attorney, and the government of the town, state, and even at the federal level. In the case of Uvalde, it was a federal border patrol agent who went in and killed the shooter. So it's a gamble - does your area have a police culture which acts to take the responsibility to protect the population from armed assault, or does that responsibility devolve to the local citizens - or in the absolute worst case as seen in Uvalde, does the local police culture refuse to come to the aid of individuals or groups - as is their legal right - and prevent citizens from protecting their children - which is to me of questionable legality, if not morality, since case law states that schools do not have a custodial relationship to their students, nor do they have that duty of care.
What is helpful is to clarify the situation, so that citizens know where they stand - and can make funding decisions accordingly. If the police force in Uvalde had made it generally known that they would not take action unless officer safety was absolutely assured, as seems to have been the case (and for the Parkland shooting, and the one at the department store in El Paso), then citizens would have a clear idea about their safety and that of their children, and take action accordingly.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯... heartbreaking.
I think it depends largely upon the department as far as expectations regarding whether they move in immediately during an active shooter situation. When I was a police officer, our chief made it explicitly clear to us that we would move in quickly to gain a foothold on the interior of the building and attempt to direct people outside the building, gleaning intelligence on description and whereabouts of the shooter(s), and passing to follow-on units to coordinate the assault. We treated it very much like a military urban combat environment. Our chief said very bluntly that anyone who hesitated to make entry would be disciplined, because the expectation of us was to put an end to the situation as rapidly as possible. This was also in Texas. Therefore, making a blanket statement about all law enforcement entities as if they are all the same is not helpful, much the same as the fact that it's not helpful to make a blanket policy about all shooting situations as if they're all the same. There is always nuance.
Here's another viewpoint, for nuance:
https://grahamfactor.substack.com/p/a-brief-note-for-keyboard-warriors?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2&s=r
Give it a read and mull it over. Everyone has opinions and strong feelings, but are oftentimes incapable of objectivity and seeing things through a different lens.
I totally agree with the author's assessment on the 2A considerations involved in this discussion. I don't agree with Russell Brand's take completely either - but I'm willing to hear him out. At the end of the day, no one seems to truly have any idea whatsoever on how to solve complex issues like those we face today. But, if something works for you (or doesn't), share the knowledge you gained from the experience. All I ask is for people to talk about it, discuss it at length, and have an open mind and open heart when it comes to searching for answers and meaning in everything we're experiencing.
I did criminal defense law for 20 years. I've come into contact with people and situations which the vast majority of people never have any exposure to, and God willing, they won't, and I've seen things which I can't un-see. The guy who wrote that piece is disgusting, he's unfit to be a cop, he has unbridled contempt for those people who aren't cops - and he may be on a force which lets people get shot and die, and then he comes in and takes the pictures and does the reports. I've lived in a place like that, with a pussy police force too afraid to come in after dark - and in the daytime, they came in in armored vehicles - usually three of them - and came out locked and loaded and pointing their guns at everyone they saw. In the daytime, they were bullies, after dark, yellow cowards. I'm used to hearing automatic weapons fire overhead, too, and diving down behind cover if I could find it, and that wasn't Afghanistan, it was Over the Rhine in Cincinnati, before it got gentrified, and the Crips were effectively the police force, when they weren't shooting it out with the Bloods. Actually, if you demonstrated that you were worthy of respect, you could walk down the street - down Ravine Street, where Charles Manson and Glenn Danzig grew up - at two in the morning and be perfectly safe - if you had situational awareness... And I've been living in a place with good policing right now and have been for 17 years, and it's a lot less stress...
What happened in Uvalde was despicable cowardice by the local police - all of them that showed up and corraled parents whose kids were being shot dead or wounded. They ought to be fired and relieved of pensions and benefits, but I'll bet they have a really strong police union, which means that bad cops face no consequences and officer discipline is non-existent. If I were a citizen there, I'd be up in arms. My opinions come from my personal experiences over the years, so there's that. There are some real assholes out there, and the only way to deal with them is force - most people have no idea, you might. And if they're guilty, and want a jury trial, it's their right - and it's my duty to protect and uphold the Bill of Rights... and my duty to give zealous representation, and not to allow my client to lie to the court or participate in lying to the court. It's interesting, but sometimes it's a bitch kitty. And that's enough for now, it's getting late.
Just a bit more - my response under fire is just weird to me, I had panic attacks before tests in school - and in my doctoral dissertation defense - but with bullets snapping overhead, I'm calm and collected, time slows way down, can't hear much of anything else - it's the strangest thing... Not that I'd want to repeat it...
with you 100% .
Sure, it depends on the police culture: the department, the chief, the district attorney, and the government of the town, state, and even at the federal level. In the case of Uvalde, it was a federal border patrol agent who went in and killed the shooter. So it's a gamble - does your area have a police culture which acts to take the responsibility to protect the population from armed assault, or does that responsibility devolve to the local citizens - or in the absolute worst case as seen in Uvalde, does the local police culture refuse to come to the aid of individuals or groups - as is their legal right - and prevent citizens from protecting their children - which is to me of questionable legality, if not morality, since case law states that schools do not have a custodial relationship to their students, nor do they have that duty of care.
What is helpful is to clarify the situation, so that citizens know where they stand - and can make funding decisions accordingly. If the police force in Uvalde had made it generally known that they would not take action unless officer safety was absolutely assured, as seems to have been the case (and for the Parkland shooting, and the one at the department store in El Paso), then citizens would have a clear idea about their safety and that of their children, and take action accordingly.