At least 16 dead in Florida school shooting

[Mark1T]

I was wrong. After reading more last night it seems the standard procedure since Columbine is to enter and engage as soon as shots are fired. I am pretty ignorant on the topic and I was just trying to understand the situation and was unsure if it was either poor leadership, poor protocol, or cowardice. It’s very easy for us to judge police officers who were there and in the situation while we read about it online.

The whole situation is horrible and any sympathy I have for the officer doesn't mean I don’t feel for the families. I have watched my parents deal with the loss of a child for the last 45 years, I am well aware of the affect a loss of a child has on a family.

Nothing is wrong with stating what you believe at the time. I appreciate the message and for posting here.

[latebloomingmom]

I took hunter safety training from enthusiastic Sportsmen. These guys were the most responsible firearms owners I've ever met. If owning a certain type of gun required a number of hours of training from guys like this, they could pick out the bad seeds IMO. You don't need to be licensed clinical board certified psychologist to know crazy and of course HIPAA only applies to health care providers.

I'm not necessarily advocating that this be done, but I think it's not as hard as you make it out to be. I'm not sure why there's such a gap between the data and the stakeholders. I'm guessing if you ask any card carrying member of the NRA if a 19 year old in South Florida buying an AR 15 should be subjected to some kind of vetting process, they would mostly say yes. Common sense still exists. It's not about the guns themselves, but there are statistical indicators that shouldn't be ignored.

I am all for hunter's safety and both my boys went through it but most that get their hands on guns are not the ones that take this course.

I never said it was easy to do...

hahaha...I agree

Exactly! Being around guns in and of itself doesn't make anyone shoot other human beings any more than owning a car makes one want to run people over. It's what's between the ears that is the problem.

amen

my prospective on active shooters is from a university which is a much different and more dangerous scenario than a elementary or high school setting.

For a high school...
There are 4 areas of focus for us; awareness, predictive measures, preventive measures and emergency response. There are ZERO reasons that every member of a school district/ hospital/ large corporate building/ everyone reading this post is not properly trained in emergency response in an active shooter situation. This includes emergency notification systems, this includes the run hide fight training model practiced and practiced and practiced, this includes securing a classroom. These things have been best practices for a good 5 years or so and should be as second nature to these kids and teachers as a fire drill.

The second area to where there is no excuse for in schools are allowing external threats into school. All that is needed for prevention of external threats is people paying attention and people investing the time. Most schools secure the building better when it is empty than they do when there are kids inside. Internal threats are still very difficult and thats where the predictive models are used and implemented but there is no real true identifier for every single case. BUT none of these cases are impulsive, they are all planned out, they are all rehearsed, they are all researched. So the cookie crumbs are there and usually it is just a lack of engagement of the parents, church society to see the crumbs and hand them to the right person so that person can put together the puzzle and intervene.

That's why i say this one was one of the easiest to prevent, people did exactly as we have been training them to do for years... they fed all of the information to the right people and those people failed to assess this child and failed to intervene.

I think most of us would like to see a Preventitive instead of reactionary program put into place into schools that actually works but what to include in that is a topic of contant debate and most schools are scrambling in the aftermath of these shootings trying to figure this out

I can understand that. Which is why the decision shouldn’t be made by the federal government but at the local level, give people the choice. “Arming teachers", is a bad way for President Trump to present it and m I don't think it's accurate for what we want to accomplish. I think "allowing teachers to be armed" is more representative of what the solution should be.

I don't want a teacher forced to have a gun against their will, who will be a liability rather than an asset.

I want teachers who are CCW holders to be allowed to carry in schools and not make a big deal about who is carrying or not- people shouldn't know. Let them self select into it.

concealed carry is not a new idea for school staff and I am not against it but it comes with risks and many feel that by bringing a gun into a school it will increase the chances of a student getting ahold of it and using it

[7Seconds]

concealed carry is not a new idea for school staff and I am not against it but it comes with risks and many feel that by bringing a gun into a school it will increase the chances of a student getting ahold of it and using it

If we can agree on the idea that teachers with CHLs should be allowed to carry and can be an effective deterrent to shooters then a easy compromise can be found on the "how".

Install safes on teachers desks that have a life alert feature that auto calls 911 any time it's opened during school hours and places the school on lockdown. Teachers place the firearm into the safe before school officially starts, keep the firearm in the safe, are able to protect themselves effectively should an emergency arise, and it will auto call 911. Sounds like a great system and compromise to me. I am sure there are other ways as well.

[Old-Time-Lifter]

If we can agree on the idea that teachers with CHLs should be allowed to carry and can be an effective deterrent to shooters then a easy compromise can be found on the "how".

Install safes on teachers desks that have a life alert feature that auto calls 911 any time it's opened during school hours and places the school on lockdown. Teachers place the firearm into the safe before school officially starts, keep the firearm in the safe, are able to protect themselves effectively should an emergency arise, and it will auto call 911. Sounds like a great system and compromise to me. I am sure there are other ways as well.

That's not a horrible idea.

[Brackneyc]

concealed carry is not a new idea for school staff and I am not against it but it comes with risks and many feel that by bringing a gun into a school it will increase the chances of a student getting ahold of it and using it

Kids who want guns can get guns. We have more than enough evidence to support this. A teacher having access to a defensive weapon is no more dangerous than the average cop having it. Most cops go through their entire careers having not shot and killed someone.

Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

[latebloomingmom]

I am not against it C
seems like we would have gotten on board with this one by now
not really a gun free zone
when the kids are bringing them in

[Mark1T]

concealed carry is not a new idea for school staff and I am not against it but it comes with risks and many feel that by bringing a gun into a school it will increase the chances of a student getting ahold of it and using it

There is nothing wrong with being concerned. There is risk. There is always risk. But, we have to weigh those risks against the risk of a school being shot up.

Qualified and trained teachers would not have to worry about a student getting hold of the gun, unless the teacher broke policy by laying it around.

What solution is worth the risk that saving lives or some lives?

[Brackneyc]

There is nothing wrong with being concerned. There is risk. There is always risk. But, we have to weigh those risks against the risk of a school being shot up.

Qualified and trained teachers would not have to worry about a student getting hold of the gun, unless the teacher broke policy by laying it around.

What solution is worth the risk that saving lives or some lives?

I’m concerned as hell. I work in a school. I know the difficulty of securing a large building full of kids. Not a single day goes by when we aren’t thinking about it, and talking about it, and on some level, preparing for it.

I am the ALICE/response drill coordinator for my building.

Trust me, I’m concerned about it.

[wesleysh21]

If we can agree on the idea that teachers with CHLs should be allowed to carry and can be an effective deterrent to shooters then a easy compromise can be found on the "how".

Install safes on teachers desks that have a life alert feature that auto calls 911 any time it's opened during school hours and places the school on lockdown. Teachers place the firearm into the safe before school officially starts, keep the firearm in the safe, are able to protect themselves effectively should an emergency arise, and it will auto call 911. Sounds like a great system and compromise to me. I am sure there are other ways as well.

If a particular teacher wants to have a weapon in the classroom, by all means it should be entertained. If not, that should be their right as well. For me, I just want AT LEAST 1 gun in the school. It would be preferable to have 4-6, but even a single gun can potentially change the dynamics of the situation. I’ve watched enough “shootouts” online at this point that I realize if you are being attacked by an amateur, just firing in their general direction can buy time for the police to get there.

If a school doesn’t want guns in the hands of the teachers, that’s cool. I can see the safety concerns for having them in the classroom. But I want at least 1 gun kept in the principle’s office or somewhere like that. Maybe Mr. Jones the PE teacher can’t carry his own gun, but he knows where to go get one if hell breaks loose.

I was wrong. After reading more last night it seems the standard procedure since Columbine is to enter and engage as soon as shots are fired. I am pretty ignorant on the topic and I was just trying to understand the situation and was unsure if it was either poor leadership, poor protocol, or cowardice. It’s very easy for us to judge police officers who were there and in the situation while we read about it online.

The whole situation is horrible and any sympathy I have for the officer doesn't mean I don’t feel for the families. I have watched my parents deal with the loss of a child for the last 45 years, I am well aware of the affect a loss of a child has on a family.

I am not necessarily comfortable with a single officer rushing into that situation. He has no clue how many gunmen there are or what the situation is inside the building. I’m okay with him waiting for backup. In this case my understanding is 3 additional officers arrived on the scene and they posted up outside as well.

[Mark1T]

I’m concerned as hell. I work in a school. I know the difficulty of securing a large building full of kids. Not a single day goes by when we aren’t thinking about it, and talking about it, and on some level, preparing for it.

I am the ALICE/response drill coordinator for my building.

Trust me, I’m concerned about it.

I don't think anyone can argue with that.

[whatevergirl]

There is nothing wrong with being concerned. There is risk. There is always risk. But, we have to weigh those risks against the risk of a school being shot up.

Qualified and trained teachers would not have to worry about a student getting hold of the gun, unless the teacher broke policy by laying it around.

What solution is worth the risk that saving lives or some lives?

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

[Brackneyc]

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

Maybe, maybe not. If they do nothing, we are right where we are now. If they do something, maybe less, or no kids will die.

Idk the answer. But trying to control the actions of mind crazed individuals with more laws isn’t the answer. This I am convinced of.

[Mark1T]

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

A lot of incorrect assumptions.

[Plateauplower]

Kids who want guns can get guns. We have more than enough evidence to support this. A teacher having access to a defensive weapon is no more dangerous than the average cop having it. Most cops go through their entire careers having not shot and killed someone.

Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Actually I’ve seen statistics for CCL vs police on a variety of things. CCL have much better hit ratio, less innocent bystanders, and overall CCL holders are more law abiding than police in terms of arrests of CCL holders vs active police. The hit ratio and innocent bystander ratio is partially better because of rules of engagement. A CCL holder is typically shooting someone at feet away rather than yards away, so there’s that.

[mtpockets]

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

I'm not disputing your point, but I think those cops may have acted differently if they had found themselves suddenly closer to the business end of an AR like those teachers did. I'm not defending those cowards just pointing out that teachers would be right there in the action and in a position where reacting beats the alternative.

Some of the Teachers in Florida were hero's without weapons, I think they would have done everything possible with a weapon

[whatevergirl]

Maybe, maybe not. If they do nothing, we are right where we are now. If they do something, maybe less, or no kids will die.

Idk the answer. But trying to control the actions of mind crazed individuals with more laws isn’t the answer. This I am convinced of.

Think you're right on this.

A lot of incorrect assumptions.

I saw your pre-edited post

Not saying that no lives could be saved with armed teachers on property in the event something like this would happen again, but, I think it's an unfair expectation to place on teachers, as well.

Actually I’ve seen statistics for CCL vs police on a variety of things. CCL have much better hit ratio, less innocent bystanders, and overall CCL holders are more law abiding than police in terms of arrests of CCL holders vs active police. The hit ratio and innocent bystander ratio is partially better because of rules of engagement. A CCL holder is typically shooting someone at feet away rather than yards away, so there’s that.

That makes sense.

I'm not disputing your point, but I think those cops may have acted differently if they had found themselves suddenly closer to the business end of an AR like those teachers did. I'm not defending those cowards just pointing out that teachers would be right there in the action and in a position where reacting beats the alternative.

I completely empathize with the cops that were ''hiding,'' they're human...and fear is a human trait. But, that's their job, to protect the public. It's just scary that we can't trust the FBI or police in a situation like this. Both failed.

[mtpockets]

Think you're right on this.

I saw your pre-edited post

Not saying that no lives could be saved with armed teachers on property in the event something like this would happen again, but, I think it's an unfair expectation to place on teachers, as well.

That makes sense.

I completely empathize with the cops that were ''hiding,'' they're human...and fear is a human trait. .

No empathy from me, they were selfish gutless cowards who put their lives ahead of innocent children, lives they took an oath to protect.

[7Seconds]

Not saying that no lives could be saved with armed teachers on property in the event something like this would happen again, but, I think it's an unfair expectation to place on teachers, as well.

There is no one serious arguing teachers should be obligated to defend others with lethal force or their lives. The goal is to allow others with the ability and desire to protect themselves and innocent children to do so.

The goal is to stop murder (mass or otherwise), one of the best ways to do that is empower good people, not disarm them.

[Mark1T]

I saw your pre-edited post

LOL. I kinda of figured ya did I don't wanna hurt no white girl's feelin's <3

Not saying that no lives could be saved with armed teachers on property in the event something like this would happen again, but, I think it's an unfair expectation to place on teachers, as well.

Well, I appreciate your passion, but I need to spend more time on my answer to your previous most interesting post

[Bando]

you would think at least 1 of the 3 was willing to prove he was ballsier than the other 2 !

The line between coward and hero is pretty thin sometimes.

[Bando]

gonna save most of my opinions until I get a time line of the shootings and when these other 3 showed up..

I saw a pretty good one with a map, it was right down to the seconds. If the first officer had just rushed in and ran towards the gunshots he would have saved 3 or 4 people.

as I understand...the shootings in general only last for a brief time and the response time is generally about the same (maybe quicker)...

no doubt they should have hit the ground running and went directly inside and should be let go..

I only question how effective they may or may not have been after all the damage "may" have been done...

The killer did the most damage early, he was hunting out victims near the end, they were hunkered down pretty well at that point. He dropped his gun and tried to blend in with the students running out.

[Karl_Hungus]

Maybe, maybe not. If they do nothing, we are right where we are now. If they do something, maybe less, or no kids will die.

Idk the answer. But trying to control the actions of mind crazed individuals with more laws isn’t the answer. This I am convinced of.

^^ This. I suspect that if we get an instance of two of a would-be shooter getting shot before a rampage, it might change the perception among these nutjobs that schools are easy targets. By the same token, if it is known that some teachers are armed, it could stop shootings before they ever happen (due to the deterrence factor).

[Fishman15]

^^ This. I suspect that if we get an instance of two of a would-be shooter getting shot before a rampage, it might change the perception among these nutjobs that schools are easy targets. By the same token, if it is known that some teachers are armed, it could stop shootings before they ever happen (due to the deterrence factor).

The deterrence factor will be the best case scenario although it would be impossible to measure just how good it was working. If a school isn't having any instances of shootings, the right will say it's because there are armed teachers and the left will say it's because bumpstocks were banned. lol

[Corbi]

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

A lot of incorrect assumptions.

This ^^^ Why do people think life is like a Dirty Harry or Lethal Weapon movie where the cops are always at the range? Most of the CCL holders I know spend far more time honing their abilities at the range then your average cop does.

Actually I’ve seen statistics for CCL vs police on a variety of things. CCL have much better hit ratio, less innocent bystanders, and overall CCL holders are more law abiding than police in terms of arrests of CCL holders vs active police. The hit ratio and innocent bystander ratio is partially better because of rules of engagement. A CCL holder is typically shooting someone at feet away rather than yards away, so there’s that.

Also this^^^

[Mark1T]

Like those four cops did? They're considerably more trained and ''qualified'' than any of these teachers would have been, and they did nothing. I think that many people from what I've seen on the news, and even on here, seem to believe this idea that everyday, average teachers after a gun class or two, will somehow turn into CIA agents, protecting entire schools at a moment's notice. And everyone will escape unscathed. It doesn't work that way.

Going purposefully overboard seems to be popular these days. I am sorry, but it also seems so disingenuous with the only intent to support a political position or subliminally attack personally. No problems are solved this way.

[Old-Time-Lifter]

Going purposefully overboard seems to be popular these days. I am sorry, but it also seems so disingenuous with the only intent to support a political position or subliminally attack personally. No problems are solved this way.

x2...

[GuyJin]

Here's a dumba** question, and I'm not trolling. If the police--who are ostensibly proficient in sidearms use (or are supposed to be)--have something like a 20% hit rate vs armed suspects, how is an armed teacher who probably has less experience at a firing range/simulated combat practice going to improve things? The way I see it, you'll have a lot of screaming, panicky kids--very understandable--running around/cowering in fear, and a teacher who may freeze up faster than a police officer would. Or, if they loose a shot or three, they're more apt to wound or kill one of the kids. I'm not against having a gun, but I don't see the need for teachers to be packing heat. I can see the need for armed, professional personnel patrolling the schools.

As a sidenote, the FBI really screwed the pooch on this one. Granted, they were hamstrung in that they couldn't really arrest Cruz without due cause--and threatening other kids should have been sufficient to haul his butt in at the very least or get him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation--but it is what it is. I wish I had the answer to this. I don't.

[Fishman15]

Here's a dumba** question, and I'm not trolling. If the police--who are ostensibly proficient in sidearms use (or are supposed to be)--have something like a 20% hit rate vs armed suspects, how is an armed teacher who probably has less experience at a firing range/simulated combat practice going to improve things? The way I see it, you'll have a lot of screaming, panicky kids--very understandable--running around/cowering in fear, and a teacher who may freeze up faster than a police officer would. Or, if they loose a shot or three, they're more apt to wound or kill one of the kids. I'm not against having a gun, but I don't see the need for teachers to be packing heat. I can see the need for armed, professional personnel patrolling the schools.

As a sidenote, the FBI really screwed the pooch on this one. Granted, they were hamstrung in that they couldn't really arrest Cruz without due cause--and threatening other kids should have been sufficient to haul his butt in at the very least or get him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation--but it is what it is. I wish I had the answer to this. I don't.

I could possibly see in the future some new teachers being hired as teachers/security so they would have to be trained to do both before being hired. Like you, I don't really have the answer for this but if your goal is to stop the shooter immediately you are going to have to have it done from people on site. One security guy walking around the school grounds isn't going to cut it.

[Old-Time-Lifter]

Here's a dumba** question, and I'm not trolling. If the police--who are ostensibly proficient in sidearms use (or are supposed to be)--have something like a 20% hit rate vs armed suspects, how is an armed teacher who probably has less experience at a firing range/simulated combat practice going to improve things? The way I see it, you'll have a lot of screaming, panicky kids--very understandable--running around/cowering in fear, and a teacher who may freeze up faster than a police officer would. Or, if they loose a shot or three, they're more apt to wound or kill one of the kids. I'm not against having a gun, but I don't see the need for teachers to be packing heat. I can see the need for armed, professional personnel patrolling the schools.

As a sidenote, the FBI really screwed the pooch on this one. Granted, they were hamstrung in that they couldn't really arrest Cruz without due cause--and threatening other kids should have been sufficient to haul his butt in at the very least or get him to undergo a psychiatric evaluation--but it is what it is. I wish I had the answer to this. I don't.

Some officers rarely fire their weapons. Most ccw carriers in contrast shoot regularly.

[poundXpound]

It is my understanding that in many rural areas of the US kids are raised around guns, and are taught to use them at very young age. And somehow this doesn't cause them to go on school shootings. Who knows, maybe because they are taught gun safety and responsible handling? Maybe because in rural areas they still put some premium on values?


Who am I kidding? It's GUNNNNNZZZZZ!!!

You are correct. My dad had a gun cabinet in the basement with a number of shotguns and boxes of shells. It was never locked. Both my parents worked and when we were old enough (pre-teen) to be home alone during summer vacation, we never even thought about touching those guns, let alone taking and using them somewhere.