Jump to content

[News/Updates] Mass Shooting at Robb Elementary Uvalde - 5/24/2022


Ghost of LL

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Eastwood said:

Really fucking tired of this argument. If you aren’t willing to roll out of bed, put on the uniform, punch into work, and patrol your area with not only the realization, but the expectation, that any random day will be the day that you need to step in and risk your life to save others, then you shouldn’t be a cop. Period. Full stop. Don’t beat society over the head for the last 4 years about how selfless cops are and how much they are risking and how much their families sacrifice and then create hypotheticals about the how and why sitting outside of a building full of dying children to wait for the best opportunity to intervene was the better option.

Children died mere yards away from their parents who were cordoned off by armed, armored police officers. Dying in a building filled with other children who were still living and breathing. Children who could still be saved. Explain that to me. Don’t explain the nuances of the job to me. Explain to me, as a concerned citizen with elementary school-aged children, who had to explain to his first grader on his walk to school this morning that 19 children died in their classroom but he is somehow safe from the same fate, how these chain of events happened. Explain to me how a town of 16,000 has their own tactical team HQed less than two miles away from an active shooter murdering children and still can’t clear that threat in less than 10 minutes.

Explain it to me.

1 -- cops are actually cowards.

2 -- everything they've ever told you is a lie.  It's what they do.

Explanation complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

False.  Functionally every cop carries a sidearm.  They are required to be trained in the use of that sidearm, including how to engage armed suspects.  There are hundreds/thousands of examples every year of ordinary cops engaging an armed suspect using only their sidearm.  Do that.  That's all I'm asking/demanding.

For fuck's sake, I don't have ANY formal training.  But I own firearms and know how to use them.  IF you'd called me and said "Brisket, there's someone who has gone into your kid's school and is shooting kids -- can you get there and help them?", I would have damned well grabbed a weapon (probably a shotgun), and gone and engaged.  If all I did was exchange fire and draw fire away from the kids, I'd do that.  If I came to a locked door, I'd blow the fucking lock.  Because I would have a singular mission: get to the shooter and stop him, or at least keep him from shooting kids as long as I can.

It is not too much to ask trained cops (I mean, every affidavit they sign starts with "based on my years of experience and extensive training") to engage an armed suspect.  It's the reason they carry a weapon.

If cops who carry a weapon aren't willing to use it to save lives, then they shouldn't carry them at all.

So your position is that cops should get good at neutralizing mass shooter events in small towns. Ok. How do we make that happen across the US in every small town? 

Edited by blacklab
poster taking a few days off for trolling this thread. Just ignore trolls and move on please.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conflicting info and changing accounts from the LEO side, but also misleading spin or flat BS from the Twitter blue check side (that is or heavily influences the media).  I'm not excusing any response delays or decisions, but I'm also going to wait until the current investigation is concluded before condemning, because we still don't know the full story. 

What appears to be one of the misleading spin is that LEO went in and just rescued their kids:

 

At least one of those who did was also rescued his wife (a teacher) and their classroom as part of an evac effort of that building involving at least 4 other police officers:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10858885/Hero-CBP-cop-rushed-Texas-massacre-school-shotgun-teacher-wife-texted-Help.html

  • Jacob Albarado, a border patrol agent, was off work on Tuesday and was at the barber's when he got a text from his wife Trisha Albarado saying: 'Help'
  • Trisha, mother to their three children - sons Zachary and Jordan, and daughter Jayda, teaches fourth grade maths and science at Robb Elementary School 
  • Albarado leapt up from the barber's, grabbed the barber's shotgun, and drove straight to the school, where eight-year-old Jayda and her mother were inside
  • A tactical team was already readying to take the room where the gunman was barricaded, so Albarado began searching for his daughter and clearing rooms 
  • Two officers provided cover, guns drawn, he said, and two others guided the children out on the sidewalk

Important to note that the school has 6 separate buildings.  

Elem - Copy.JPG

So it appears that they did evacuate at least some of the buildings while they waited on the tac team to go after the classroom the killer was in (actually 2 rooms sharing an interior door?)  Maybe all but the classroom the shooter was in.  I would guess his wife texted him within 5 of the lockdown, after securing her classroom.  The school is near the middle of a small town, he probably arrived within 10 minutes of getting the text.  A few more minutes to confer, updated, and develop an evac plan.  Could fit with the children seen evacuating 20 minutes after the shooting started.

Once police located the killer and assessed the overall situation, they could plan to evac buildings with portions not in the line of fire, and make plans for the other buildings.

A teacher in the building the killer shot up, down the hall from the classroom(s) he took over, says her classroom was evacuated 35 minutes after the shooting started.  Unclear if they were one of the first or last evacuated.     

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/teacher-uvalde-texas-describes-longest-35-minutes-life-rcna30571

Best as I can tell, this timeline seems pretty consistent with the info we have now:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61604652?xtor=AL-72-[partner]-[bbc.news.twitter]-[headline]-[news]-[bizdev]-[isapi]&at_medium=custom7&at_custom3=%40BBCNorthAmerica&at_custom1=[post+type]&at_campaign=64&at_custom4=D7670908-DDA7-11EC-BF55-6BC14744363C&at_custom2=twitter

_124941114_texas_uvalde_shooting_timelin

Other reports say that he first shot at people in front of the funeral home across the street from the school (to the NW of campus.)  May be key to the slow responses.  Did that 911 call mention the school?  If not, did the dispatcher perhaps not connect the dots that the funeral home was next to the school?  Because 14 minutes from the call to police arriving on the scene seems very long, if they new the school could be involved.  Reports from various interviews, including of HS students, are that school lockdowns are common, maybe once or twice a week (because of the criteria for what nearby (or not so nearby) incidents can trigger them.  14 minutes police response doesn't seem consistent with that.

Nor does a 13 minute delay by the school before declaring a lockdown.  Other reports say from 1130 to 1140 the killer was outside shooting the gun intermittently in that time and even shooting towards the school.  You can see the funeral homes parking lot in the upper right corner of the pic above, very close to the parking lot and the building he entered (NW side of the NW building.)  Did no one from the school hear those shots?  Haven't seen any reports of school officials/teachers reacting before he started shooting inside the building.  (Still fog of war in what we know.)  If the timeline is true (still not certain) the school may have had up to 10 minutes to lock the doors, to start a lockdown before entry, but it didn't happen. 

Or did he not shoot much  outside the school?  He apparently did enough for someone 2 houses down the street from the funeral home (to the east) to start filming from their upstairs window.  That short clip doesn't show him shooting as he walks up to the door.  Unclear

The police may have made mistakes in responding to clean up this incident, but at the moment it looks like the school and district could have prevented a lot of this.  The police did arrive within 4 minutes of getting the distress call from school officials (and apparently some teachers, too.)   Why were the doors not locked after he was shooting outside?  Why were they not locked to begin with?  Why was an armed school district officer not on site at that time of the morning?

NPR intentionally misleading readers/listeners by conflating school shootings with mass school shootings, to make it sound much more common than they actually are.  Each one is terrible, but we need to keep perspective.

https://reason.com/2022/05/26/uvalde-texas-mass-shooting-statistics-gun-crimes-misleading/

There Have Been 13 Mass School Shootings Since 1966, Not 27 This Year

For many people, the Uvalde, Texas, mass shooting—which claimed the lives of at least 19 children and two adults—seemed all the more horrible after they learned it was the 27th school shooting so far this year. That fact makes it harder to view Uvalde as any kind of isolated incident.

An NPR article highlighting this statistic has been shared frequently on social media. The headline, "27 school shootings have taken place so far this year," probably gave many readers the impression that gun-related killings in schools have been especially high this year, even before Uvalde. Naturally, the prospect of 26 other previously unnoticed mass shooting events in schools should provoke alarm. It should also raise eyebrows.

The problem here is that three very differently defined terms are being used somewhat incautiously and interchangeably: school shooting, mass shooting, and mass school shooting. Uvalde was a mass school shooting; the 26 previous tragedies at schools this year were not.

The difference is significant. Education Week, which tracks all school shootings, defines them as incidents in which a person other than the suspect suffers a bullet wound on school property. Many of the 26 previous shootings involved disputes between students in parking lots, or after athletic events, and all of them resulted in one or zero deaths. These deaths are still incredibly tragic, of course. But they are fundamentally unlike what happened in Uvalde.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/statistics-matter-in-statistical-disputes/

...numbers aren’t everything, but they should inform our sense of proportion in nationwide policy-making. Some perspective on the size of the problem and the direction of the trend is always important. The Associated Press counts 169 deaths in 23 years. That’s a lot in absolute terms, especially when we’re discussing innocent schoolchildren. But it is also seven deaths per year, compared with 43 per year by lightning, 300 per year by toasters, 800 per year by bedsheets...

...As Dan implies, these numbers can sound callous. But now that figures such as Representative Eric Swalwell have begun making contrary claims on TV, they are important to note nevertheless. “Look at the statistics!” is an ugly and non-responsive thing to say to a grieving parent, but it is an entirely necessary thing to say to someone who is making a hard claim about generalized risk, as Swalwell most certainly is.

On MSNBC yesterday, Swalwell claimed that “it’s a lie to tell our children that they are safe at school.” But it’s not. It’s a lie to tell them otherwise. Government data show that around 54 million American children currently attend school (public and private), and that somewhere between 3.4 million and 4.6 million children enter those schools each year. If we use 4 million as a rough guide for the latter number, by my back-of-the-envelope math, this means that, over the last 23 years, 146 million children have been enrolled in America’s 131,000 schools at some point. That 110 people in K-12 schools (including teachers and other staff, but not including people at colleges, which the AP’s number does) have been murdered in that period is utterly appalling. But it does not indicate that our schools are “unsafe.” It indicates that we have an extremely specific problem with extremely rare attacks. In no other circumstance would we conclude that a risk factor of just over one in 1.3 million makes one “unsafe....”

Another example of dishonest media just reflexively trying to score political points immediately off of a terrible tragedy by starting false urban myths, this is a senior editor at the Washington Post.  Second most influential paper in the country.  This tweet is a flat out lie, easily refuted with just the tiny bit of research (isn't researching to confirm/deny what reporters are supposed to do?  Isn't an editor supposed to catch such mistakes?)  And yet the blue checked tweet still hasn't been taken down, a day later.  So pardon me if I don't join the usual 3 dozen CR types (that have made 80% of the posts in these 2 DT Uvalde threads) in condemning all cops to hell before we get the full story.

 

Edited by clapclapclap
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

So your position is that cops should get good at neutralizing mass shooter events in small towns. Ok. How do we make that happen across the US in every small town? 

They don't have to be "good" at it.  Engaging the shooter is a solution in and of itself. If the shooter is having to deal with me, Deputy Barney Fife, then he is not able to focus on killing innocent victims.

The lesson of Columbine (always immediately engage an active shooter) has been known and part of functionally all basic police training nationwide for decades.  Yes, even in small-town PDs.  This isn't a PhD in microbiology.  It's basic "how to engage against an armed suspect" training, which every cop who carries a firearm has already received.  We probably don't need much further training/instruction at all -- they already have it. 

What we need is cops who give a shit.  That's a much taller order.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

Conflicting info and changing accounts from the LEO side, but also misleading spin or flat BS from the Twitter blue check side (that is or heavily influences the media).  I'm not excusing any response delays or decisions, but I'm also going to wait until the current investigation is concluded before condemning, because we still don't know the full story. 

What appears to be one of the misleading spin is that LEO went in and just rescued their kids:

 

At least one of those who did was also rescued his wife (a teacher) and their classroom as part of an evac effort of that building involving at least 4 other police officers:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10858885/Hero-CBP-cop-rushed-Texas-massacre-school-shotgun-teacher-wife-texted-Help.html

  • Jacob Albarado, a border patrol agent, was off work on Tuesday and was at the barber's when he got a text from his wife Trisha Albarado saying: 'Help'
  • Trisha, mother to their three children - sons Zachary and Jordan, and daughter Jayda, teaches fourth grade maths and science at Robb Elementary School 
  • Albarado leapt up from the barber's, grabbed the barber's shotgun, and drove straight to the school, where eight-year-old Jayda and her mother were inside
  • A tactical team was already readying to take the room where the gunman was barricaded, so Albarado began searching for his daughter and clearing rooms 
  • Two officers provided cover, guns drawn, he said, and two others guided the children out on the sidewalk

Important to note that the school has 6 separate buildings.  

Elem - Copy.JPG

So it appears that they did evacuate at least some of the buildings while they waited on the tac team to go after the classroom the killer was in (actually 2 rooms sharing an interior door?)  Maybe all but the classroom the shooter was in.  I would guess his wife texted him within 5 of the lockdown, after securing her classroom.  The school is near the middle of a small town, he probably arrived within 10 minutes of getting the text.  A few more minutes to confer, updated, and develop an evac plan.  Could fit with the children seen evacuating 20 minutes after the shooting started.

Once police located the killer and assessed the overall situation, they could plan to evac buildings with portions not in the line of fire, and make plans for the other buildings.

A teacher in the building the killer shot up, down the hall from the classroom(s) he took over, says her classroom was evacuated 35 minutes after the shooting started.  Unclear if they were one of the first or last evacuated.     

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/teacher-uvalde-texas-describes-longest-35-minutes-life-rcna30571

Best as I can tell, this timeline seems pretty consistent with the info we have now:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61604652?xtor=AL-72-[partner]-[bbc.news.twitter]-[headline]-[news]-[bizdev]-[isapi]&at_medium=custom7&at_custom3=%40BBCNorthAmerica&at_custom1=[post+type]&at_campaign=64&at_custom4=D7670908-DDA7-11EC-BF55-6BC14744363C&at_custom2=twitter

_124941114_texas_uvalde_shooting_timelin

Other reports say that he first shot at people in front of the funeral home across the street from the school (to the NW of campus.)  May be key to the slow responses.  Did that 911 call mention the school?  If not, did the dispatcher perhaps not connect the dots that the funeral home was next to the school?  Because 14 minutes from the call to police arriving on the scene seems very long, if they new the school could be involved.  Reports from various interviews, including of HS students, are that school lockdowns are common, maybe once or twice a week (because of the criteria for what nearby (or not so nearby) incidents can trigger them.  14 minutes police response doesn't seem consistent with that.

Nor does a 13 minute delay by the school before declaring a lockdown.  Other reports say from 1130 to 1140 the killer was outside shooting the gun intermittently in that time and even shooting towards the school.  You can see the funeral homes parking lot in the upper right corner of the pic above, very close to the parking lot and the building he entered (NW side of the NW building.)  Did no one from the school hear those shots?  Haven't seen any reports of school officials/teachers reacting before he started shooting inside the building.  (Still fog of war in what we know.)  If the timeline is true (still not certain) the school may have had up to 10 minutes to lock the doors, to start a lockdown before entry, but it didn't happen. 

Or did he not shoot much  outside the school?  He apparently did enough for someone 2 houses down the street from the funeral home (to the east) to start filming from their upstairs window.  That short clip doesn't show him shooting as he walks up to the door.  Unclear

The police may have made mistakes in responding to clean up this incident, but at the moment it looks like the school and district could have prevented a lot of this.  The police did arrive within 4 minutes of getting the distress call from school officials (and apparently some teachers, too.)   Why were the doors not locked after he was shooting outside?  Why were they not locked to begin with?  Why was an armed school district officer not on site at that time of the morning?

Another example of dishonest media just reflexively trying to score political points immediately off of a terrible tragedy by starting false urban myths, this is a senior editor at the Washington Post.  Second most influential paper in the country.  This tweet is a flat out lie, easily refuted with just the tiny bit of research (isn't researching to confirm/deny what reporters are supposed to do?  Isn't an editor supposed to catch such mistakes?)  And yet the blue checked tweet still hasn't been taken down, a day later.  So pardon me if I don't join the usual 3 dozen CR types (that have made 80% of the posts in these 2 DT Uvalde threads) in condemning all cops to hell before we get the full story.

 

See this:

_124941114_texas_uvalde_shooting_timelin

 

My entire issue is the gap between 11:44 and 12:45.  That's it.  We can discuss the rest, but that HOUR is the problem here.  The gunman was inside a barricaded room, murdering people, and the cops.......just waited?

Yeah, I definitely want to get all the facts on this.  But I already know that the cops have changed their stories multiple times -- not the "in the confusion, we're still gathering facts," but they have stated things as matter-of-fact and then had to go back and say "well, not exactly."

But it seems that there's no dispute that the gunman had an hour in a classroom, unmolested or uninterrupted by law enforcement, to slaughter people.  That fact is inexcusable and unacceptable.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

They don't have to be "good" at it.  Engaging the shooter is a solution in and of itself. If the shooter is having to deal with me, Deputy Barney Fife, then he is not able to focus on killing innocent victims.

The lesson of Columbine (always immediately engage an active shooter) has been known and part of functionally all basic police training nationwide for decades.  Yes, even in small-town PDs.  This isn't a PhD in microbiology.  It's basic "how to engage against an armed suspect" training, which every cop who carries a firearm has already received.  We probably don't need much further training/instruction at all -- they already have it. 

What we need is cops who give a shit.  That's a much taller order.

So your position is that nothing needs to change from a reform perspective - just that small town cops need to just follow their prior training.  

There seems to be an obvious disconnect here. Snapping fingers isn't a solution and isn't an effective method of change. Why would we think that any other small town in the US that has similar conditions as Uvalde (low population, potentially low-paid bored cops, maybe minimal training standards, maybe they haven't responded to an active shooter event for over a decade) would better respond to a mass shooter event? Is there reason to believe that Uvalde is an anomaly? 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

So your position is that cops should get good at neutralizing mass shooter events in small towns. Ok. How do we make that happen across the US in every small town? 

No. His position is they should make an attempt. A poor attempt is preferable to no attempt. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

So your position is that nothing needs to change from a reform perspective - just that small town cops need to just follow their prior training.  

There seems to be an obvious disconnect here. Snapping fingers isn't a solution and isn't an effective method of change. Why would we think that any other small town in the US that has similar conditions as Uvalde (low population, potentially low-paid bored cops, maybe minimal training standards, maybe they haven't responded to an active shooter event for over a decade) would better respond to a mass shooter event? Is there reason to believe that Uvalde is an anomaly? 

Oh.....I would think we definitely have reason to believe that every PD -- from a large metro area to a 3-man shop in West Cowshit -- needs a stout refresher/reminder in active shooter engagement training.  But again, we don't have to re-invent the wheel here.

The protocol exists, and is not complex.

The training exists, and is regularly provided to PDs all around the country.

This is not advanced PhD level shit -- it's basic police protocol and training in America in the 2000s.  They already know how to do this.  They've already received the training (maybe there's an outlier here and there, and if they haven't done so -- then they sure as hell should).  It's about FOLLOWING the protocol and training.  And that isn't happening because police do not have our best interests at heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update, Friday, May 27: University Health said one of the three children hospitalized in San Antonio was released. The 66-year-old woman remains in serious condition along with one of the 10-year-old girls. Another child, 9, is also hospitalized in good condition. 

Along with the 21 dead, 17 people were injured. According to University Health, the hospital is treating a 66-year-old woman who's in critical condition, a 10-year-old who's in serious condition, and a 10-year-old and 9-year-old who are both in good condition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh.....I would think we definitely have reason to believe that every PD -- from a large metro area to a 3-man shop in West Cowshit -- needs a stout refresher/reminder in active shooter engagement training.  But again, we don't have to re-invent the wheel here.

The protocol exists, and is not complex.

The training exists, and is regularly provided to PDs all around the country.

This is not advanced PhD level shit -- it's basic police protocol and training in America in the 2000s.  They already know how to do this.  They've already received the training (maybe there's an outlier here and there, and if they haven't done so -- then they sure as hell should).  It's about FOLLOWING the protocol and training.  And that isn't happening because police do not have our best interests at heart.

Alright. Well I disagree with the idea that refresher training would result in any sort of actual change in how small towns across the US respond to mass shooter events.  We can disagree on that point - and thus we likely also will disagree on my point that a reliance on police to decrease mass shooting events across the US, in every small town, would require major reforms in the direction of greater militarization of police - which I am against - and instead other solutions would be more appropriate and effective.  

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

We can disagree on that point - and thus we likely also will disagree on my point that a reliance on police to decrease mass shooting events across the US, in every small town, would require major reforms in the direction of greater militarization of police - which I am against - and instead other solutions would be more appropriate and effective.  

I believe that this problem -- like most problems -- requires multifaceted approaches to make the outcomes better (we won't ever "solve" it, but we can improve it).  Some of those approaches are:

1 -- various gun control measures (discussed at length around here).

2 -- having appropriate response protocols at schools, that administrators and teachers are trained on (simple things like locking and barricading doors).

3 -- ensuring that local first responders are trained in and will follow active shooter response protocols.

I truly don't understand how you think that the active shooter response protocol requires some sort of Navy SEAL training shit.  This has been a known and oft-discussed and regularly trained thing since Columbine.  We have DECADES of experience with it.  It's a universally known part of law enforcement function in the US.  When Deputy Fife shows up at an active shooter scene, he is to engage.  That doesn't require a 6 month special forces course.  If he knows how to fire his gun at a hostile human being -- which he does, every armed cop gets that training -- then he can follow the protocol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GW, think about what you're debating....    The fact that our small town police departments aren't properly trained to handle mass shooter events.   Maybe it's the crazy pills I take but WHY are we talking about that instead of how to reduce mass shooter events?

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

I truly don't understand how you think that the active shooter response protocol requires some sort of Navy SEAL training shit.  

We disagree. I don't consider refresher training to be effective at implementing real change - and if it does implement some minor change that change doesn't last very long, and I don't believe Uvalde is an anomaly in terms of small town law enforcement ability.   Ensuring quick, forceful responses in every small town (like Uvalde) against dudes with semi auto rifles and potentially body armor would require more structural changes - IMO - and we disagree on all of that.  

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

GW, think about what you're debating....    The fact that our small town police departments aren't properly trained to handle mass shooter events.   Maybe it's the crazy pills I take but WHY are we talking about that instead of how to reduce mass shooter events?

 

I think that’s his overarching point, actually. The cop response won’t get better so don’t waste resources on it. Address things that can be changed for the better. 
 

but of course with any level of gun control, the question is not whether the lever of change exists, but whether it would be allowed to be pulled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

GW, think about what you're debating....    The fact that our small town police departments aren't properly trained to handle mass shooter events.   Maybe it's the crazy pills I take but WHY are we talking about that instead of how to reduce mass shooter events?

 

I've been talking about both.  I don't think we should rely on small town cops to solve our mass shooter events problem - that is my entire point.  I don't think refresher training will fix our small town cops.  I also don't think major militarization reforms in small towns is the correct path either.  Major militarization may have some effect at decreasing the magnitude of mass shooting events, but I don't believe that benefit would outweigh the other costs associated with a more militarized police state.  Therefore, addressing your question of "how to reduce mass shooter events" is the appropriate one.  IMO that answer obviously lies with gun reform and universal healthcare.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

We disagree. I don't consider refresher training to be effective at implementing real change - and if it does implement some minor change that change doesn't last very long, and I don't believe Uvalde is an anomaly in terms of small town law enforcement ability.   Ensuring quick, forceful responses in every small town (like Uvalde) against dudes with semi auto rifles and potentially body armor would require more structural changes - IMO - and we disagree on all of that.  

You are correct -- we definitely disagree.  My position, however, is based on the evidence that one or two regular cops can engage an active shooter and shut shit down.  And those cops don't need to be the Los Angeles SWAT team.  The Sikh temple shooting in Oak Creek, Wisconsin -- a town of 35k -- was stopped by two street cops.  The Garland terrorist attack -- they were engaged and stopped by a local Garland cop (SWAT later showed up and finished them off, but the local cop stopped the attack cold) -- Garland ain't NYC.

Maybe they try and fail.  But "try" is not hard.  It's not hard at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Update, Friday, May 27: University Health said one of the three children hospitalized in San Antonio was released. The 66-year-old woman remains in serious condition along with one of the 10-year-old girls. Another child, 9, is also hospitalized in good condition. 

Along with the 21 dead, 17 people were injured. According to University Health, the hospital is treating a 66-year-old woman who's in critical condition, a 10-year-old who's in serious condition, and a 10-year-old and 9-year-old who are both in good condition. 

Damn.  38 people.  Mr. Saturday Night Special, indeed.  Ain't good for nothing....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tailgate said:

Saying all cops are bad and lie is like saying all lawyers are bad and lie.

Messed up situation on this one. 

Then why is it that the cops have not yet been able to give us a single set of consistent facts so far? It may not be each individual officer is a liar, but you put enough of them together and suddenly they lie through the teeth to the public.

Body armor? Guns blazing shootout? No risk to children?

Fuck outta here. "The Cops" are all fucking liars. 

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So going by some of todays press conference quotes and info from a survivor in the classroom from this article - https://www.yahoo.com/gma/student-survived-texas-school-shooting-090000830.html

Asshole goes in and immediately shoots everyone in the classroom. Cops approach locked classroom door, don’t hear shooting anymore and assume everyone is dead? Wait 40 minutes to engage and discover survivors. Holy shit. Who knows how many more might have survived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If that commanding officer knew he should be publicly executed because at best it’s incompetence but it appears to be negligence 

There's literally been supreme court cases on if the police have a duty to protect. The law says they don't. And they have sovereign immunity from bad decision making.

Cops are untouchable.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Seasick Sailor said:

So this coaward just fucking assumed there weren't kids in the room at 11:20 am on a fucking school day? 

 

No they just figured the kids were dead already so no rush. What a fucking failure on every level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

If that commanding officer knew he should be publicly executed because at best it’s incompetence but it appears to be negligence 

As an originalist, I think the citizens of Uvalde can tar and feather the commanding officer.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

Edited 51 minutes ago by blacklab
poster taking a few days off for trolling this thread. Just ignore trolls and move on please.

I just read all his posts on this page. that’s trolling? what’s wrong with you? is it because this is the news thread and he was having a discussion?

Edited by futureman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wildcat09 said:

These fucks are still lying. 

Trying to shift the narrative to fit their behavior so they don’t have to admit wrongdoing. Asking us to believe that everyone except the cops on the ground knew it was a live shooter and/or serious casualty situation where expediency is the most important thing. 
the cops, conveniently, believed it was just a barricaded person and their own safety was the most important thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dps director saying anyone who spoke with shooter over social media will be held accountable. HOW ABOUT THE COPS BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE!!!!
there are some good cops out there but they need to start demanding accountability on the bad ones. I know unions , "brotherhood" won't allow it.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...