Both 911 and dispatch would have all the calls and radio traffic recorded.
Oh, I'm sure those have long been lost through equipment failures or other unavoidable technical problems.
Both 911 and dispatch would have all the calls and radio traffic recorded.
Yes, it's on the federal government. But the problem with that is, it's easy to then call for expanding background checks, which I think casts a wider blanket over people who would ultimately not pose a societal problem with firearm ownership. I think the feds failure is a systemic failure of the whole idea of background checks. They're not perfect, nor can they be, and the tend to disable people who aren't a threat from exercising a right.Simple fact of the matter is… The federal government approved him for purchase. It’s on them.
I mean, I agree with the rest. If only the funeral home employee had been armed. But. Was that an unlawful order? A foolish order, yes. Was it unlawful? And were the other officers who were ordered to stand down and then complied, really breaking any law? I think the person who ordered officers to stand down deserves to face consequences. I don't know that it amounts to breaking the law.First guy to meet the shooter was a funeral home employee. Ramos tried to shoot him and he ran tripping. Called his wife and told her to bring his gun.
If only he had been carrying……
Once his wife got there he was armed but cops were on scene
“I told him that he’s already inside the school,” Briseno said. He said the officer told him to stay back and shut up.
Uvalde funeral attendant who encountered gunman says he tried to go after shooter, was held back
Cody Briseno said he has helped bury five children who died on that day, including a cousin.www.nbcnews.com
Every officer who ordered people to stand down or refused to disobey those unlawful orders needs to be charged as an accessory to murder
I think you're interpreting things to meet criteria it may not meet, maybe because of anger. And I can certainly see being angry. I am. I think the police failed its community, and there should be consequences for that.From the Texas penal code
d) A person acts with criminal negligence, or is criminally negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.
Since the ordinary person was attempting to rush in while officers stood by I see no reason why the conduct of those on scene doesn’t meet the definition of criminally negligent homicide according to Texas penal code.
From the Texas penal code I posted upthreadI think you're interpreting things to meet criteria it may not meet, maybe because of anger. And I can certainly see being angry. I am. I think the police failed its community, and there should be consequences for that.
Would officers have the legal authority to prevent ordinary citizens from going into the school armed in any circumstances? Can you not think of a scenario where that should be the case?
Yes, I did read that. I can think of some scenarios where that would be the case. However we don't really know all the things that everyone knew and why the decisions made were made. That is what determines if this meets the definition.From the Texas penal code I posted upthread
“The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint”
So now we are getting reports he was known to the fbi and threats had been reported.
I’m shocked I tell you, shocked
I keep reading the "moron" comments about this person. I think emergency behavior is largely trained.True.
In their case, the "adults" in the group (school employees) were.
The school employee propped the door open.
I keep reading the "moron" comments about this person. I think emergency behavior is largely trained.
It's easy to look at something in hindsight and call someone stupid. In the heat of the moment, people aren't good at making new plans they never thought about before. If their actual training had emphasized the importance of door-locking habits, perhaps the person instinctively would have locked the door.
Equipment also matters. All of our external household doors have keypads. Before we got keypads it was way too tempting to leave doors unlocked because we HAD negative experiences with getting locked out multiple times. Now, even if we aren't sure when someone else might want to come in, we aren't worried about locking them out. We have confidence they can get back in with their code. Surely someone in security planning has discovered the same thing for workplaces? Give people electronic codes and they'll have better door-locking habits?
thank you and my apologies. I had only read about halfway through the thread when I made my comment. I later saw that those of you with experience had addressed the subjectfobs and access cards are even better. Adds literally 1 second to the entry of a locked door.
No worries. And you are spot on. If everyone who should be able to enter can easily, you dont have propping issues. (at least not regularly)thank you and my apologies. I had only read about halfway through the thread when I made my comment. I later saw that those of you with experience had addressed the subject
Except that they had just had a school shooter exercise with the Uvalde school police a couple of months before... So I'm thinking they had their plans. They just didn't follow them.It's easy to look at something in hindsight and call someone stupid. In the heat of the moment, people aren't good at making new plans they never thought about before.
I think there may be several reasons why teachers prop doors open.No worries. And you are spot on. If everyone who should be able to enter can easily, you dont have propping issues. (at least not regularly)
I think it was posted in this thread earlier, in the training material that they took it expressly said that an in an active shooter situation you go in and stop the shooter. It also said that if you can't do that you should look for a different career.Except that they had just had a school shooter exercise with the Uvalde school police a couple of months before... So I'm thinking they had their plans. They just didn't follow them.
Ok let’s lay it out like this, essentially a large part of my job is a lock out tag out function. my job has the potential to kill multiple people every day if I fail to follow standard practices, safety rules ect. If I grossly violate those standard practices and make up my own on the spot, over-ride safeguards and just straight up not do my job properly despite all the training/warnings/safeguards and jamil dies while working on the equipment I told him was safe is rooster in some way morally and legally responsible for jamils death?I think you're interpreting things to meet criteria it may not meet, maybe because of anger. And I can certainly see being angry. I am. I think the police failed its community, and there should be consequences for that.
Would officers have the legal authority to prevent ordinary citizens from going into the school armed in any circumstances? Can you not think of a scenario where that should be the case?