Armed FL school deputy Resigns after video shows he stood outside did nothing

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Yup I bet that guy in the OP said exact the same thing.
Until it happens we are all talking bravado.

I already lived it twice for that matter. Like i said speak for yourself. There is no we in this case.

Look. Not judging you or anyone here, really, but it's my experience that those who scream the loudest about being tough or hard or a great lover or whatever, aren't.

I'll relate a little of my experiences in similar circumstances in an effort to illustrate the complex emotions that enter into this area.

I've lived through several deployments to just about every craphole you can think of in my 18+ years in the military.

I've been under fire more times than I want to think about.

During each of those engagements, I was soiling myself in fear (figuratively - mostly...). Abject terror.

Training helps but unless you get extremely good training, repeat it often and as realistically as possible, have the "opportunity" to apply that training in real-life situations, live through those situations and - as screwed up as it sounds - get used to those situations; it really is kind of a crap shoot what any one person would do.

Being part of a unit and bonding with those on your "side" helps too. The desire to not let your buddies down is a strong motivator even if you're scared poop-less.

Now maybe I'm just a little messed up or there's something off in my brain, but I never ran, hid or shot my weapon in the air/purposefully aimed off-target so I didn't have to kill anyone (that actually happens A LOT and would be an interesting thread in and of itself). I was screaming and pissing myself in my mind but I never broke despite that being exactly what I most wanted to do.

Some guys I served with did run or hide or fire over the heads of the bad guys. I felt bad for them; not as bad as they felt about themselves, but it was just a thing. It happened. Screw it, drive on. We just tried to work to their strengths in assigning tasks.

Funny thing is/was - and what is applicable to your discussion of fight or flight or having balls or whatever you want to call it - that some of the hardest m-fers who had been with us through multiple deployments and significant hostile actions just broke sometimes.

Maybe things just got to much for them. Maybe they just had a kid at home and their outlook changed. Maybe they just found out that their significant other was cheating on them. Maybe a million things and maybe nothing, but it happened. Several times with good people I knew and served with for a long time - the guy you'd want to be next to you or laying down covering fire or kicking in a door with you.

You just never know. And it's not even "you never know until you're in the situation." You might be good to go when you come under fire one morning but in the next engagement just not.

Obviously, this is just my opinion on a complex situation but it is informed by very relevant experience. Take it as you will.

a reply to: seagull

You can't find out in an interview. You find out on the street.

When I became a truck driver (another occupation that takes that little "something"), I was interviewed, hired, and assigned to a trainer. That trainer went out in the truck with me (wouldn't even let me drive until he had a chance to get to know me) for six weeks. They then routed me back to the terminal and his recommendation (along with my driving record) determined whether I stayed hired or not.

If we do that for truck drivers, why not for police? I know people like to make fun of the Andy Griffith Show, but we need more Barney Fife assignments until they prove they can "put their bullet in their gun."

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Barney Fife is anathema to modern policing, though.

In modern policing the officer is always right, even when they aren't. They have to project this ego. Not sure if you saw the big CBD bust in Rutherford County SC recently, but the chief of police for Smyrna stood up on a mic and said all sorts of patently wrong things while he violated the rights of business owners (a judge has since let them return to business while she sorts out the mess). he was told all along the way that what he was doing was wrong and not in accordance with the law....and still stood up and gave a press conference where he insisted they used the CBD to "get high". Even then, when told he was wrong, he shrugged it off.

Im not on the "in the know" list for how cops get hired. I've read the same articles everyone else has, and it seems that there is a personality type that is sought out the most. The "low IQ" thing is more a smear (whether true or not), but it does appear that a specific set of personality traits is sought out. If i am wrong, i'd be happy for someone who is "in the know" to inform.

a reply to: Aazadan

He did his job fine, police and military are trained to only engage when they have fire superiority. He did not have that.

Military are expected to complete the mission. Period.

Police are expected to protect the peace (in my world anyway). Period.

I hope you are never facing down a criminal with intent to kill you while a cop nearby hides in terror because his gun ain't big enough.

TheRedneck

a reply to: MteWamp

If we ever meet, the beer's on me, yes?

Just make mine a real one... PBR!

TheRedneck

a reply to: MerkabaTribeEntity

I was only 16, and truth be told, I've just found out that I'm still really affected by it, that will never leave me.

No, it will never leave you. That is not something that can be removed.

But I will defend you. You were 16, almost an adult but not yet quite. You were not in a security role. You have two excuses. They just won't help how you feel. The real question to ask yourself is, would you be able to step up today if you were paid to do so?

I'm not going to call you a coward; as I said, you have two legitimate excuses. But I will post this here since you so graciously provided the segway, aimed at the wanna-be who let children die while he watched in fear:

"A coward dies a thousand deaths; a brave man only one."

TheRedneck

a reply to: 35Foxtrot

I was screaming and pissing myself in my mind but I never broke despite that being exactly what I most wanted to do.

That is the best description of true courage I have seen in a while. It needed to be said again.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: HomelessWhiteMale

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Just because a blind man needs a job, you still don't out him behind the wheel of a truck.

Just because a guy in a wheelchair needs a job, you still don't have him trying to climb phone poles.

I see people all the time who are blessed enough to have a decent job, but they either won't or can't do what is expected of them. If you can't do the job, find another job. 17 people are dead because this one piece of trash couldn't do his job.

TheRedneck

you realize he did do his job. What he didnt do was go beyond his official duties
An officer has no duty to protect anyone but himself
Its law

Right, so now we're being told that no one but police and military need to have legal weapons for protection and that they can protect us.

But as you ably point out, they have no obligation to protect anyone but themselves.

So why on earth would anyone want to surrender the second amendment again?

Cognitive dissonance much? If they won't/don't have to protect me, then why would I swallow the very obvious lie that they will if only I surrender my ability to defend myself?

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: HomelessWhiteMale

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Just because a blind man needs a job, you still don't out him behind the wheel of a truck.

Just because a guy in a wheelchair needs a job, you still don't have him trying to climb phone poles.

I see people all the time who are blessed enough to have a decent job, but they either won't or can't do what is expected of them. If you can't do the job, find another job. 17 people are dead because this one piece of trash couldn't do his job.

TheRedneck

you realize he did do his job. What he didnt do was go beyond his official duties
An officer has no duty to protect anyone but himself
Its law

Right, so now we're being told that no one but police and military need to have legal weapons for protection and that they can protect us.

But as you ably point out, they have no obligation to protect anyone but themselves.

So why on earth would anyone want to surrender the second amendment again?

Cognitive dissonance much? If they won't/don't have to protect me, then why would I swallow the very obvious lie that they will if only I surrender my ability to defend myself?

What happens if the teacher with the gun runs away? Lets give the students themselves the guns. Then each one can make their own choice.

a reply to: Aazadan

The experience in Florida shows us that some have the proper instinct. Again, I refer to the football coach and the other teacher who used their own bodies as human shields attempting to protect their students and died.

Do you think they would have run had they been armed?

a reply to: Aazadan

when i was a kid, it was not unusual for one of us to have a rifle or shotgun in the headache rack of our truck (or trunk of our car, whatever the case may have been).

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Aazadan

The experience in Florida shows us that some have the proper instinct. Again, I refer to the football coach and the other teacher who used their own bodies as human shields attempting to protect their students and died.

Do you think they would have run had they been armed?

You can't test that instinct though until the moment it happens. Even with training some people break down in combat. That's going to happen a lot more often for teachers that haven't ever been in combat before, and we don't have enough combat vets that also have proper crossover skillsets with teachers to rely on that.

If we want to arm the adults in schools, we're going to have to arm somewhere between most and all of them.

a reply to: Aazadan

So we disarm everyone who wants to own legally and allow crooks to continue walking around and shooting whomever they please while we rely on cops ... who also can't be tested like you want? And they can also freeze and have no legal obligation to protect anyone like this veteran cop at the school?

That makes no good sense either.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
You can't find out in an interview. You find out on the street.

To me, the most obvious solution to this problem is to require some kind of (documented) proof - that you've been in a "fight-or-flight" situation before and came out the other side knowing where you stand on the spectrum. And with this line of thought, I'd expect a good percentage of recruitment's to be those that served (along with some exceptions). Of course there'd need to be extensive psychiatric evaluations & background checks done to filter out those with serious PTSD, mental issues, etc - but why not? You're hiring tried and proven "heroes" that the public can surely have a lot more faith in to actually protect & serve the public. It shouldn't just be another job that anyone can choose to do regardless of motivations. I think something along those lines would work much better (in the public's interest) for politicians as well - but unfortunately that's likely to never happen in our lifetimes.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Barney Fife is anathema to modern policing, though.

That needs to change, IMO.

Barney Fife was a caricature of an inept cop, yes. But at the same time, there were certain aspects to the character that were desirable. His courage and his dedication, for instance. I would place those traits above things like aggressiveness any day.

In my day, as I am sure it was in yours, the police apparently had no need to take total control of any situation; they already had it. If one was stopped by the law, one pulled over, opened the door, slowly got out of the car, and stood patiently by the rear quarter panel for the cop to approach. It was a sign of respect. The cop would walk up to you tell you what the problem was, and take care of business. If one decided they wanted to fight, well, that was simply a mistake that often became apparent within seconds. Cops were trained to handle hand-to-hand combat, and usually trained well.

Today, one is expected to remain in the vehicle while the cop tries to approach a concealed area. The cop is at a severe disadvantage because the occupant(s) of the vehicle may have hidden weapons and all they need do is wait for their target to approach. A person standing outside with hands in clear view is much less dangerous, much less trouble for the officer to handle should he try unarmed violence, much less capable of hiding firearms, and less work on the officer.

That just never made sense to me. "Don't you dare respect my authority, and make sure you stay in the most dangerous place you can while I approach. I have a right to protect myself!"

As to the "low IQ" part, that is indeed a smear, but I fear it is becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy as well. In college, as a math tutor, I regularly had difficulty explaining the simplest concepts to people pursuing Criminal Justice majors. If I had a dime for every time a Criminal Justice major tried to pay me to finish their homework, 'fix' their grades, or just get the instructor to let them 'slide' on assignments, I'd have a whole lot of dimes. And this was despite the fact that the math requirements for Criminal Justice were the easiest in the school.

The fastest, most powerful, surest weapon known to mankind is the mind. It's a shame that so few of our 'best and brightest' use it.

TheRedneck

Saw the sheriff say his job was to enter the ability and address the situation, and stop the shooter not stand outside for 4 mins while kids are running and dying.

He was going to be suspended without pay while they investigated it and decided to retire instead.

Also for all those making excuses, he was armed and supposedly trained the teachers that died that ran over from other areas to try and help the kids were trying to do his job without the training or the weapon.

He screwed up, no ifs ands or buts about it (that's my opinion and his bosses opinion)... I am not saying he should be hounded because he shouldn't more than likely he will be a suicide stat in a few years if nobody bothered him, with the media circus that will descend on him I expect he will eat a bullet within the year.

EDIT: MSN

On Thursday, Israel said surveillance footage captured the officer’s inaction. Asked what Peterson should have done, Israel said: “Went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

a reply to: Aazadan

What happens if the teacher with the gun runs away?

The next teacher fires off a round that takes the killer down.

I live in rural Alabama. Believe it or not, not everyone 'packs heat' down here... maybe half of the people you meet have a permit to carry concealed. Of those, maybe half are actually carrying at any one time. Of those, maybe a quarter have what it takes to pull the trigger when the rubber meets the road.

So a criminal has a 1-in-16 chance of waking up dead. I don't know how you feel, but those aren't odds I like to take, and apparently neither do the criminals. If there are 16 or more adults in an area, the odds are very favorable that one will wind up feeling like a slice of Swiss cheeses within a few seconds. The vast majority of the crimes here happen in the cities, where there are local restrictions on guns and an unfriendly attitude toward them.

If there is a lesson in this tragedy, it is that placing all of one's fate in the hands of a precious few 'elites' who have firearms is a sure method to have that fate blasted to kingdom come. Hire armed, capable security and allow faculty to exercise their proper 2nd Amendment rights... school shootings will become a thing of the past.

Lets give the students themselves the guns.

Oh, yeah, let's issue AR-15s to 10-year-olds who have never held one. Good idea... not.

TheRedneck

There's no excuse and that's why he resigned. If his kids were in that school, had run there guns blazing. People without weapons sacrificed their lives for kids, other kids acting heroically to save their classmates. This mans purpose was to protect the kids and he was the only other weapons armed with training to neutralize such threats. That was his job the these children's parents pay to protect their kids. He turned his back and failed them just like the police department and the FBI.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Saw the sheriff say his job was to enter the ability and address the situation, and stop the shooter not stand outside for 4 mins while kids are running and dying.

He was going to be suspended without pay while they investigated it and decided to retire instead.

Also for all those making excuses, he was armed and supposedly trained the teachers that died that ran over from other areas to try and help the kids were trying to do his job without the training or the weapon.

He screwed up, no ifs ands or buts about it (that's my opinion and his bosses opinion)... I am not saying he should be hounded because he shouldn't more than likely he will be a suicide stat in a few years if nobody bothered him, with the media circus that will descend on him I expect he will eat a bullet within the year.

EDIT: MSN

On Thursday, Israel said surveillance footage captured the officer’s inaction. Asked what Peterson should have done, Israel said: “Went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

How many kids died in those 4 minutes? This is just inexcusable.

When seconds count, the police are...

..sitting in the corner wetting themselves.