A cop's take on the Stoneman Douglas Resource Officer

a reply to: JBurns

Are you sure Nazi Germany was disarmed?

originally posted by: Kryties
Nobody can say how they would react to a scary situation like that, with adrenaline flowing and bullets flying. I agree, based on what I have read, that he could have done more but for a bunch of keyboard warriors to sit there and condemn him when they would probably have taken a dump in their pants in that same situation if it were them, is quite pathetic.

I've heard many titles to describe him: Deputy, Security Guard, Resource Officer, maybe others.

Call me a keyboard warrior all you want, here is my point: If he was carrying a weapon and was on duty at the school with the clear intent to keep the kids safe, he failed. If he hid behind a SCOTUS ruling then he does not deserve retirement benefits. The citizens of his locality payed tax dollars in exchange for his training to keep their children safe. I would call that a breach of contract and he should never be trusted with the safety of other people every again.

I've seen soldiers with years of training under their belt who have frozen during a firefight. I'm not talking about some random pog. These were All-American soldiers. Usually a nudge will clear their minds and their training to take over so I can't be angry that a deputy with likely little to no situational training froze. There are many of you branding this man a coward from behind a screen which is irony at it's finest. It's easy to say you would run into the school, towards gunfire with no thought of your safety to save the day. That's fine and dandy to believe that # but I guarantee many would be facing the same criticisms had you been there.

a reply to: JBurns

To be completely honest with you, I don't think the elites would even bother trying to grab the guns, that simply will not happen, too many guns out there to bother, I would however entertain the idea they may be engineering the people to kill each other.

a reply to: JBurns


I was thinking about this the other day. I'm thinking that somebody somewhere is getting access to these types of events and exploiting them to the fullest. An example was what happened in Washington State at a military base, a terror drill was going to be conducted, and what do you know some weirdo drives inside the gate and claimed to have an explosive vest and car full of explosives. He didn't but it put most of the bases around here on high alert, and the drills were canceled.

***EDITED FOR THE ADDITION OF LINKY***

Kitsap Sun Story on USNB Bangor Wa

***END OF ADDED IN EDIT***

You might think that the deep state thing is not involved (or possibly doesn't exist) but what is going on from a large picture? We have groups like that Foundation losing it's grip on geopolitics, people like Soros beginning to panic, and old guard bankers slowly making last grasp attemps to control the populace. A few dead kids in exchange for disarming a large society isn't too much for these people. After all didn't one of those deep State people once say;

the fact is, we had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they'd go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make?

So Deep State or not there is a puzzle here that has more pieces that have been exposed, and a better understanding of what the final picture is, to be left unsolved. So many wonderful questions being ignored by so many wanting to revoke civil liberties to not think that those pulling the strings are in panic mode.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Shamrock6

Peterson should not lose a retirement package he spent 32 years earning because of a noncriminal lapse in judgement. That is beyond acceptable.

Fired? Sure.

Stripped of his commission? Sure

Made fun of publicly? Sure

But to pull his retirement not only is unjust (and theft), it foists the responsibility for taking care of him onto the public.

Lapse of judgment?

Isn't it deriliction of duty?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I would however entertain the idea they may be engineering the people to kill each other.

Don’t need to engineer that, killing each other is what we do best, historically speaking.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Absolutely were are a violent species, I was thinking more along the lines of the gun loving folk wiping each other out.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

A gun is just a tool though.

Yes, a tool to kill, but so is a pressure cooker or a car, if one chooses so.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Of course, some folk however are more inclined to love guns and use them, if they wipe each other out the rest of the population will have no issue with remaining unarmed and under the protection of the police.

Obviously I'm generalising and being highly conspiritol (if that's even a word), still just as likely in my mind as a gun grab by the elites, with all that is going on all I have is speculation .

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

A gun grab would never work.

The man had no idea what was waiting beyond the doors of that school. There was no information available to him at all. Even in the 82nd, we didn't go into an encounter blind. You need reconnaissance to make sure you're going into a situation that you can control as opposed to encountering overwhelming enemy forces. What if there were explosives involved? More than a single shooter? Shooters using human shields? Pretending that the best idea was to go in guns blazing with a single sidearm only highlight that many of you have seen too many action movies.

Just out of curiousity, how many members here have actually been in the service of law enforcement or the military? Of those members, how many have ever exchanged fire with armed combatants?

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

A gun grab would never work.

I know that's why I speculated engineering gun lovers to wipe themselves out.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Chadwickus

Absolutely were are a violent species, I was thinking more along the lines of the gun loving folk wiping each other out.

Talk about being an absolute hypocrite. You hate guns because they kill people but you're perfectly okay with complete genocide of gun owners? Your moral compass is broken and you sicken me.

originally posted by: Anathros

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Chadwickus

Absolutely were are a violent species, I was thinking more along the lines of the gun loving folk wiping each other out.

Talk about being an absolute hypocrite. You hate guns because they kill people but you're perfectly okay with complete genocide of gun owners? Your moral compass is broken and you sicken me.

I'm curious as to why you think I think genocide of gun owners is OK?

Oh I see, I think... Is it because you lack the ability to understand context, cherry picking part of a conversation to jump to conclusions. Perhaps you are just a dumb ass or perhaps you spouted off in the heat of the moment either way, pull your head in.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Not a real nice thought pattern there, guy...

...and please, don't lecture me on context. I venture to guess, at least I sure as hell hope so, you're not actually advocating anything of the sort.

Still, and all, not really cool.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Not a real nice thought pattern there, guy...

...and please, don't lecture me on context. I venture to guess, at least I sure as hell hope so, you're not actually advocating anything of the sort.

Still, and all, not really cool.

Really? Why would i beat around the bush ? if I felt gun nuts should all die I would just come out and say it, now despite all this I know you're not stupid so surely you are able to read between the lines. Anyhow since the context of what I'm saying is proving difficult to understand, in my post below I'm hoping there is some clarification.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Wow just in case anyone else is confused, I replied to the member thinking it may be the elites killing kids in an attempt for a gun grab, I speculated that it is unlikely as there are too many guns to grab, and it's possible were being engineered to kill each other off. It's really not that difficult to understand is it?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Now we know there were what, 4 officer cowards?

Naw, not so sure of your selves now....please

.........i lead manpower and manage peoples walk in this world....get offa him and come get ya some of big old me

in the war it's not so cut and dried.....to really protect from this scenario ,

I'd have a protocol in place.......more equpment for a protector and regulator, yep, tool em up if ya wanna see real world results.


First things first......when ya start a project.....first thing we do is.....tool up........fail on the leader.....the head dude, not the peon!

the right men with the right equipment.......... to get the job done.....see how that is more sensible than friggin complaining about a guy in a tee shirt with a pew pew pewy water pistol to take on a fariggin social monstrocity yes, it'd been different if he was given a 6 inch S W 44 mag with a red dot or better and Garrett hammerheads with a .35 meplat and runnin along at 25 brinnell hardness