It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Breaking - Four Officers Remained Outside Douglas Massacre!

page: 9
72
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit

It is a fact that criminals will usually pick softer targets where they themselves are in less danger of acute lead poisoning.


Well if these were criminals (or even terrorists), that might be true. But those carrying out the attacks are schools are neither. Most intend to die in the attack, making them very dangerous.

Also.. a "liberal policy" didn't kill 17 kids. A crazy kid who found it all too easy to get weapons even after people called the FBI to warn about him is why 17 kids died.


Many of them do intend to die, but you're forgetting something. They also want to kill as many people as they can. They do specifically look for soft targets where they're unlikely to face immediate resistance. Gun free zones draw these people like a magnet. That's a liberal policy. At best it's ineffective. At worst it's actually making the problem worse.




posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: face23785
A silly meme.
Zebras can kill lions with their kicks.
Porcupines are killed by lions, as well.


Yeah they can kill porcupines, when they're desperate for food. Lions are documented to even attack elephants on occasion, despite elephants being extremely dangerous to them. Most of the time lions leave porcupines alone though, that's kind of the point. They're looking for easier prey. So are criminals and mass shooters. The meme demonstrates that point effectively.

Slight problem:

You would always have to have your gun in your hand for it to actually demonstrate anything.

How fast do you think an antagonist can open fire?
How fast can you draw?



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: fleabit

It is a fact that criminals will usually pick softer targets where they themselves are in less danger of acute lead poisoning.


Well if these were criminals (or even terrorists), that might be true. But those carrying out the attacks are schools are neither. Most intend to die in the attack, making them very dangerous.

Also.. a "liberal policy" didn't kill 17 kids. A crazy kid who found it all too easy to get weapons even after people called the FBI to warn about him is why 17 kids died.


Many of them do intend to die, but you're forgetting something. They also want to kill as many people as they can. They do specifically look for soft targets where they're unlikely to face immediate resistance. Gun free zones draw these people like a magnet. That's a liberal policy. At best it's ineffective. At worst it's actually making the problem worse.

Strange that there were people with guns at the scene while the shooting was going on - at least one and perhaps up to four police officers - but they didn't go in and stop it.

A similar story with Las Vegas.
edit on 11Sat, 24 Feb 2018 11:03:26 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago2 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 12:17 PM
link   



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

The cops outside whose lives aren't in immediate jeopardy and have to work up the courage to run inside are a little different than a teacher who is inside, hunkered down with his students when the perp comes in. Would you rather sit there throwing pencils at him or at least have a fighting chance?

And no one thinks a teacher is going to turn into Rambo.


This isn't proof of anything except the "wait for the police" strategy is a non-starter. Citizens defend themselves with guns every day. You won't see it covered on CNN but it happens all the time. It does happen in real life situations. Sorry about your narrative, I heard you two were close.


These officers are trained for just this type of scenario and yet they stood outside and did nothing, this is just the proof many members need to hear with their "I would have shot him" attitude. The macho bull from some members on this site would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad!!
A recent statistic shows that only about 30% of shots in a gun battle are on target, and thats a police officer with training, now imagine that in a class room with kids running for cover with someone less trained?
It's also typical that a person with a losing argument likes to make themselves feel better by pointing out bad grammer or "narative", you're so funny!!
Link




edit on 24-2-2018 by Kurokage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So much for that theory.
An armed trained teacher / marine / mercenary/ warrior would have stopped that guy.
The good guys with the guns had their heads up their asses.
Probably because they know a hand gun ain't no match for a semi automatic rifle!



Think about that. These officers had GUNS. Even if you are going to ignore the previous common sense replies to the above: the type of gun did not matter; training matters more; there were four against one; etc. etc. ... consider this:

There were defenseless CHILDREN and teachers inside the school. The officers knew that. They knew that NONE of the innocent victims inside had ANY type of gun or way to defend themselves against a shooter. And yet these officers did nothing, even knowing that they had weapons in their hands and training. They had a moral duty to protect the innocent, even if courts have decided it is not a legal duty.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: mymymy
Or is it possible that when an officer KNOWS someone is armed, and are not just "feeling" threatened, they're not the big tough guys so many of them think they are?

Corruption and cowardice aside. Their job is to uphold the law not die for the kids. That said it was pretty cowardly on their part. Especially considering the new information points to the police actively falsifying crime statistics to continue receiving big federal grants. Essentially allowing this shooter to slip through the cracks countless times.

They basically created this tragedy and now are blaming the NRA and anyone to cover their tracks. Sadly a vast majority of people are buying it. Anything to confirm their bias towards conservatives and anything gun related.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
We've had lots of members in the past saying "if there had only been someone who was armed there, this would have never happened!". Now it turns out that there were 4 armed police officers there during the most recent shooting and they decided to just stay outside. Some members seem think that the average armed person in a situation like this is suddenly going to turn in John McClane or Rambo, heres the proof that this doesn't happen in real life situations.


It happens in real life all the time. These cops are just cowards who have no business in this line of work.

Either that or they were told to let these kids get killed.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 01:56 PM
link   
This event seems to be dynamic. Meaning that every single thought or avenue on gun control has been forseen and acted against by the event.

more officers on scene to stop threat-fail
officers assigned to school to stop threat-fail
fbi tips to local sheriffs-fail
see something say something-fail
mental health stay-fail
it just goes on and on and is seemingly inevitable to stop before it is time to stop it



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So much for that theory.
An armed trained teacher / marine / mercenary/ warrior would have stopped that guy.
The good guys with the guns had their heads up their asses.
Probably because they know a hand gun ain't no match for a semi automatic rifle!



how did they know what weapon he had? did they supply it? Did he call them before hand and let them know he'd be using an AR as opposed to an AK-47? You should think more and type less.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

It wasn't just this event. What about Las Vegas? There were police and security everywhere.

Even way back at Columbine quickly had armed guard/police on site before the shooting stopped.

In Columbine, two of those armed individuals even fired from cover upon one of the shooters who had emerged outside. Unfortunately, this was at considerable distance for a handgun and the shooter escaped back into the building to continue the rampage.

I bet you never heard about that bit from Columbine.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Vroomfondel


How do you know thats not the case? I wouldn't put anything past the democrats at this point.


Yes, I can see that.

Unplug. It's gone too far with you. My political persuasion is Democrat. I am not a murderer, nor are any of the people I know. When children are killed, we all feel pain. Regardless of their or their parents political affiliation.

To think otherwise, is quite paranoid, I believe, in addition to being utter nonsense.





If its all sick paranoia explain this...

link



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: fleabit

It is a fact that criminals will usually pick softer targets where they themselves are in less danger of acute lead poisoning.


Well if these were criminals (or even terrorists), that might be true. But those carrying out the attacks are schools are neither. Most intend to die in the attack, making them very dangerous.

Also.. a "liberal policy" didn't kill 17 kids. A crazy kid who found it all too easy to get weapons even after people called the FBI to warn about him is why 17 kids died.


Many of them do intend to die, but you're forgetting something. They also want to kill as many people as they can. They do specifically look for soft targets where they're unlikely to face immediate resistance. Gun free zones draw these people like a magnet. That's a liberal policy. At best it's ineffective. At worst it's actually making the problem worse.

Strange that there were people with guns at the scene while the shooting was going on - at least one and perhaps up to four police officers - but they didn't go in and stop it.

A similar story with Las Vegas.


Yeah this kid was a former student, so he knew where the resource officer was and he entered the building on the complete opposite side of the campus. And since he was a former student it's possible he knew the guy was unlikely to actually confront him. It just illustrates that hiding in a closet waiting for the cops to save you isn't an effective strategy.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: face23785
A silly meme.
Zebras can kill lions with their kicks.
Porcupines are killed by lions, as well.


Yeah they can kill porcupines, when they're desperate for food. Lions are documented to even attack elephants on occasion, despite elephants being extremely dangerous to them. Most of the time lions leave porcupines alone though, that's kind of the point. They're looking for easier prey. So are criminals and mass shooters. The meme demonstrates that point effectively.

Slight problem:

You would always have to have your gun in your hand for it to actually demonstrate anything.

How fast do you think an antagonist can open fire?
How fast can you draw?


That's a problem if you're the first person shot. That's why a lot of the schools that have implemented programs where they have armed staff keep their identities anonymous.

Nobody is guaranteeing that they can stop the shooter. As of right now though, there's zero chance of stopping the shooter. I'd like to improve those odds, wouldn't you?



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785
What will save you from a situation like Las Vegas?



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: face23785

The cops outside whose lives aren't in immediate jeopardy and have to work up the courage to run inside are a little different than a teacher who is inside, hunkered down with his students when the perp comes in. Would you rather sit there throwing pencils at him or at least have a fighting chance?

And no one thinks a teacher is going to turn into Rambo.


This isn't proof of anything except the "wait for the police" strategy is a non-starter. Citizens defend themselves with guns every day. You won't see it covered on CNN but it happens all the time. It does happen in real life situations. Sorry about your narrative, I heard you two were close.


These officers are trained for just this type of scenario and yet they stood outside and did nothing, this is just the proof many members need to hear with their "I would have shot him" attitude. The macho bull from some members on this site would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad!!
A recent statistic shows that only about 30% of shots in a gun battle are on target, and thats a police officer with training, now imagine that in a class room with kids running for cover with someone less trained?
It's also typical that a person with a losing argument likes to make themselves feel better by pointing out bad grammer or "narative", you're so funny!!
Link





I'm well aware of the accuracy rate, in fact I linked to that same incident where cops hit bystanders. But even with their poor accuracy rate, it's statistically rare for them to hit a bystander compared to the number of shots they fire. The reason for this is simple to anyone who's been trained. One of the things they hammer into your head is to know your background. If there's anything next to or behind the shooter you wouldn't want to hit, you don't take the shot. You only take the shot if the background is clear, so if you miss all you hit is a wall or something. You're also ignoring the fact that these shooters aren't standing in the middle of a crowd of students. The majority of the victims in these incidents get shot wherever they happen to be taking cover, because no one saved them. They're on the floor or under desks and chairs, and the shooter is standing and walking around looking for the next person to shoot. If there's 30 people in the room, and one of them is armed, the shooter can only shoot one person at a time. If he turns his back to you, you have a chance to draw your weapon and stop him. But you'd rather there be zero chance of stopping him for some reason.

And speaking of training, I hate to break it to you but police don't get some double-secret-probation uber-training that's only available to the elite of the elite. Any civilian can take a tactical training course, and that's precisely the kind of course the schools that do have these programs send their staff through. As projectvxn already pointed out, civilians using guns in defense of their lives and others isn't just "macho bull", it's real and happens every day. I know it makes you feel better to pretend gun owners are all pussies with small dicks who own guns to make themselves feel big, but that only shows your own insecurity. And pretending that I'm losing this argument because I pointed out the flaws in your false narrative is what's really funny. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about on this subject, and sadly have no desire to learn from people more informed than yourself. You're actually part of the problem, why we can't have informed debate and reach a meaningful solution that will actually save lives. But keep blaming the NRA bud. I only hope someday you and those like you will open your minds and actually develop a desire to solve this instead of just blame boogeymen.
edit on 24 2 18 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

What liberal policy?


Read the thread.



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785


I've seen this about 20 times and I just now noticed the spelling error lol


Is the top one trying to eat or mate?




posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
A gun and a badge doesn't make you a hero



posted on Feb, 24 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Another example of why gun control doesn't work. You can't rely on just having the police armed. Just ask Chicago who has the strictest gun laws.







 
72
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join