You win - he really was a chickenshit - I know my limitations - that’s why I enforced the law with an ink pen - far as I know zero ink pen fatalities.
.
......... 
.
School Shootings
-
-
@Bill Martin, I looked it up here!
I would venture to say that most Americans have absolutely no clue that law enforcement has no legal obligation to protect them (especially since “To Protect & To Serve” is erroneously plastered all over their vehicles).
Now don’t get me wrong, I believe most police officers will do what’s right & willingly put themselves in harm’s way - however, they certainly have no legal obligation to do so.
-
Display More@Bill Martin, I looked it up here!
I would venture to say that most Americans have absolutely no clue that law enforcement has no legal obligation to protect them (especially since “To Protect & To Serve” is erroneously plastered all over their vehicles).
Now don’t get me wrong, I believe most police officers will do what’s right & willingly put themselves in harm’s way - however, they certainly have no legal obligation to do so.
And there lies the problem
-
Display More
@KayTwo, I personally agree with you 100%. A moral & ethical response & in order to fulfill your oath - most certainly! Legally, though, we have a problem.
Unfortunately, our nations’ courts disagree that the police have any obligation to protect anyone. There are two major cases that come to mind:
The Town of Castlerock vs. Gonzalez
(The court ruled that a municipality cannot be sued for failure to enforce a restraining order.)Warren vs. District of Columbia
(The court ruled that police do not have a specific duty to provide police services to individual citizens.)@Tripod, if he were a deputy out in town on normal duty, thats one thing, BUT he had a specific place of duty with a specific set of rules for that job. A school resource officer IS a security officer. He DOES have that obligation. Even the Sheriff said he should have been moving to the fight.
Normal, everyday officers, yes - most of them will fight anyway because of their beliefs, but they would not be as culpable if they did not, as this deputy is in this case.
-
Now here is something else for people to think about. You cannot buy a gun until you are 21 years of age. How many (real numbers here) single females that have graduated from high school and living on their own until they are of age of 21. How can they protect themselves. I am just using females here for a reason. Everyone wants to protect their daughters but she can only protect herself with what? A Baseball Bat. You are leaving them with 3 or 4 years of this.
-
Okay, so I just would like to point out that you just said a cop has no legal obligation to protect a person. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court (Warren v. District of Columbia). Got it. And yet you are all saying that this police officer (School Resource Officer) does have that legal obligation even though his contract, out of all likelihood, does not require that of him (School Resource Officer Role).
Does it make him a chickenshit, yes. Is what he did illegal? No. Maybe the people they pick for SROs should be under more scrutiny, or should be willing to die for the kids, but technically they are not required to do so.
-
Okay, so I just would like to point out that you just said a cop has no legal obligation to protect a person. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court (Warren v. District of Columbia). Got it. And yet you are all saying that this police officer (School Resource Officer) does have that legal obligation even though his contract, out of all likelihood, does not require that of him (School Resource Officer Role).
Does it make him a chickenshit, yes. Is what he did illegal? No. Maybe the people they pick for SROs should be under more scrutiny, or should be willing to die for the kids, but technically they are not required to do so.
Okay, so I just would like to point out that you just said a cop has no legal obligation to protect a person. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court (Warren v. District of Columbia). Got it. And yet you are all saying that this police officer (School Resource Officer) does have that legal obligation even though his contract, out of all likelihood, does not require that of him (School Resource Officer Role).
Does it make him a chickenshit, yes. Is what he did illegal? No. Maybe the people they pick for SROs should be under more scrutiny, or should be willing to die for the kids, but technically they are not required to do so.What really gets me is they are willing to take the money that is paid for a job with the intended purpose to protect those who pay their salary. By not performing the role they have traditionally taken, they should be treated like a conscience objector and refused pay and benefits and be dismissed from the job they hold. If they want the money for the retirement, they should be expected to perform to the same values as the military. We signed a contract to perform our duty and could be court martial-ed if negligent in doing so. SO SHOULD THEY!
-
Why ( I havent read the entire thread) is no one talking non-lethal? We have the best non lethal means of disabling anyone and any animal. Equip and train school staff in the use of non-lethal options. Tasers, OC, Bean bag shot guns, Paint ball guns with pepper balls (I said balls). We have elaborate fire systems within schools. Why not have the ability to fill a room with OC? We do it in our jails. A staff member trained every month at the range, lets say a 9mm, in a stressful situation will........cause friendly fire just because, all plans go to shit in the first minute anyway. Then look forward to a manslaughter charge later, thats just the way it goes. My son is a deputy sheriff and they fill cells with OC that incapacitates all. I have certified with OC and I would gladly go into an Army gas chamber or be Tased before OC. Beanbag weapons are no joke, they disable but not kill. A quick fix that doesn't require a lot of effort, just time and open source purchases from the local sporting goods store. I have the business model and training requirements in theroy if interested. "Shoot em in the face" Peace out!!!
-
Does it make him a chickenshit, yes. Is what he did illegal?
Keep in mind too, I never spoke in terms of legalities, either, only in terms of moral and ethical requirements. There's often a difference in what is written, and what is right.
-
Okay, so I just would like to point out that you just said a cop has no legal obligation to protect a person. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court (Warren v. District of Columbia). Got it. And yet you are all saying that this police officer (School Resource Officer) does have that legal obligation even though his contract, out of all likelihood, does not require that of him (School Resource Officer Role).
Does it make him a chickenshit, yes. Is what he did illegal? No. Maybe the people they pick for SROs should be under more scrutiny, or should be willing to die for the kids, but technically they are not required to do so.
With my meager understanding of the law now days your analysis is spot on IMO! To put this into a courtroom type argument - if this officer is culpable under the law THEN let’s say Joe Blow steps off the sidewalk as a speeding bus approaches. An officer is right behind him. If the officer does not jump to push Joe Blow out of harm’s way he surely will be killed. It is the officer’s sworn duty to protect the public of which Joe Blow is a member. The officer does nothing. If the officer is legally culpable in the Florida shooting situation he also would be in my little scenario. Granted a horrendous act vs a stupid act but in the eyes of the law the same.
Just a little boost to your argument there @sideseatdriver 
-
BTW - I’m so proud of you guys quoting court cases and making legal arguments it ALMOST makes me wanna go out and rehang my shingle
VERY AROUSING -
BTW - I’m so proud of you guys quoting court cases and making legal arguments it ALMOST makes me wanna go out and rehang my shingle
VERY AROUSING Easy, killer, don't need you back in the hospital from over-exertion.
-
I am not saying that what he did/did not do was correct, but, believe it or not, up until a couple of years ago, some police agencies were TRAINED to stay out of the fight until backup arrives. It is possible that he was following his training. It is also possible that the Sheriff just threw his deputy under the bus because he is another elected official and the last thing he wants to admit during this shitstorm is that his deputy was just following his training. Thankfully, we are now being trained to engage as quickly as possible.
-
I brought up the legal issue because most people just do not realize that the police do NOT have to legally protect you. Most will do so though. Can I count on them though? When seconds count & the cops are minutes away, what do you do? You MUST be able to defend yourself & those you care about. I’m totally in favor of teachers & administrators who are trained & willing to carry firearms to do so (where permitted by law) in order to protect themselves & their students.
I have a friend here in Las Cruces who is a SWAT officer. He told me with no qualms that they are trained to protect themselves & their fellow officers FIRST & FOREMOST - Joe Citizen is a secondary concern.
-
I am not saying that what he did/did not do was correct, but, believe it or not, up until a couple of years ago, some police agencies were TRAINED to stay out of the fight until backup arrives. It is possible that he was following his training. It is also possible that the Sheriff just threw his deputy under the bus because he is another elected official and the last thing he wants to admit during this shitstorm is that his deputy was just following his training. Thankfully, we are now being trained to engage as quickly as possible.
One of the best points made yet that had not occurred to me. With a high profile crime like this no one should ever be so naive as to not believe politics can’t steamroll over somebody in a heart beat. I was not aware till now you were LEO - thank you for everything you do to keep us safe !!!
-
@sideseatdriver Sorry for the delay in response. Haven’t been keeping up with this thread all that much because I’ve been working in the garage. Just checked my address book, I have contacts at CNN, Rolling Stone, Bloomberg, LA Times and a few international press folks if you need me to reach out.
*Just a warning though ~> these folks are pretty left-of-center. Happy to help though.
-
@sideseatdriver Sorry for the delay in response. Haven’t been keeping up with this thread all that much because I’ve been working in the garage. Just checked my address book, I have contacts at CNN, Rolling Stone, Bloomberg, LA Times and a few international press folks if you need me to reach out.
*Just a warning though ~> these folks are pretty left-of-center. Happy to help though.
I’d a never guessed with that list -
Those were the tame one’s... have contacts at TYT and MTV for those ready to dive off that cliff!
-
Just my point. If you train all staff members in the use of non-lethal force, lets say 25. At best you will get 8 that take action during a crisis. Do you prosicute the remaining 17 staff members for inaction? Dereliction of duty? Does the "good samaritian law" apply? We have a better chance and more receptive audience with non-lethal means. The 55 year old vegetarian woman/man (being fair) will sling some OC/Tase before sending rounds down range. Have non-lethal stations throughout the school that only staff members have access to, how hard is that. I don't mind a teacher with a Taser and OC at their disposal in the class room, lead is a different story.
