Current Events > Judge ruled officers had no duty to protect students in parkland shooting.

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:02:19 PM #103:	JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... He's a professor of law. He works in a school too so he probably advises it's SROs. He works in a total different school from the one the shooting happens in. Being a professor of law doesn't require you to learn thousands of school protocols. Wait how do you know the school's protocol then? Cite your source. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914396387] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>He's a professor of law. He works in a school too so he probably advises it's SROs. </quote> He works in a total different school from the one the shooting happens in. Being a professor of law doesn't require you to learn thousands of school protocols.</quote> Wait how do you know the school's protocol then? Cite your source.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
K181 12/19/18 2:02:26 PM #104:	Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in. --- Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, I could care less. <cite>K181 posted [p:914396394] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:02:55 PM #105:	Webmaster4531 posted... Wait how do you know the school's protocol then? Cite your source. I never claimed I knew the school's protocol. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914396424] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Wait how do you know the school's protocol then? Cite your source. </quote> I never claimed I knew the school's protocol.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ThePrinceFish 12/19/18 2:03:12 PM #106:	K181 posted... Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in. You'd be pissed off if a medic "in the heat of the moment" threw all his training to the wind and got people killed. Why should a cop be able to say fuck his training because of adrenaline? --- Dielman on Rivers: "I've tried to get him to say s--- or f--- and all he'll ever do is say, 'Golly gee, I can't do that." <cite>ThePrinceFish posted [p:914396439] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>K181 posted...</cite> <quote>Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in.</quote> You'd be pissed off if a medic "in the heat of the moment" threw all his training to the wind and got people killed. Why should a cop be able to say fuck his training because of adrenaline?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
sylverlolol 12/19/18 2:04:23 PM #107:	Protect and serve...lol guess not --- This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. <cite>sylverlolol posted [p:914396510] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>Protect and serve...lol guess not</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:04:26 PM #108:	Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... He does not have any particular insight on when it is or is not appropriate to initiate a lockdown Professor of law not knowing about law enforcement. That doesn't make sense especially since they're asking him because he should know. I'm not sure why you think it makes no sense. Law professors are not experts on law enforcement. That is not what they do. They are experts on the laws and statutes themselves, as well as how the courts work, and no doubt there is some overlap in regards to laws that apply to law enforcement, but there is basically no reason to expect a law professor to have any specific knowledge on how school lockdowns work. But regardless of that, he was not making the implication that you claim he was. Stop being so eager to put words in peoples' mouths. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914396512] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>He does not have any particular insight on when it is or is not appropriate to initiate a lockdown</quote> Professor of law not knowing about law enforcement. That doesn't make sense especially since they're asking him because he should know.</quote> I'm not sure why you think it makes no sense. Law professors are not experts on law enforcement. That is not what they do. They are experts on the laws and statutes themselves, as well as how the courts work, and no doubt there is some overlap in regards to laws that apply to law enforcement, but there is basically no reason to expect a law professor to have any specific knowledge on how school lockdowns work. But regardless of that, he was not making the implication that you claim he was. Stop being so eager to put words in peoples' mouths.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
spudger 12/19/18 2:04:57 PM #109:	Then take it off your cop car slogan Liars --- -Only dead fish swim with the current http://error1355.com/ce/spudger.html <cite>spudger posted [p:914396538] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>Then take it off your cop car slogan Liars</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
K181 12/19/18 2:06:22 PM #110:	ThePrinceFish posted... K181 posted... Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in. You'd be pissed off if a medic "in the heat of the moment" threw all his training to the wind and got people killed. Why should a cop be able to say fuck his training because of adrenaline? If a medic didn't rush into a dangerous situation? Not really, or at the very least not liable for damages. Incompetence at stabilizing a patient is different, though. --- Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, I could care less. <cite>K181 posted [p:914396611] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>ThePrinceFish posted...</cite> <quote><cite>K181 posted...</cite> <quote>Fair enough, but in the heat of the moment it's absolutely understandable thst self-preservation instincts kick in and a random cop is too afraid to rush in.</quote> You'd be pissed off if a medic "in the heat of the moment" threw all his training to the wind and got people killed. Why should a cop be able to say fuck his training because of adrenaline?</quote> If a medic didn't rush into a dangerous situation? Not really, or at the very least not liable for damages. Incompetence at stabilizing a patient is different, though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:09:41 PM #111:	eston posted... Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... He does not have any particular insight on when it is or is not appropriate to initiate a lockdown Professor of law not knowing about law enforcement. That doesn't make sense especially since they're asking him because he should know. I'm not sure why you think it makes no sense. Law professors are not experts on law enforcement. That is not what they do. They are experts on the laws and statutes themselves, as well as how the courts work, and no doubt there is some overlap in regards to laws that apply to law enforcement, but there is basically no reason to expect a law professor to have any specific knowledge on how school lockdowns work. But regardless of that, he was not making the implication that you claim he was. Stop being so eager to put words in peoples' mouths. This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914396802] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>He does not have any particular insight on when it is or is not appropriate to initiate a lockdown</quote> Professor of law not knowing about law enforcement. That doesn't make sense especially since they're asking him because he should know.</quote> I'm not sure why you think it makes no sense. Law professors are not experts on law enforcement. That is not what they do. They are experts on the laws and statutes themselves, as well as how the courts work, and no doubt there is some overlap in regards to laws that apply to law enforcement, but there is basically no reason to expect a law professor to have any specific knowledge on how school lockdowns work. But regardless of that, he was not making the implication that you claim he was. Stop being so eager to put words in peoples' mouths.</quote> This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:11:13 PM #112:	Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914396877] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? </quote> They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:11:43 PM #113:	Webmaster4531 posted... He knew that a crossing guard is liable to people crossing. It's his job to know school protocol because it's police protocol. He knows that because it has a legal precedent, and his knowledge of police protocol is likely relegated to what is specifically referenced by law and statute --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914396899] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>He knew that a crossing guard is liable to people crossing. It's his job to know school protocol because it's police protocol.</quote> He knows that because it has a legal precedent, and his knowledge of police protocol is likely relegated to what is specifically referenced by law and statute</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dark_Spiret 12/19/18 2:13:30 PM #114:	learn to take care of your self and your family cause no one else will. <cite>Dark_Spiret posted [p:914397008] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>learn to take care of your self and your family cause no one else will.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:14:10 PM #115:	JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable. Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914397049] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? </quote> They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable.</quote> Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:14:24 PM #116:	Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They aren't --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914397067] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable?</quote> They aren't</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:15:54 PM #117:	Webmaster4531 posted... JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable. Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown. If the arguments being made by the lawyer are successful. He is not making a definitive claim about whether or not the lockdown was appropriate. That's the lawyer for the people suing who is saying that. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914397147] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? </quote> They wouldn't be, if they followed their training, they won't be liable.</quote> Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown.</quote> If the arguments being made by the lawyer are successful. He is not making a definitive claim about whether or not the lockdown was appropriate. That's the lawyer for the people suing who is saying that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:16:15 PM #118:	Webmaster4531 posted... Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown. No, he said he could be found liable if the police oficer "negligently ordered a lockdown", if the police order was following his training, it wasn't negligent. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914397164] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Hutchinson literally said they could be held liable for the lockdown. </quote> No, he said he could be found liable if the police oficer "negligently ordered a lockdown", if the police order was following his training, it wasn't negligent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:16:42 PM #119:	eston posted... Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They aren't What did you mean here? eston posted... He knew there was an active shooter on campus, which means it gets locked down. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914397188] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable?</quote> They aren't</quote> What did you mean here? <cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>He knew there was an active shooter on campus, which means it gets locked down.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:17:40 PM #120:	JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... He's a professor of law. He works in a school too so he probably advises it's SROs. He works in a total different school from the one the shooting happens in. Being a professor of law doesn't require you to learn thousands of school protocols. He works at a university, which typically has its own police department. It's not at all the same thing as a high school SRO. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914397236] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>He's a professor of law. He works in a school too so he probably advises it's SROs. </quote> He works in a total different school from the one the shooting happens in. Being a professor of law doesn't require you to learn thousands of school protocols.</quote> He works at a university, which typically has its own police department. It's not at all the same thing as a high school SRO.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:21:11 PM #121:	Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... Webmaster4531 posted... This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable? They aren't What did you mean here? eston posted... He knew there was an active shooter on campus, which means it gets locked down. Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. The lawyer representing those suing the officer is claiming that the lockdown put more people in danger, and Hutchinson is saying IF that's true then it could make the officer liable. You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914397411] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>This is pretty asinine. Why would any police officer be trained to do something that would make them liable?</quote> They aren't</quote> What did you mean here? <cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>He knew there was an active shooter on campus, which means it gets locked down.</quote></quote> Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. The lawyer representing those suing the officer is claiming that the lockdown put more people in danger, and Hutchinson is saying IF that's true then it could make the officer liable. You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ultimate reaver 12/19/18 2:23:20 PM #122:	to serve and --- butts <cite>ultimate reaver posted [p:914397516] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>to serve and</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LyraTheUnicorn 12/19/18 2:25:00 PM #123:	eston posted... The idea that a lone police officer should have rushed into the building when he did not know where the shooter was or even how many shooters there were is completely ludicrous and flat out unreasonable. --- https://tinyurl.com/ya94bmrw / https://tinyurl.com/y8b6mzsm / https://tinyurl.com/ycbt5t5o https://tinyurl.com/ya3qd7pv / https://tinyurl.com/yancofs3 <cite>LyraTheUnicorn posted [p:914397602] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>The idea that a lone police officer should have rushed into the building when he did not know where the shooter was or even how many shooters there were is completely ludicrous and flat out unreasonable.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Typhon 12/19/18 2:27:11 PM #124:	thrashmetal14 posted... So basically cops are just here to swindle money from drug users, shoot innocent people, and not protect civilians. Got it. Don't forget harassing the poor, lying under oath, and framing those they don't like. <cite>Typhon posted [p:914397716] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>thrashmetal14 posted...</cite> <quote>So basically cops are just here to swindle money from drug users, shoot innocent people, and not protect civilians. Got it.</quote> Don't forget harassing the poor, lying under oath, and framing those they don't like.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/19/18 2:27:36 PM #125:	ThePrinceFish posted... K181 posted... ThePrinceFish posted... K181 posted... CreekCo posted... Going "above and beyond the call of duty" is literally the job No, that's why that phrase exists, to recognize exceptional bravery and sacrifice. It's not a soldier's duty to jump on a grenade to save their squad mates' lives, which is why when it does happen it's so extraordinarily conspicuous. Rushing into an active shooting is the same thing for a random cop or security guard as well. Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. They are LITERALLY taught not to wait for backup, and to intervene in the shooting as soon as they are able. Not when they feel safe doing so, when they are able. No offense, but [citation needed]. I think you're vastly overstating your case if you believe that police officers are specifically taught to run into active shooting situations without backup. And even if it's something that they're taught to do, it's hardly shocking if self-preservation instincts cause a random guard or patrolman to free under the pressure. https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-school-shooting-columbine-lessons/index.html "You're going to the sound of the guns," he said. "The No. 1 goal is to interdict the shooter or shooters. In the old days, you took land. You went in. You clear the room. Then you slowly and methodically move to clear the next room. In this instance ... get to the shooter as quickly as possible and that's what they clearly did here." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/02/23/police-are-trained-to-attack-active-shooters-but-parkland-officer-didnt-would-armed-teachers-help/?utm_term=.4385bd9f4465 In American policing, confronting active shooters is divided into two eras: before Columbine, and after Columbine. Before the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado, police strategy was to wait for the SWAT team to arrive and then attack en masse with precise force. But after the two shooters in Columbine roamed the school for nearly 50 minutes, killing 13 and wounding 21, the police approach changed: Enter now. Whoever is there with a gun, whether a school resource officer or the first patrol officer to arrive, should go after the shooter. We teach that the first priority when you come on scene is to stop the killing, said Pete Blair, executive director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University and one of the nations top experts on active shooter training. The number one driving force is gunfire. If theres gunfire, we teach the officers to isolate, distract and neutralize. We want people to go directly to the sounds of the gunfire. etc I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:914397737] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>ThePrinceFish posted...</cite> <quote><cite>K181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ThePrinceFish posted...</cite> <quote><cite>K181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>CreekCo posted...</cite> <quote>Going "above and beyond the call of duty" is literally the job</quote> No, that's why that phrase exists, to recognize exceptional bravery and sacrifice. It's not a soldier's duty to jump on a grenade to save their squad mates' lives, which is why when it does happen it's so extraordinarily conspicuous. Rushing into an active shooting is the same thing for a random cop or security guard as well.</quote> Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. They are LITERALLY taught not to wait for backup, and to intervene in the shooting as soon as they are able. Not when they feel safe doing so, when they are able.</quote> No offense, but [citation needed]. I think you're vastly overstating your case if you believe that police officers are specifically taught to run into active shooting situations without backup. And even if it's something that they're taught to do, it's hardly shocking if self-preservation instincts cause a random guard or patrolman to free under the pressure.</quote> https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-school-shooting-columbine-lessons/index.html <quote>"You're going to the sound of the guns," he said. "The No. 1 goal is to interdict the shooter or shooters. In the old days, you took land. You went in. You clear the room. Then you slowly and methodically move to clear the next room. In this instance ... get to the shooter as quickly as possible and that's what they clearly did here."</quote> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/02/23/police-are-trained-to-attack-active-shooters-but-parkland-officer-didnt-would-armed-teachers-help/?utm_term=.4385bd9f4465 <quote>In American policing, confronting active shooters is divided into two eras: before Columbine, and after Columbine. Before the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado, police strategy was to wait for the SWAT team to arrive and then attack en masse with precise force. But after the two shooters in Columbine roamed the school for nearly 50 minutes, killing 13 and wounding 21, the police approach changed: Enter now. Whoever is there with a gun, whether a school resource officer or the first patrol officer to arrive, should go after the shooter. We teach that the first priority when you come on scene is to stop the killing, said Pete Blair, executive director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University and one of the nations top experts on active shooter training. The number one driving force is gunfire. If theres gunfire, we teach the officers to isolate, distract and neutralize. We want people to go directly to the sounds of the gunfire.</quote> etc</quote> I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HenryAllbright 12/19/18 2:28:54 PM #126:	Tmaster148 posted... I mean. If cops don't have to protect people then what's the point in paying for them with our taxes. We pay taxes to fund the police so that they can arrest us, fine us, and lock us up in cages for harmless recreational drug use and traffic infractions that don't hurt anyone. Oh yeah, and also to arrest us for not paying our taxes to fund the police. --- All points of view and perspectives exist for a reason. There is no such thing as evil. <cite>HenryAllbright posted [p:914397814] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote>I mean. If cops don't have to protect people then what's the point in paying for them with our taxes.</quote> We pay taxes to fund the police so that they can arrest us, fine us, and lock us up in cages for harmless recreational drug use and traffic infractions that don't hurt anyone. Oh yeah, and also to arrest us for not paying our taxes to fund the police.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:29:45 PM #127:	Tmaster148 posted... I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this. I still think it's unreasonable tbqh --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914397860] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote>I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this.</quote> I still think it's unreasonable tbqh</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HenryAllbright 12/19/18 2:31:19 PM #128:	LyraTheUnicorn posted... eston posted... The idea that a lone police officer should have rushed into the building when he did not know where the shooter was or even how many shooters there were is completely ludicrous and flat out unreasonable. Looking at this instance, as much as I criticize the police, it was perfectly reasonable for the officer to have done what he did. But it sure makes a nice attention-grabbing headline "Officer on scene of school shooting, but did nothing to intervene" is sure a cheap, easy way to get people to rev up their premature judgment engines. --- All points of view and perspectives exist for a reason. There is no such thing as evil. <cite>HenryAllbright posted [p:914397940] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>LyraTheUnicorn posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>The idea that a lone police officer should have rushed into the building when he did not know where the shooter was or even how many shooters there were is completely ludicrous and flat out unreasonable.</quote></quote> Looking at this instance, as much as I criticize the police, it was perfectly reasonable for the officer to have done what he did. But it sure makes a nice attention-grabbing headline "Officer on scene of school shooting, but did nothing to intervene" is sure a cheap, easy way to get people to rev up their premature judgment engines.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:32:44 PM #129:	eston posted... Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. You know this how? Also cite your source. eston posted... You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying. No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398020] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. </quote> You know this how? Also cite your source. <cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying.</quote> No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tmaster148 12/19/18 2:32:57 PM #130:	eston posted... Tmaster148 posted... I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this. I still think it's unreasonable tbqh Well it's what we are training cops to do. Which apparantly doesn't matter because police just don't have to do their job. I can't think of any other job where you can choose to not do what is expected of you and still have a job. --- https://imgur.com/BBcZDLJ <cite>Tmaster148 posted [p:914398035] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tmaster148 posted...</cite> <quote>I guess the excuse that it's unreasonable to expect 1 officer to engage in a shooting is shot down by this.</quote> I still think it's unreasonable tbqh</quote> Well it's what we are training cops to do. Which apparantly doesn't matter because police just don't have to do their job. I can't think of any other job where you can choose to not do what is expected of you and still have a job.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DirkDiggles 12/19/18 2:33:44 PM #131:	ThePrinceFish posted... Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. Then you get situations like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/black-man-killed-alabama-mall-shooting.html It's not what they are trained to do. Their responsibility is to assess the situation and go forward from there, not to make the situation worse. Blindly rushing in just gets more people hurt or killed. --- https://imgtc.com/i/5CTKeaL.jpg https://imgtc.com/i/G9w39yE.gif <cite>DirkDiggles posted [p:914398085] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>ThePrinceFish posted...</cite> <quote>Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. </quote> Then you get situations like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/black-man-killed-alabama-mall-shooting.html It's not what they are trained to do. Their responsibility is to assess the situation and go forward from there, not to make the situation worse. Blindly rushing in just gets more people hurt or killed.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
dave_is_slick 12/19/18 2:35:23 PM #132:	eston posted... I can't expect a police officer to sacrifice his life for me. Fucking what? --- The most relaxing version of Aquatic Ambiance I've ever heard: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl61y1XM7sM <cite>dave_is_slick posted [p:914398176] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>I can't expect a police officer to sacrifice his life for me.</quote> Fucking what?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:37:07 PM #133:	DirkDiggles posted... ThePrinceFish posted... Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. Then you get situations like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/black-man-killed-alabama-mall-shooting.html It's not what they are trained to do. Their responsibility is to assess the situation and go forward from there, not to make the situation worse. Blindly rushing in just gets more people hurt or killed. Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, executive director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University and one of the nations top experts on active shooter training. We teach that the first priority when you come on scene is to stop the killing, said Pete Blair, The number one driving force is gunfire. If theres gunfire, we teach the officers to isolate, distract and neutralize. We want people to go directly to the sounds of the gunfire. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398272] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>DirkDiggles posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ThePrinceFish posted...</cite> <quote>Running into an active shooting at a school is exactly what every random cop is trained to do, and has been standard protocol since Columbine. </quote> Then you get situations like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/black-man-killed-alabama-mall-shooting.html It's not what they are trained to do. Their responsibility is to assess the situation and go forward from there, not to make the situation worse. Blindly rushing in just gets more people hurt or killed.</quote> Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, executive director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University and one of the nations top experts on active shooter training. We teach that the first priority when you come on scene is to stop the killing, said Pete Blair, The number one driving force is gunfire. If theres gunfire, we teach the officers to isolate, distract and neutralize. We want people to go directly to the sounds of the gunfire.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DirkDiggles 12/19/18 2:39:30 PM #134:	Webmaster4531 posted... Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, Oh, much like yourself? Would you blindly charge in? --- https://imgtc.com/i/5CTKeaL.jpg https://imgtc.com/i/G9w39yE.gif <cite>DirkDiggles posted [p:914398393] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, </quote> Oh, much like yourself? Would you blindly charge in?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:40:59 PM #135:	Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. You know this how? Also cite your source It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. eston posted... You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying. No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. It does not imply anything of the sort. He is speaking in legal context, and nothing more. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914398468] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>Locking the school down is standard pretty much everywhere when there is an active shooter on campus. It's a universal response. </quote> You know this how? Also cite your source</quote> It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>You are taking this to mean that Hutchinson is saying the lockdown shouldn't have been initiated, which is not what he's saying.</quote> No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard.</quote> It does not imply anything of the sort. He is speaking in legal context, and nothing more.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:42:46 PM #136:	DirkDiggles posted... Webmaster4531 posted... Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, Oh, much like yourself? Would you blindly charge in? Me being brave or a coward is pretty meaningless. I have no reason to doubt Pete. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398576] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>DirkDiggles posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Look here we found an expert better than Pete Blair, </quote> Oh, much like yourself? Would you blindly charge in?</quote> Me being brave or a coward is pretty meaningless. I have no reason to doubt Pete.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Unknown5uspect 12/19/18 2:43:50 PM #137:	No surprise. There's already precedent for this. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html <cite>Unknown5uspect posted [p:914398642] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>No surprise. There's already precedent for this. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:45:27 PM #138:	eston posted... It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398740] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.</quote> You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:46:45 PM #139:	Webmaster4531 posted... No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914398803] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. </quote> Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CADE FOSTER 12/19/18 2:47:30 PM #140:	Member when Trump said he would have went in and stopped the shooter --- https://imgtc.com/i/HXEuaL9.jpg https://imgtc.com/i/xZ5hGDm.jpg https://imgtc.com/i/UZiqG9l.jpg <cite>CADE FOSTER posted [p:914398838] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>Member when Trump said he would have went in and stopped the shooter</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:47:45 PM #141:	Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source. eston posted... feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914398851] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.</quote> You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source.</quote> <cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:49:19 PM #142:	JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true. I never said he said they're true. Hutchinson said "could" in the quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398943] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. </quote> Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true.</quote> I never said he said they're true. Hutchinson said "could" in the quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:49:40 PM #143:	JE19426 posted... Webmaster4531 posted... No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true. Exactly. Like, they literally went and found a law professor (who is not connected to the case at all) to dumb this down for the general public And he still doesn't get it --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914398958] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>No, I'm not. Hutchinson said "could" in he quote. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. </quote> Nope, he's saying if the prosecutions claim are true, they support Peterson being liable. He isn't saying prosecutions claims are true.</quote> Exactly. Like, they literally went and found a law professor (who is not connected to the case at all) to dumb this down for the general public And he still doesn't get it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:50:20 PM #144:	eston posted... Webmaster4531 posted... eston posted... It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source. eston posted... feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong. Feel free to prove yourself right. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914398993] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>It's common knowledge. I'm not going to track down a source, but feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.</quote> You pulled this out of your ass. There is no source.</quote> <cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.</quote></quote> Feel free to prove yourself right.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:50:41 PM #145:	Webmaster4531 posted... I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. No, it does not --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914399013] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard.</quote> No, it does not</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:51:07 PM #146:	eston posted... Webmaster4531 posted... I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. No, it does not Webmaster4531 posted... Feel free to prove yourself right. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914399046] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard.</quote> No, it does not</quote> <cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Feel free to prove yourself right.</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:52:52 PM #147:	Webmaster4531 posted... Feel free to prove yourself right. It's an argument that only exists because you misunderstood the article. I'm not willing to put much energy towards it tbqh But again, if I'm wrong about this piece of minutia that you've chosen to focus on then you are free to rub my face in it Edit: since you quoted the same thing again, I will clarify that this is in regards to you demanding a source that schools lock down when there is a confirmed shooter --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914399151] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>Feel free to prove yourself right.</quote> It's an argument that only exists because you misunderstood the article. I'm not willing to put much energy towards it tbqh But again, if I'm wrong about this piece of minutia that you've chosen to focus on then you are free to rub my face in it Edit: since you quoted the same thing again, I will clarify that this is in regards to you demanding a source that schools lock down when there is a confirmed shooter</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:53:41 PM #148:	Webmaster4531 posted... I never said he said they're true. That's the only possible way he could be implying it isn't standard. Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. It doesn't imply that at all. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914399190] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>I never said he said they're true.</quote> That's the only possible way he could be implying it isn't standard. <quote>Which brings us back to "Either of these assertions could support liability for Peterson." I'm just saying it implies that this isn't standard. </quote> It doesn't imply that at all.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
eston 12/19/18 2:55:29 PM #149:	I think I'm gonna just let him be wrong guys. I've done all I could --- http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i215/estonc/grizzly_bear_chairs_2.jpg https://imgur.com/8kjZU <cite>eston posted [p:914399275] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote>I think I'm gonna just let him be wrong guys. I've done all I could</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:56:59 PM #150:	JE19426 posted... That's the only possible way he could be implying it isn't standard. How? JE19426 posted... It doesn't imply that at all. It does. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914399358] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote>That's the only possible way he could be implying it isn't standard.</quote> How? <cite>JE19426 posted...</cite> <quote>It doesn't imply that at all.</quote> It does.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Webmaster4531 12/19/18 2:58:24 PM #151:	eston posted... I think I'm gonna just let him be wrong guys. I've done all I could You won't even provide evidence for "common knowledge". Can't be that hard to prove yourself right. --- Ad Hominem. <cite>Webmaster4531 posted [p:914399438] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>eston posted...</cite> <quote>I think I'm gonna just let him be wrong guys. I've done all I could</quote> You won't even provide evidence for "common knowledge". Can't be that hard to prove yourself right.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JE19426 12/19/18 2:59:13 PM #152:	Webmaster4531 posted... How? Becaause he's saying the assertions could could support liability for Peterson. If the assertions aren't true they couldn't support liability for Peterson. It does. Wrong. <cite>JE19426 posted [p:914399486] in Judge rule... [t:77316398]...</cite> <quote><cite>Webmaster4531 posted...</cite> <quote>How? </quote> Becaause he's saying the assertions could could support liability for Peterson. If the assertions aren't true they couldn't support liability for Peterson. <quote>It does. </quote> Wrong.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Current Events > Judge ruled officers had no duty to protect students in parkland shooting. (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Judge ruled officers had no duty to protect students in parkland shooting.