Do You Agree?

[Fool]

The cops know full well the guidelines against “failing to ascertain the presence of bystanders before firing a weapons.”
Do you think they do, or not?

Again police working in rural areas are trained. The assailant probably wasn't. They waited. There were still bystanders when they took the guy out. Unfortunately more children died while the cops fiddled around.

 

[nPeace]

Again police working in rural areas are trained. The assailant probably wasn't. They waited. There were still bystanders when they took the guy out. Unfortunately more children died while the cops fiddled around.

I noticed you said 'probably'. He had an AR-15. He didn't need to be trained.

I don't know what the delay was about, but it looked like a 15 minute delay to me, and from my perspective, safety seemed to be a concern.

I would not want the police to unnecessarily or foolishly put their lives in danger just to save me, to be honest.
That's just me. Others obviously have a different view.

 

[Fool]

I noticed you said 'probably'. He had an AR-15. He didn't need to be trained.

I don't know what the delay was about, but it looked like a 15 minute delay to me, and from my perspective, safety seemed to be a concern.

I would not want the police to unnecessarily or foolishly put their lives in danger just to save me, to be honest.
That's just me. Others obviously have a different view.

possessing a gun doesn't mean your trained . Being a policeman in the field means you are.

This isn't a leap of faith.

View or not. Policemen aren't released into the field without training.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I have a few questions.

Not one of them shows the slightest concern for the children and teachers slaughtered and terrorized.

 

[YoursTrue]

God expects more than faith. People can daydream all they like but indifference in the face of action is cowardly.

They had guns. those killed didn't.

That is true, God wants more than faith. One reason the Bible gives is that faith without works is useless. James 2:20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless
Keep in mind this was written in the first century.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not one of them shows the slightest concern for the children and teachers slaughtered and terrorized.

Would you say that teachers should have guns within their reach in the classroom?

 

[YoursTrue]

What is this supposed to mean? You think we would run around with katanas if given the chance? Seriously?

It means that there are fewer crimes committed by people with guns in Japan because guns do not proliferate there as they do here. That's not hard to understand.

 

[YoursTrue]

It doesn't seem to have any such effect in the many other countries, that coincidentally have strict gun laws.

I think you made a claim of causation without any evidence, and that is not borne out by the evidence, as many other countries have violence depicted in movies and games, and don't have anywhere near the rate of violent gun crime the US suffers. These other countries also have strict laws controlling gun manufacture, sale, and ownership, so the evidence suggests the lax gun laws in the US are the greater causal factor, that and the inevitable proliferation of guns that has resulted from a very profitable industry for gun manufacturers.

So tell me, why do you think the rate of violence in the U.S. is so high?

 

[YoursTrue]

God expects more than faith. People can daydream all they like but indifference in the face of action is cowardly.

They had guns. those killed didn't.

Here's an interesting comment in an article I read: "Japan's gun restrictions do not explain why murders committed with alternative weapons, including knives and blunt objects as well as homemade firearms, are so unusual in that country. Japan's remarkable peacefulness clearly goes far beyond the firearm regulations its legislators have decided to impose." The writer makes an interesting point further, which I won't tell you what it is, hopefully you will read the article. Japan's Gun Restrictions Don't Fully Explain Its Low Crime Rate (reason.com)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You did that

No, you are the one suggesting that my disdain for the police in this instance betrays a lack of empathy.

I would suggest that defending police chasing an armed suspect into a school, then doing nothing for an hour, then lying in an attempt to justify doing nothing for an hour should induce disdain from anyone with a shred of human empathy.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Do you have credible sources to support that assertion.

Which one? To be fair, there's some confusion as to whether the shooter went into the school following initial encounters with the police, or if the shooter was misidentified by the police while the actual shooter walked in unobstructed. Either way, the shooter entered the school and the police we aware of this and did nothing.

There is no video footage showing the suspect running... but he walks casually into the school.

How is that relevant?

Men are seen running from him though, and video surveillance caught him shooting [at someone] at the school.
If the police chased him into the school, why did they not shoot him?
Why did it take them 3 minutes to catch up with him, if they chased him into the school?

See above.

Not if one acts foolish, no.
For example, A man that cannot swim and is terrified of being in the water, would be foolish to jump in to play hero, and drown, along with the one he "tries to save".

So you think armed and trained police officers are terrified of armed conflict and would be foolish to intervene in an active shooter scenario?

That's an assertion.
If you can prove it, then it would be a fact.
We would see that shown to be the case.

I'm not protecting anyone. I'm not justice, or a lawyer, or any of that.

They sat outside for over an hour rather than intervening in an active shooter incident, and then lied about how well equipped the gunman was in order to support their cowardice.

Stop covering for them.

 

[stvdv]

No

You better reread what you wrote, to which I replied

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You better reread what you wrote, to which I replied

You're still doing it now.

Please step down from the pulpit and stop lecturing people. Empathy has nothing to do with holding police officers to account when they fail to protect people - and, in fact, put people in danger - in order to protect themselves.

 

[stvdv]

You're still doing it now.

NO

IF you play with fire THEN don't start crying when you get burned

You started to be disrespectful
You started to misrepresent my words
IF I correct your mistake

You twist my words

These games I am totally fed up with (meaning "find someone else" to play your games)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

NO

IF you play with fire THEN don't start crying when you get burned

You started to be disrespectful
You started to misrepresent my words
IF I correct your mistake

You twist my words

These games I am totally fed up with (meaning "find someone else" to play your games)

Are you ever going to address the actual issue?

 

[Sheldon]

So tell me, why do you think the rate of violence in the U.S. is so high?

Probably a host of causal factors, but specifically gun crime is among the highest in the world because lax gun laws have created a proliferation of firearms. The more guns there are, the easier and cheaper they are to obtain, an increase in gun crime is inevitable.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Would you say that teachers should have guns within their reach in the classroom?

No.

 

[1213]

Does that include the man who used his gun to mass murder the children here?

I think all should have right to defend themselves. But, I think murderers deserve death penalty.

 

[nPeace]

possessing a gun doesn't mean your trained .

True. I don't remember saying otherwise.

Being a policeman in the field means you are.

In the field of what?
Police are trained in the field they work in.
Those who do paperwork, are trained to do paper work.
Those who work with traffic are trained in that area. Carrying a gun, bullet proof vest... does not mean they are marksmen.
The training Special forces get, is not the same as a patrol officer.

This isn't a leap of faith.

I don't even know why that's on this page.

View or not. Policemen aren't released into the field without training.

Being trained in the field doesn't make police officers more than human. That's why things like this happen.
Two officers opened fire, discharging a total of three bullets. They missed the man, but struck two women nearby, including one who had been leaning against her walker; the bullet wound to her leg sent her tumbling to the ground.

The shooting on Saturday night immediately raised questions about the police’s use of deadly force, especially in a crowded area where bystanders were in the line of fire.

Does that make the officer untrained?
Maybe that depends on what one considers trained, because some of these officers are rookies, so one might not consider them trained to the degree that they consider trained.
I don't know what you consider trained.

It was said, these officers were relatively new to the department - a year and a half to three years experience. Does that matter?

Then it should be considered in the case where those first responders arrived, boldly went toward the gunfire, right up to the classroom, but retreated to cover, under gunfire.

They used their judgment. That counts as part of their training.
Firing a weapon is not the only thing police officers are trained to do.
They are humans. They aren't machines.

 

[nPeace]

Not one of them shows the slightest concern for the children and teachers slaughtered and terrorized.

I did not ask you for your subjective opinion, which for all we know, can be based solely on opinionated bias.
I asked you a few questions.
You can't answer them, or you don't want to answer them. That's fine.

I don't need your opinion.
I can't see what's in a person's mind, or how they feel about a situation, from a video. Neither can you.