JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Instapundit » Blog Archive » REALCLEARINVESTIGATIONS: The Sheriff, the Sheriff's Son, and the 'Coward of Broward.' "Parents of …

REALCLEARINVESTIGATIONS: The Sheriff, the Sheriff's Son, and the 'Coward of Broward.' "Parents of children gunned down in the Parkland school shooting in Florida last year have never understood two actions taken by Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel: his refusal to fire a campus-based deputy who failed to enter the school during the rampage that took 17 lives, and his continued defense of controversial Obama-era school policies that allowed the accused shooter, Nikolas Cruz, to avoid arrest and a police record and thereby purchase the murder weapon. Some now think they have found the answer in a single incident that occurred in 2014. A police report shows that's when Israel's then-17-year-old son, Brett, was accused of participating in a sexual assault of a 14-year-old boy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. The case was investigated by Scot Peterson — the armed deputy who took cover while children and staff were shot last February. Using the Obama-era guidelines, Peterson's recommendation helped his boss's son receive just a three-day suspension."
 
Curious to know the legality of the governor removing an elected official??
This could be bad. I could see Inslee or Brown removing all the sheriffs that oppose the various gun control schemes coming up!!
 
Jeff Weiner on Twitter

Breaking: FDLE announces the arrest of Scot Peterson, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School SRO whose response to the Parkland massacre has been heavily criticized, on charges including child neglect and perjury

Fired: Scot Peterson and Sergeant Brian Miller who were found to have neglected their duties.
 

Honestly, this feels like scapegoating:

"As a law enforcement officer, despite whatever policies and procedures agencies have, we swear an oath to protect and serve. I think this says he would be held accountable if you don't do your job. You will be held accountable."

Were his actions laudable or honorable? Obviously not and I don't have any respect for him. But freezing up in a situation like that or following agency rules as the basis for a criminal indictment? I don't think anyone really knows what they would do until they are actually there in the middle of the bubblegum. There is also plenty of blame to go around especially higher up the chain and across agencies -- seems like a Machiavelli move by all those with higher but more amorphous responsibility to pile all the blame on the peon at the bottom.
 
Honestly, this feels like scapegoating:



Were his actions laudable or honorable? Obviously not and I don't have any respect for him. But freezing up in a situation like that or following agency rules as the basis for a criminal indictment? I don't think anyone really knows what they would do until they are actually there in the middle of the bubblegum. There is also plenty of blame to go around especially higher up the chain and across agencies -- seems like a Machiavelli move by all those with higher but more amorphous responsibility to pile all the blame on the peon at the bottom.

If cops won't do the job they are paid/expected to do, school staff must be made allowed to defend themselves.

That's a large issue, at least for me. The idea that the police will come protect people is as only good as the length of time for a response and if the officers have the stones to respond at all. People who are being actively gunned down can't wait, and sadly they have been legally stripped of their natural right to defend themselves effectively.
 
If cops won't do the job they are paid/expected to do, school staff must be made allowed to defend themselves. ....

I agree. Having just one person is not enough because some percentage will simply be incapable of responding. With multiple onsite responders, the impact of a person who discovers in the moment that he or she is paralyzed by fear, is lessened.
 
I agree. Having just one person is not enough because some percentage will simply be incapable of responding. With multiple onsite responders, the impact of a person who discovers in the moment that he or she is paralyzed by fear, is lessened.

Agreed, also, there is a very specific mentality a person must have to feel confident to respond to a dangerous situation individually, people in many ways naturally are pack animals, by having the knowledge that multiple people are responding because they are a "team" it further lessens any individual's fear of responding because they are not alone, so to speak.
 
Criminally negligent... IDK. But he is also accused of perjury, that would be a valid criminal complaint against him. It was interesting as I listened to the news of this on the radio, that all the charges are misdemeanors... it makes it sound like minor offenses. Petty stuff. Oh well.
 

Upcoming Events

Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA
Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top