JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Agreed, I know one guy that left the streets to become a SRO when his son entered high school, he had vested interest in stopping a shooter should they visit his campus.

It's not that SROs are necessarily the bottom of the barrel, it's that it's a dead end career wise so the top guys often dont do it.
 
Huh? I'd like to see the legal opinion that states that!!!

ETA: I did a little bit of nosing around and all the legal beagle definitions I could find indicated that legally a "caregiver" is a person that cares for another person that is inhibited in caring for themselves... some lawyer might/could stretch that to apply to children in school, but my impression was that in normal usage it references taking care of a person with some sort of dysfunction or as in paid childcare. The typical examples were daycare, the elderly, mental patients, disabled people. A caregiver can be employed in a facility, or in a home. Schools were never mentioned.
Not to mention this is being stretched to insane points. The idea of arming a teacher being a "problem" if the said teacher then is too scared. No one seriously believes said teacher is going to be gone after if they hide in a room with the gun they had the right to carry. I would not care if they did. I would like to see the responsible teachers who wish to, be able to carry. How many of these "mass shooting" have a kook going door to door shooting fish in a barrel? Some armed teacher does not need to go hunt the shooter. They can herd any kids into a back corner, behind a door, and train a gun on the door. If shooter tries to come in that door, then they can fire on him.
This is a lot like the "are you armed at work thread". When I have been armed at work I had zero thoughts of being the hero who would go hunt the active shooter at my work. I would be if possible getting the hell away from the shooter. If I could not? And ended up in some room, hoping the kook would run out of ammo or the good guys would get him. At least I would not be sitting in the corner waiting my turn to be shot. Any who were lucky enough to be in the same room with me? Well if he came in that room I would fight back.
 
Doing a little digging, it has become apparent that this is a Salem Witch hanging, and this dude is being strung up to deflect from the much bigger issues!
Broward County Sheriff's dept had a standing policy for it's SRO to hold and report and wait for back up, which is exactly what this SRO did!
Further more, responding Deputies would then hold and gather intel before going in!
It was the City cops who went in finally, not a single Broward County Deputy who had responded ever set foot inside that school until after the shooting had stopped!
Sheriff Israel then lied repeatedly about what went down, and deflected pointed questions while defending him self and his dept's actions and policies!
Browards Cowards need to be Investigated BIG TIME by the D.O.J. and all Leadership held accountable, including the Mayor, Dist. Attorney, Commissioner, city council members and any others involved is setting and implementing the Counties Response Policies!
 
Huh? I'd like to see the legal opinion that states that!!!

ETA: I did a little bit of nosing around and all the legal beagle definitions I could find indicated that legally a "caregiver" is a person ....

I should have worked harder to provide a better citation than "I think I read ..." ;-)

Anyway, I think I found the statute involved, but I haven't looked at it closely (I could be in the wrong section or there could be other overriding sections -- this is just a quick and dirty search). Here is the Florida statutory definition of "caregiver": Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Definitions.—When used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
...
(10) "Caregiver" means the parent, legal custodian, permanent guardian, adult household member, or other person responsible for a child's welfare as defined in subsection (54).
...
(54) "Other person responsible for a child's welfare" includes the child's legal guardian or foster parent; an employee of any school, public or private child day care center, residential home, institution, facility, or agency; a law enforcement officer employed in any facility, service, or program for children that is operated or contracted by the Department of Juvenile Justice; or any other person legally responsible for the child's welfare in a residential setting; and also includes an adult sitter or relative entrusted with a child's care. For the purpose of departmental investigative jurisdiction, this definition does not include the following persons when they are acting in an official capacity: law enforcement officers, except as otherwise provided in this subsection; employees of municipal or county detention facilities; or employees of the Department of Corrections.

So, any teacher is a "caregiver" -- as are the maintenance people. In about the middle of 54, it almost looks like law enforcement are also caregivers, but that only applies in juvie (so I grayed it out). Then at the end, law enforcement officers are excluded from the definition (they are not caregivers). Based on the definition in the statute (and that's the only one that matters), it might make sense for the prosecutor to be going after teachers and administrators at the school, but going after the SRO seems a stretch.
 
So, correct me of im wrong here, but didnt SCOTUS rule that LEO do not have a duty to risk life and limb to "Protect and Serve"? ...

That was addressed in a Reason article cited upthread I think (*), though it feels like hair splitting to me:

[UPDATE: Some readers brought up the cases holding that the police can't be sued by people whom they failed to protect for failing to protect them; that is indeed well-settled, but that simply reflects that the police don't have such a privately enforceable obligation to the public. This case raises a different question: whether the government, as the representative of the public, can prosecute police officers for failing to perform their duties to the public.

(*) Deputy Scot Peterson (of Marjory Stoneman Douglas HS Fame) Being Prosecuted for, Essentially, Cowardice in Battle

EDIT: It dawned on me why I don't like this private/public distinction. In a situation such as here, it is government officials deciding whether to charge other government officials. This brings up problems with those high in the chain protecting other buddies high in the chain or alternatively, using this process to go after others for political reasons. It seems a distinction that would lead more to abuse than anything else.
 
Last Edited:
... I doubt he will get convicted of anything other that lying, if that. ...

Apparently, (citation: I read it somewhere LOL) the perjury was that if you review the surveillance data, you can count 75 (or some other number of) shots. The officer in question said he didn't hear 75 shots but rather fewer.

IF that is the basis for perjury, it seems weak -- presumably he has been to a firing range, he was near retirement age, and he was outside. It is completely plausible between damaged hearing and intervening building materials, he didn't hear 75 shots.
 
Last Edited:
... The idea of arming a teacher being a "problem" if the said teacher then is too scared. No one seriously believes said teacher is going to be gone after if they hide in a room with the gun they had the right to carry. ...

After looking at the definition of caregiver, if I was a FL teacher I would worry. As Ura-Kai mentioned above, this seems to be a scapegoat situation where the officer is being criminally charged for following the rules. I am perfectly willing to believe that people in the upper hierarchy with greater culpability, would look for any scapegoat, even a teacher. They say bubblegum rolls downhill, and that hill gets really steep when it is bubblegum saving time.

If I was a FL teacher, I'd want to get an exception before I carried at school because even if it was reasonable to herd the kids into a corner and keep the gun trained on the door, that isn't going to stop you from being scapegoated if that's in the air, or just sued civilly (something that would bankrupt most teachers).
 
Sept 2019 Follow up.

"After the deadly Feb. 14, 2018, mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., national media focused largely on a handful of student activists, leaving it to victims' parents to unravel why the slaughter happened. Andrew Pollack, whose daughter, Meadow, was one of the 17 killed, conducted his own investigation to uncover the roots of what he calls the most avoidable mass murder in American history. "





Compare what we know about Parkland to what we know about Vegas.
 
Sept 2019 Follow up.

"After the deadly Feb. 14, 2018, mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., national media focused largely on a handful of student activists, leaving it to victims' parents to unravel why the slaughter happened. Andrew Pollack, whose daughter, Meadow, was one of the 17 killed, conducted his own investigation to uncover the roots of what he calls the most avoidable mass murder in American history. "





Compare what we know about Parkland to what we know about Vegas.

Nikolas Cruz couldn't possibly have made himself any clearer. Broward schools staff knew exactly who and what he was. Yet they not only allowed him to enroll in Marjory Stoneman Douglas, they literally gave him an air gun, shaped like an AR-15, and let him practice shooting.

Yet they want to take our guns.
 
Nikolas Cruz couldn't possibly have made himself any clearer. Broward schools staff knew exactly who and what he was. Yet they not only allowed him to enroll in Marjory Stoneman Douglas, they literally gave him an air gun, shaped like an AR-15, and let him practice shooting.

Yet they want to take our guns.
Yep the libtards figure if they are stupid/fearful/cowardly about guns then everyone should be denied the right to own one. That way they'll feel safer.
 
That is exactly why there was this enormous push to focus the blame elsewhere. The local, state and federal government all had at least one bite at that apple and failed. Hmm, better start looking for a fall guy. Gun owners would be an easy victim.
 
Personally as close to justice as I see it would be the decision makers in this case to be charged with being accomplices in the murder, as they were.
 

Upcoming Events

Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top