Four deputies refuse to make entry into school

Based on a number of reports related to the actions of his department before and during this event it is no wonder the Sheriff in attempting to place blame on the NRA and law abiding gun owners.
 
While I don't condone the inaction of the deputy, I can understand the reluctance of a lone officer, armed only with a single handgun, entering a building where an unknown number of assailants are firing away with semi-automatic weapons. I realize that many shooters are cowards who will cease the assault when confronted, but not all, and the officer is betting his life on it. Perhaps school protectors should carry or have immediate access to better fire power.
 
While I don't condone the inaction of the deputy, I can understand the reluctance of a lone officer, armed only with a single handgun, entering a building where an unknown number of assailants are firing away with semi-automatic weapons.
Click to expand...

First, it was not "reluctance." He refused to make entry. Second, it was HIS JOB, HIS PRIMARY JOB! He was the school's SRO whose job it is to protect the staff and students. That is exactly what he was trained to do. He had been an SRO for 28 years. In 2014, he was SRO of the Year for Parkland. He spoke big of how he responds to problems, you know, like skateboarders trespassing. You can hear him boasting of his prowess in 2015 http://miami.cbslocal.com/2018/02/23/florida-school-shooting-deputy-scot-peterson/

NO, this is not an issue of reluctance. This is an issue of dereliction of duty, of abandoning known, recommended procedures that Peterson was well familiar with as he would has been well aware of the changes in procedures after Columbine that happened during his tenure as a SRO.

Moreover, an an SRO, Peterson would have had training for dealing with this particular type of situation. You won't find any SRO manuals or training programs that indicate one should take up a defensive position outside of the event (aka surround and contain). That was pre-Columbine 1999 strategy.
 
You know the stupid people at CNN probably thought that, "publishing this story should add to our gun control agenda," which is why they went with it so quickly.

IMHO, it is, "pretty scary," to the average left winger. "We need gun control because the police refuse to engage people with an AR-15." Etc, etc..
 
And now the sheriff is saying that reports of more than one deputy failing to enter are incorrect.

http://www.newser.com/story/255830/sheriff-just-1-deputy-on-scene-during-parkland-shooting.html

As always, the devil is in the details. First, the incident was almost two weeks ago, and the allegations of dereliction of duty by Broward County deputies came to light almost immediately -- from the Coral Springs officers who were the first to make entry. Why has it taken the sheriff almost two weeks to respond? Perhaps because he had to find the appropriate way to deny the allegation with out actually lying. So:

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel told CNN on Sunday that investigators are looking into claims that three other deputies were on the scene but failed to enter the school when the chance to save lives still existed. To date, the investigation pointed to only one deputy being on campus while the killer was present, he said.
Click to expand...
The bolded statement may be true -- but VERY misleading. The entire shooting took (according to timelines I've seen) five minutes. It probably took at least a couple of minutes for (former) Deputy Peterson to get to the building, and maybe another minute or two for other deputies to arrive. So "while the killer was present" is a very significant set of weasel words. Maybe the other three didn't show up until after the killer had departed -- but Peterson and the others on the outside didn't know that. That wasn't established until much later, when the video tapes were reviewed.

Coral Springs officers have said there were four Broward deputies in the parking lot when they (Coral Springs) arrived, and that none of those four made entry with or immediately behind them. Two other Broward deputies and an officer from another jurisdiction did participate in entering and clearing the building.
 
Last edited:
Broward Sheriff defends response to Parkland shooting amid criticism, says he has given ‘amazing leadership’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...en-amazing-leadership/?utm_term=.aac6f2bae90b
Yes, I am amazed. And not in a good way.
His constituents are burying their offspring, and he sounds like a politician working on damage control.

"Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said Sunday that he should bear no responsibility for the missed warning signs before the Feb. 14 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 students and faculty members.

“I can only take responsibility for what I knew about,” Israel said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I’ve given amazing leadership to this agency.”

Burying his head in the sand, and you know where that sand is.
 
For some strange reason, teachers can be trusted with children and not firearms. Teachers that can be trusted with firearms concealed on their persons cannot be trusted with such on a school campus.

The state demands we wait for police to save us but then the police come but wait outside. Very strange.

Police have no legal duty to protect anyone, that includes school children. Clearly we need more govt.
 
Last edited:
For some strange reason, teachers can be trusted with children and not firearms. Teachers that can be trusted with firearms concealed on their persons cannot be trusted with such on a school campus.

The state demands we wait for police to save us but then the police come but wait outside. Very strange.
Click to expand...

My compliments, sir. The most concise and clear three-in-a-row statements I've ever read.
 
The legal non-obligation of police to protect any single individual references individuals. IIRC the case law is based on an individual who wanted police protection for a correctly perceived threat. It does not apply to a non-obligation to address ongoing active threats
 
Last edited:
That brings us to question of the hour.

How many Broward County Deputies does it take to stop a school shooting?

Answer: No one knows, it has never been tried.
 
I understand per Sheriff Israel, there is an ongoing internal invesigation as to why they did not enter. Kind of makes one frown. Why not an investigation by the Florida Burea of Investigation? Is the Sheriff going to let everything come out looking clean when he is already in jeopardy of loosing his job?

I do not know all the facts and maybe they will come out soon. I do know you have 4 deputies of the Sheriff's Department getting there first and doing nothing. Then you have the local Police Department getting there too late? Should it be investigated as to why it took the police longer to get there than the sheriff's department? It almost sounds like the Sheriff's Dept. got there and had a cigarette whild the Police Dept. decided to have their cigarette at the coffee shop and then go to where the danger was at.

I could be all wrong or just don't have the facts.
 
Just proves the old saying “when secoconds count, police are minutes away”.

That’s not bashing any LEO, it’s just how life is.
 
The legal non-obligation of police to protect any single individual references individuals. IIRC the case law is based on an individual who wanted police protection for a correctly perceived threat. It does not apply to a non-obligation to address ongoing active threats

Might want to tell that to Ferguson, LA, Charlottesville, and Baltimore police departments that stood down in the face of riots.
 
Sounds like the City police went straight in. Leadership?
Click to expand...
Could be training, too. Proper active shooter training is enormously expensive.

There's always a tug of war between manpower (having folks in the field), required annual/quarterly/etc training, and training you'd love to do (but aren't required). Often, it's manpower that wins out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top