[walkinguf61]

Aren't you the guy that wanted the SWAT team? Waiting for a SWAT team is contrary to "the process".

Everyone knowing, agreeing to, and being trained on "the process", is great.

But actually doing it is much harder.

"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

My former department had to change it's use of force policies to allow active shooter protocols. Because active shooter protocols are so much more aggressive then prior tactics allowed.

We had admin staff that believed that shooting a suspect without giving verbal commands, to allow them to surrender was un-Constitutional behavior.

Not to mention, more than a few officers are hesitant, or just don't want to use force, especially deadly force.

----------------

I think it's interesting all the talk about the officers should have gone in regardless of risk.

If that is the employer/public's expectation, all police officers should have life insurance, worker's comp, etc designed around that premise, provided by that same employer/public. Most do not.

I worked for a 500 officer department. One of my co-workers was run over by a suspect, and critically injured. When he wasn't able to return to return to work in 180 days, they tried to force him off worker's comp, and retire him. That would have seriously cut into what he was taking home. It took about a year, for him to return to work. He worked 5 more years. That allowed him to retire with the full benefits.

-----------------

Having or not having shields, "go bags", breaching equipment, available in every patrol car is also an issue. Saying "get in there", which is the right tactic, but not having a way to breach a steel door in a steel frame is an issue.

-----------------

Pulse Nightclub - was an active shooter that was confronted outside, but able to get inside and become a barricaded active shooter.

Columbine High - Shooters confronted by an SRO in the parking lot, but able to get inside and become barricaded active shooters.

Parkland High - Just a disaster.

------------------

Saying you need to go in and confront an active shooter is easy. But actually doing it seems to be much harder.

It looks like a training and leadership issue.

Not to mention a public that seems to bristle at police officer with exterior load bearing vests, pants with cargo pockets, and long guns to name a few things

Then everyone acts surprised when the police officers that are trained to de-escalate, and avoid using force, don't go into battle mode when they encounter an active shooter.

Thank you. They can’t turn on a dime. Force Deesculation for everything then expect them to be aggressive in a second. It’s doesn’t work that way.

 

[1cm]

You and I are not on the same page.

Fair enough. I am just saying I cannot find any expert who says stopping assault was right move. Even if shooting stopped, it is urgent to get into help injured.

 

[walkinguf61]

No I asked if any members responded and if so why they did not enter or lead the charge since they should know school layout better than BORTAC.

We really need answers as to what happened in that hallway, I sure as hell hope it does not come down to interagency rivalry or some other bs.

The answer is easy. They are trained, encouraged their whole time to deesculate despite some training then people expect a different mind set. It doesn’t turn on a dime. It’s why as a supervisor you can’t just plug in any cop for any job even if they had training in it. It’s also mind set. Hard chargers do units like BorTac and those who aren’t do things like Schools. Even former SWAT/anti-crime/narcotics guys can lose their edge after doing such assignments like schools.Former school cops usually take some time to get the edge if they transfer into one of the hard charger units.
Over here, ask a criminal of which officers they are more afraid of, a uniform cop or the cop in plainclothes ( not a true undercover). The answer is the plainclothes cop because they are hungry and are hard chargers

 

[walkinguf61]

Fair enough. I am just saying I cannot find any expert who says stopping assault was right move. Even if shooting stopped, it is urgent to get into help injured.

No one here is saying stopping the assault was the right move. It’s just easier said than done. The initial cops stopped pushing forward…why? Was it a locked door they could not open? We dont know yet.
Even BorTac waited for the key before attempting an entry.

 

[SAR]

Fair enough. I am just saying I cannot find any expert who says stopping assault was right move. Even if shooting stopped, it is urgent to get into help injured.

We are still not on the same page. You are still trying to argue theory and I am still talking about critical decision making under stress. You still haven’t actually given us any data points on your level of experience so I am guessing none.

 

[1cm]

We are still not on the same page. You are still trying to argue theory and I am still talking about critical decision making under stress. You still haven’t actually given us any data points on your level of experience so I am guessing none.

I am not arguing.

I am quoting what professionals have said. Asking if there are alternative views, which none have been provided.

 

[1cm]

No one here is saying stopping the assault was the right move. It’s just easier said than done. The initial cops stopped pushing forward…why? Was it a locked door they could not open? We dont know yet.

I am referring to the reports the IC halted the entry, not the initial team.

The on-scene commander, who is also the Uvalde school district police chief, "believed that it had transitioned from an active shooter to a barricaded subject," McCraw said. "It was the wrong decision. Period. There's no excuse for that," McCraw said of the supervisor's call not to confront the shooter

 

[SAR]

I am not arguing.

I am quoting what professionals have said. Asking if there are alternative views, which none have been provided.

There is no alternative view. Just how critical decisions are made. You seem to know everything, yet you can’t grasp that one single concept.

 

[ateamer]

I am referring to the reports the IC halted the entry, not the initial team.

The on-scene commander, who is also the Uvalde school district police chief, "believed that it had transitioned from an active shooter to a barricaded subject," McCraw said. "It was the wrong decision. Period. There's no excuse for that," McCraw said of the supervisor's call not to confront the shooter

And no one knows tactics like the highway patrol.

 

[1cm]

There is no alternative view.

Exactly. He phucked up.

You seem to know everything,

If I did, I would not need to quote others and ask for others opinions. If I ever have a question on "how critical decisions are made", you will be my goto person. thx.

For now, I just would like to see a timeline of what happened in the hallway and by who.

 

[SAR]

Exactly. He phucked up.

And true leaders when mistakes are made don’t point fingers. They debrief the incident, discuss what went wrong, and what what went right. They discuss how things can be done differently going forward. All you seem to want to do it prove your glorious point that the Chief made a mistake. Was that even a question?

I can only say that I hope you never have to make a critical decision yourself. Let “the professionals” handle it.

 

[fastbolt]

I am not arguing.

I am quoting what professionals have said. Asking if there are alternative views, which none have been provided.

Is there some particular 'answer' you're wanting to hear from someone? What alternative view is it you're waiting to hear put forth?

Professionals can make mistakes. It's becoming increasingly apparent that this is what happened in this TX elementary school incident.

Why that mistake was made in the real-time of the critical incident is going to be put under many magnifying glasses of various sizes. Whether a better decision could've been made, and when - and what it could've been - is a question that's going to remain under discussion for the near future. Hindsight applied to this event won't be able to predict the circumstances of the next event.

Even the best training is going to be subject to being affected by the quality and timeliness of the decision-making that's going to be done the next time. The best training and decision-making in the USA isn't going to change the fact that these events are initiated and set in motion by some deranged, evil mind. Imagine if another deranged, angry evil person decides that getting a semiauto rifle is too difficult, so pipe bombs are used? Or driving a flame-engulfed PU truck, filled with cans and bottles of gasoline through the wall of a classroom is the only way to achieve their twisted ends?

 

[1cm]

And true leaders when mistakes are made don’t point fingers.

Yeah the public flogging was not expected. Abbott said they were misled, I guess this is the reaction and public **** show that has followed.

 

[Sit means Sit]

I am not arguing.

I am quoting what professionals have said. Asking if there are alternative views, which none have been provided.

SAR likely has more training and experience as a cop than most of the folks posting in here. Nearing 40 years of uniformed service, if I recall correctly, and the agency for which he works is easily the largest on the west coast and one of the top three biggest in the country. He's probably had more active shooter training than the experts you're quoting.

Keep in mind, this is Coptalk - not the general forums. If I were to tally up the cumulative years of LE experience in this thread alone, we'd be measuring it in centuries, not decades. There are all types of officers here, as well. From small town Kansas to NYPD - from federal agents of various types to probation officers to detectives to jail officers and more. You might not want to dismiss the opinion of someone here just because he hasn't been on television.

 

[1cm]

SAR likely has more training and experience as a cop than most of the folks posting in here.

Yes and me the least. But I do have experience rescuing injured folks, and time is of the essence. So I was surprised the IC stood down while kids were still bleeding, a point made by the NTOA guy.

 

[fastbolt]

Yes and me the least. But I do have experience rescuing injured folks, and time is of the essence. So I was surprised the IC stood down while kids were still bleeding, a point made by the NTOA guy.

Stop the killing & then stop the dying.

Stopping the killing has to happen before you can hope to stop the dying (treating wounded).

Rescuing injured persons who are still being shot, or may about to be shot, is a different thing than rescuing a stranded hiker, a swimmer stuck on a cliff face, etc (or whatever your experience may be).

We all want to save children. The trick is to do it without making the situation worse. Mistakes are costly. Seconds - and for damned sure minutes - can change everything. The buck stops on the shoulders of the person making the hard decisions, for good or ill. I suspect that this incident is going to end up mostly in the 'for ill' column.

Let's keep remembering that this is the fault of the twisted person who decided to start killing. Any actions that weakened the on-site security are going to earn a big bite of this sandwich, too. The monsters are always watching, and they're ready to act when the first sign of complacency, apathy or simple inattention on the Part of Good People occurs. (Open school door.)

 

[Dukeboy01]

One thing I'm realizing is that different ones of us (and the different schools of hostage response) are prioritizing different classes of hostages.

1cm and the NTOA guy are prioritizing the idea that there are critically injured hostages who might survive if a more aggressive tactical approach towards a barricaded subject is taken earlier.

The other approach maximizes the uninjured (or mildly injured) hostages who will see their chances for survival increased (statistically speaking) if a more deliberative approach is used.

Each school of thought has merits.

 

[1cm]

Stop the killing & then stop the dying.
Stopping the killing has to happen before you can hope to stop the dying (treating wounded).

Yep, and you can't stop the killing till you stop the killer just like NTOA said!

 

[Reyn]

My wife is a teacher. I am a supervisor over patrol and SROs. My wife has discussed safety measures that would help her class but i can see the double edged sword. Her door is heavy and opens out to the hallway. She does have a large window beside it that could be used for entry but she wants to install a lock from the inside to lock her room down. Great if she is ahead of an active shooter but what if the shooter gets in and now the door is reinforced /locked from the inside? Also, their lock down measures are lights out,shades drawn,door locked. Now that causes issues for LEOs seeing what's going from the outside,not to mention a sunny day and trying to see in.

The great ideas for keeping you secure are an exact opposite if the shooter gets in a room. Now it makes it more difficult once a barricade situation takes place. .

 

[G29guy06]

Yes picking a lock is an option— can you pick a lock? I can’t with most locks. SWAT often have members who can. Heck, some of our ESU guys are elevator repair trained ( hostage in an elevator like in the movie Speed).
Everything you are mentioning are solutions for why SWAT was created.

Yes, I can pick locks.