Yeah, the police never did give a reason for why they did what they did. I am still waiting on that, I want to give them a fair chance to defend themselves. From what you describe, it sounds like they blundered badly.

this is a counter thread to said_aouita "Republicans Love Guns " troll thread."

interesting that your thread was immediately closed.

Who blames parents ? So the decision was based on political values. Lol
Here’s a question why are their police “cops” anyway? Ah shootings. Ironic and I’m not a ban guns person either so you can keep your rant going. Hispanic community typically pretty conservative. Near the border I’m sure they are pretty pro immigration control. Sounds like a bunch of R to me. See how stupid this line of debate is? It’s people
Made a bad call and should be punished for it if they broke the law.
Simple

Your failure to address the issue is not merely obvious, but willfully misleading.

The active shooter policy in Uvalde was to immediately engage. Had it been and business or home in Uvalde, this is what would have occurred. The city police, when they arrived, wanted to follow policy. They were given a stand down order, directly violating that policy by the "School Police Chief". The "School Police Chief" is an appointed authority answerable to the school administration and the district's school board, NOT directly to the police. Meaning the school district, administrative workers who have no experience in law enforcement, policing, or any other matter, who's primary care is how they're going to secure next year's funding, directly intervened against police protocol to insure that 19 children and two staff members would be executed. Further, on the order of the school appointed "official" the city police actively prevented the parents from rescuing their own children. Where did they get that authority? Dunno. It's not given to them in statute, it's not given to them in the Constitution, nor is there any precedent for it.

You wish once again to point at guns. Yet in the end it was the guns of a couple of Border Patrol agents who completey ignored the school appointed "official", following the active shooter policy, that ended the hour long execution of children and killed the active shooter.

I get that you don't care that a brown guy killed a bunch of brown children. I also get that you don't care if the children of likely conservatives die. But thank you so much for pointing out that you're more than happy to use the opportunity of the children of right leaning minorities dying to try to disarm minorities and your political opponents on the right. It truly is glorious that you put it in black and white.

Ooof you drank more than usual today. It literally says in my post I’m not for gun bans…. Not even gonna bother with the rest. SMH

The fact that you immediately point at guns and shootings speaks louder than your pathetic denials. You are attempting to blame a tool. This leads to others calling for the banning of that tool. You assume everyone is too stupid to see your simplistic game of checkers. Giving one inch to such nonsensical bullshit is the kind of nonsense that ends up with an old man going to jail for buying a pointy ended potato peeler and having the gall to try to carry it home in a grocery bag in the UK.

Every western civilization in the history of western civilization had keepers of the peace. Every keeper of the peace is armed to some extent, be it swords or guns or clubs. Every western civilization in the history of western civilization has dealt with crime. The crime doesn't go away, bad people do bad shit. Only the tools used in both committing and stopping crime change.

The gun is not at fault, it has no agency. The shooter is at fault for the direct murder of 19 children and 2 adults. He's dead. The price for his crime is paid. The armed and armored police who forced parents to listen while their children were executed and assaulted or imprisoned those parents who attempted to save their own children are at fault for the enabling, aiding, and abetting of the shooter. The "School Police Chief" is at fault for belaying active shooter protocol and demanding hostage negotiation protocol instead, in the middle of an active shooting scenario. The School District of Uvalde is at fault for wresting direct authoritative control of the police that protect the children of the people of Uvalde away from the elected official who should run them (the Sheriff) and into the hands of untrained and completely unprepared school administrators and school district administrators.

Every word you type that attempts to establish any line of fault to an inanimate object that has no agency is nothing more than a political talking point. A deflection in favor of gun control instead of the depoliticization of the police.

So why did the officers obey the orders of this chief anyway? If he is not a part of the police force then there shouldnt be any consequences in not listening to him.

The school district demanded their own special department within the Uvalde PD. Part of the reason the Uvalde PD requires 40% of the Uvalde budget, with an extra half a million a year from the federal government, is specifically because the school district has it's on special "force" within the department. They demanded direct authority over their own "security". The claims over the last several years have been that since police are so untrustworthy, the School District needed to have direct authority over anyone who provides security for them, so they could "hold them accountable".

Meanwhile, their appointed "authority" is directly responsible for an active shooter having an hour to execute as many 5-10 year old children as he pleased, by ordering city police to stand down and not follow active shooter policy, the very policy designed to save lives and minimize the deaths the active shooter is capable of dealing out.

Once again, let's not forget: This shooter had just turned 18. Supposedly he was constantly made fun of in school for being poor and having cheap clothes and such. How does that square with the shooter magically getting his hands on a debit card that allows for transactions over $2000? How can he afford over $2000 for a weapon? Further, he had no history whatsoever of gun training or hunting. His parents and grandparents stated they did not and could not teach him in the use or handling of firearms. Under what scenario is a completely untrained 18 year old with his first gun so excessively dangerous that over a dozen heavily armed and armored cops need to prevent parents from rescuing their children?

Once again, the entire scenario is not only beyond suspicion, but the root failure, the root fault, beyond the shooter of course, appears to lie with the administrators of the school district, who's failure to understand their own lack of understanding of policing caused them to reach for the power to command the enforcers, without the faintest clue on what to do with them. So instead of killing the shooter, they attacked the parents.

This is literally the scenario of the school wanting absolute control over your children so badly they would rather your children be massacred then you be able to fulfill your role as a parent.

Why can't we all just get along.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jun 1 2022 07:18pm

That in itself is not impressive in any way. When you ban guns, of course gun-related violence goes down. But we would also be keeping said arms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. This is a huge negative. Maybe we should come up with a way to reduce gun violence without depriving the citizens, yes?