Another hero the media won't cover - School Resource Officer stopped gunman

JBeechel · January 10, 2013, 04:49 PM

I just saw this and wanted to share. It seems back in 2010 a School Resource Officer (cop), confronted an active shooter and did everything right.

http://easybakegunclub.com/blog/2527...pped-Gunm.html

I don't remember hearing anything about this back then and I certainly don't hear anything about it now that we're in the middle of a gun grab.

I think it's time to make sure people know about these heroes.

Dre_sa · January 10, 2013, 07:59 PM

If not already existing LEO's, why not trained volunteers from the public?

What's needed in my opinion is a trust worthy, armed person in every school, there to prevent atrocities.

We could look at it as a means to create desperately needed jobs, as well as a means to protect the most vulnerable of citizens.

Alabama Shooter · January 10, 2013, 09:47 PM

He is hardly alone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting

hogdogs · January 10, 2013, 09:51 PM

But paid law enforcement officers have no duty to protect anyone from violence...

This is why I feel the teachers or volunteers make better choices as the armed presence... They have "some skin in the game"...

That and the actual desire to stop violence...

Brent

Double Naught Spy · January 10, 2013, 11:26 PM

Quote:

I just saw this and wanted to share. It seems back in 2010 a School Resource Officer (cop), confronted an active shooter and did everything right.

To be an active shooter, you have to be firing shots. You didn't hear about an active shooter being stopped because it wasn't an active shooter. It was a gunman. It would have have been a nasty situation, no doubt, but it wasn't an active shooter situation, yet. The SRO did well.

It didn't make big news, but it certainly did make the news...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Carolyn+Gudger+SRO+news

You don't hear about a lot of good events. Such events really don't hold people's interest very well, including our own.

4 Paws · January 10, 2013, 11:39 PM

Code:

But paid law enforcement officers have no duty to protect anyone from violence...

You're kidding, right?

willhud · January 10, 2013, 11:50 PM

This isn't completely my idea, so I can't take credit for it. I got it from another poster on this or another site. But I happen to agree with them. And that's I would use the National Guard to protect the schools. We are already paying them.

In addition to that, A lot of the opposition to having someone in the schools i.e. law enforcement or military is that some parents feel their kids will be scarred for lack of a better term if the kids feel like they are spending all day in a prison. They think (and at least partly true) that the kids may feel the person is there to control them as opposed to protecting them. I can see that fear, and I can see some kids viewing it that way. So simply don't put them in Uniform. Let them carry concealed. But them in standard teacher attire. In fact, while they are at it, giving them a little training and let them fill in as substitutes. All schools need substitutes. You could even setup programs that allow active duty military personnel that are transitioning out of active duty fill these roles. It might help them transition back to civilian life. Some of them might even decide to use their GI bill to get their teaching degrees, or follow up with jobs in law enforcement.

Bottom line, there are ways to accomplish putting a deterrent in the schools, without costing a ton of new money and without alienating the students.

Buzzcook · January 10, 2013, 11:51 PM

Quote:

You're kidding, right?

I don't know if he's kidding but...

There was a case many years ago in which it was ruled that police don't have to protect citizens "before the fact".
Some folks have taken that to mean that police don't have to protect citizens at all.
I just think it means police can't be everywhere and act as personal bodyguards (except for rich folks and banks).

hogdogs · January 10, 2013, 11:56 PM

Nope not kidding at all... As stated, it was decided in court that they do not have a duty to endanger themselves no more than you or I do...

Some may choose to of their own accord just the same as we may...

Me??? In a heartbeat, I will do what ever i possibly can to prevent harm to any person without the ability to protect them self...

Failure of an adult to arm or protect themselves doesn't count as they failed to do so while having the ability available...

Brent

4 Paws · January 11, 2013, 12:13 AM

Couple things to consider. It would be necessary to review the referenced court ruling. Federal or state level? In addition, the general assumption that law enforcement are under no obligation to act is less than accurate.

hogdogs · January 11, 2013, 12:19 AM

Federal... Supreme Court should do???
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/po...otus.html?_r=0

Quote:

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

There are also state cases and D.C. case of same verdict but this'n seems to be THEE final ruling...

Brent

DPris · January 11, 2013, 03:18 AM

"Did everything right"???????????
Oh, HELL no!
Denis

Double Naught Spy · January 11, 2013, 07:57 AM

I have to agree with you there. If you are standing in a "Mexican standoff," guns pointed at each other, and you and your opponent are both yelling at one another to put the gun down, you aren't doing something right. That seems to be TV stupidity and NOT taking advantage of the fact that the other guy is threatening to kill you and hasn't yet pull the trigger.

Dwight55 · January 11, 2013, 09:09 AM

Quote:

I have to agree with you there. If you are standing in a "Mexican standoff," guns pointed at each other, and you and your opponent are both yelling at one another to put the gun down, you aren't doing something right. That seems to be TV stupidity and NOT taking advantage of the fact that the other guy is threatening to kill you and hasn't yet pull the trigger.

This is the perfect Rx for getting shot, . . . bad.

I made the decision a long time ago, . . . if I have to get my weapon out, . . . then the time for discussion and verbal discourse has ended, . . .

RE: USMC rules for gunfight, rule # 20 - The faster you finish the fight, the less shot you will get.

May God bless,
Dwight

Alabama Shooter · January 11, 2013, 12:23 PM

Quote:

That and the actual desire to stop violence...

That is a pretty rude implication.

DPris · January 11, 2013, 12:37 PM

The ONLY reason that woman is still alive is that the offender simply didn't want to kill her bad enough to do it.
She did just about everything wrong she could have.

You DO NOT stand & dialogue gun to gun.
You DO NOT alow an armed offender to get close enough to try to disarm you.
And so on.

It is entirely possible, and this is a clear example, to do everything wrong & still survive to look like a hero.
Sheer luck & absolutely nothing else.
Denis

Dwight55 · January 11, 2013, 01:50 PM

JBeechel, . . . I just added another 100 or so viewers, . . .

Took the link, . . . dropped it in facebook.

When I did that, . . . the picture of "him and her" showed up.

I'll get some flak from it, . . . but it's still the truth: The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

In this case it was a woman, . . . but it was moved, seconded, and unanimously approved to let her into the "Good Guy" club.

May God bless,
Dwight

Dr Big Bird PhD · January 11, 2013, 02:15 PM

1) LEO's aren't legally compelled to keep people safe from harm
2) Registration, confiscations, laws, bans, etc COST TONS OF MONEY
3) Allowing the arming of teachers with personal and emotional stakes in schools and students is cheap, easy, and voluntary.
4) Multiple mass shootings and attacks have been stopped with CCW holders, retired officers/veterans
5) Why is this not painfully obvious?

Double Naught Spy · January 11, 2013, 04:48 PM

Dwight, the Taft HS shooter was talked out of his shotgun by two unarmed faculty/staff members. A gun isn't the only solution. It is often a necessary and may be the best solution, but not the only solution and not always the best.

johnwilliamson062 · January 11, 2013, 11:59 PM

The LEO thing is about liability. You can't sue an officer for not protecting you b/c of the ruling.

hogdogs · January 12, 2013, 02:15 AM

Sorry if my post/s were offensive to anyone...

Here is how i see it...
For my entire life i have heard chiefs, sheriffs, mayors and even the officers themselves state "Our ultimate concern is that our officers make it home safe at the end of the day..."

That statement doesn't lend well to those who think the officer will throw his neck in front of a bullet for you or anyone else...

They are in a career with the intention of doing a good job while earning a paycheck and building towards retirement...

A volunteer who decides to PROTECT may just go beyond what a cop would and I do not slight the officer for this at all...

Same with teachers as mentioned above... they might go way further towards protecting those who they have an emotional connection to...

As for me and me only... my wife and family know that if i die a death not related to my own poor health choices or an accident I have no control over, it will very likely be while defending someone who did not have the ability to defend them self...

I wouldn't be so fast to protect someone who chooses not to defend them self but a young person or an adult overpowered by a wiser, older, stronger or more healthy person would immediately have my attention...

My family knows they may have to live without me and are well served with skills and tools to defend themselves... My financial input in the family coffers is easily lived without so they are not going to be left destitute with my passing...

Thay are well aware that i do not seek to be a hero but would never shirk what I consider my obligation to certain groups of society... Children being but one of these...

Law enforcement officers do not suffer the same commitments that i always have and I do not suffer the same limitations and liabilities that they do... fair trade in my eyes...

Brent

Alabama Shooter · January 12, 2013, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Sorry if my post/s were offensive to anyone...

The irony of what you are posting given the thread topic never occurred to you?

Everything that you say to be true about police are true about everyone. No leader is going to stand up and say that lives of his men are worth less than that of anyone else's.

Police are mostly like everyone else they make decisions about what they want to do with their lives given dangerous situations and then go do it. The biggest difference is that they see a whole lot more dangerous situations than most people.

ClydeFrog · January 12, 2013, 06:38 PM

There was a big pow-wow of my area's metro police chiefs, the county sheriff, the county mayor, & a few small town mayors to discuss school security & budgets/$.
The big gap missing was the county's school district leadership.

If these political wonks & no-load pencil pushers can't show up to address school security & the safety of young kids then what the #*=• good are they?

Clyde

January 10, 2013, 04:49 PM	#1
JBeechel Junior Member Join Date: August 11, 2012 Posts: 11	Another hero the media won't cover - School Resource Officer stopped gunman I just saw this and wanted to share. It seems back in 2010 a School Resource Officer (cop), confronted an active shooter and did everything right. http://easybakegunclub.com/blog/2527...pped-Gunm.html I don't remember hearing anything about this back then and I certainly don't hear anything about it now that we're in the middle of a gun grab. I think it's time to make sure people know about these heroes.

January 10, 2013, 07:59 PM	#2
Dre_sa Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2005 Location: Left coast Posts: 610	If not already existing LEO's, why not trained volunteers from the public? What's needed in my opinion is a trust worthy, armed person in every school, there to prevent atrocities. We could look at it as a means to create desperately needed jobs, as well as a means to protect the most vulnerable of citizens. __________________ Imagine what I would do, if I could do all I can.

January 10, 2013, 09:47 PM	#3
Alabama Shooter Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2012 Location: Sweet Home Posts: 886	He is hardly alone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting __________________ Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.

January 10, 2013, 11:39 PM	#6
4 Paws Senior Member Join Date: August 17, 2012 Posts: 159	Code: But paid law enforcement officers have no duty to protect anyone from violence... You're kidding, right?

January 11, 2013, 07:57 AM	#13
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,716	I have to agree with you there. If you are standing in a "Mexican standoff," guns pointed at each other, and you and your opponent are both yelling at one another to put the gun down, you aren't doing something right. That seems to be TV stupidity and NOT taking advantage of the fact that the other guy is threatening to kill you and hasn't yet pull the trigger. __________________ "If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange

January 10, 2013, 09:51 PM	#4
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	But paid law enforcement officers have no duty to protect anyone from violence... This is why I feel the teachers or volunteers make better choices as the armed presence... They have "some skin in the game"... That and the actual desire to stop violence... Brent

January 10, 2013, 11:50 PM	#7
willhud Member Join Date: September 4, 2012 Posts: 60	This isn't completely my idea, so I can't take credit for it. I got it from another poster on this or another site. But I happen to agree with them. And that's I would use the National Guard to protect the schools. We are already paying them. In addition to that, A lot of the opposition to having someone in the schools i.e. law enforcement or military is that some parents feel their kids will be scarred for lack of a better term if the kids feel like they are spending all day in a prison. They think (and at least partly true) that the kids may feel the person is there to control them as opposed to protecting them. I can see that fear, and I can see some kids viewing it that way. So simply don't put them in Uniform. Let them carry concealed. But them in standard teacher attire. In fact, while they are at it, giving them a little training and let them fill in as substitutes. All schools need substitutes. You could even setup programs that allow active duty military personnel that are transitioning out of active duty fill these roles. It might help them transition back to civilian life. Some of them might even decide to use their GI bill to get their teaching degrees, or follow up with jobs in law enforcement. Bottom line, there are ways to accomplish putting a deterrent in the schools, without costing a ton of new money and without alienating the students.

January 10, 2013, 11:56 PM	#9
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	Nope not kidding at all... As stated, it was decided in court that they do not have a duty to endanger themselves no more than you or I do... Some may choose to of their own accord just the same as we may... Me??? In a heartbeat, I will do what ever i possibly can to prevent harm to any person without the ability to protect them self... Failure of an adult to arm or protect themselves doesn't count as they failed to do so while having the ability available... Brent

January 11, 2013, 12:13 AM	#10
4 Paws Senior Member Join Date: August 17, 2012 Posts: 159	Couple things to consider. It would be necessary to review the referenced court ruling. Federal or state level? In addition, the general assumption that law enforcement are under no obligation to act is less than accurate.

January 11, 2013, 03:18 AM	#12
DPris Member Emeritus Join Date: August 19, 2004 Posts: 7,133	"Did everything right"??????????? Oh, HELL no! Denis

January 11, 2013, 12:37 PM	#16
DPris Member Emeritus Join Date: August 19, 2004 Posts: 7,133	The ONLY reason that woman is still alive is that the offender simply didn't want to kill her bad enough to do it. She did just about everything wrong she could have. You DO NOT stand & dialogue gun to gun. You DO NOT alow an armed offender to get close enough to try to disarm you. And so on. It is entirely possible, and this is a clear example, to do everything wrong & still survive to look like a hero. Sheer luck & absolutely nothing else. Denis

January 11, 2013, 01:50 PM	#17
Dwight55 Senior Member Join Date: June 18, 2004 Location: Central Ohio Posts: 2,568	JBeechel, . . . I just added another 100 or so viewers, . . . Took the link, . . . dropped it in facebook. When I did that, . . . the picture of "him and her" showed up. I'll get some flak from it, . . . but it's still the truth: The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun. In this case it was a woman, . . . but it was moved, seconded, and unanimously approved to let her into the "Good Guy" club. May God bless, Dwight __________________ www.dwightsgunleather.com If you can breathe, . . . thank God! If you can read, . . . thank a teacher! If you are reading this in English, . . . thank a Veteran!

January 11, 2013, 02:15 PM	#18
Dr Big Bird PhD Senior Member Join Date: October 26, 2012 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 779	1) LEO's aren't legally compelled to keep people safe from harm 2) Registration, confiscations, laws, bans, etc COST TONS OF MONEY 3) Allowing the arming of teachers with personal and emotional stakes in schools and students is cheap, easy, and voluntary. 4) Multiple mass shootings and attacks have been stopped with CCW holders, retired officers/veterans 5) Why is this not painfully obvious? __________________ I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor

January 11, 2013, 04:48 PM	#19
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,716	Dwight, the Taft HS shooter was talked out of his shotgun by two unarmed faculty/staff members. A gun isn't the only solution. It is often a necessary and may be the best solution, but not the only solution and not always the best. __________________ "If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange

January 11, 2013, 11:59 PM	#20
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	The LEO thing is about liability. You can't sue an officer for not protecting you b/c of the ruling.

January 12, 2013, 02:15 AM	#21
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	Sorry if my post/s were offensive to anyone... Here is how i see it... For my entire life i have heard chiefs, sheriffs, mayors and even the officers themselves state "Our ultimate concern is that our officers make it home safe at the end of the day..." That statement doesn't lend well to those who think the officer will throw his neck in front of a bullet for you or anyone else... They are in a career with the intention of doing a good job while earning a paycheck and building towards retirement... A volunteer who decides to PROTECT may just go beyond what a cop would and I do not slight the officer for this at all... Same with teachers as mentioned above... they might go way further towards protecting those who they have an emotional connection to... As for me and me only... my wife and family know that if i die a death not related to my own poor health choices or an accident I have no control over, it will very likely be while defending someone who did not have the ability to defend them self... I wouldn't be so fast to protect someone who chooses not to defend them self but a young person or an adult overpowered by a wiser, older, stronger or more healthy person would immediately have my attention... My family knows they may have to live without me and are well served with skills and tools to defend themselves... My financial input in the family coffers is easily lived without so they are not going to be left destitute with my passing... Thay are well aware that i do not seek to be a hero but would never shirk what I consider my obligation to certain groups of society... Children being but one of these... Law enforcement officers do not suffer the same commitments that i always have and I do not suffer the same limitations and liabilities that they do... fair trade in my eyes... Brent

January 12, 2013, 06:38 PM	#23
ClydeFrog Junior member Join Date: May 1, 2010 Posts: 5,797	School district officals; local PDs.... There was a big pow-wow of my area's metro police chiefs, the county sheriff, the county mayor, & a few small town mayors to discuss school security & budgets/$. The big gap missing was the county's school district leadership. If these political wonks & no-load pencil pushers can't show up to address school security & the safety of young kids then what the #*=• good are they? Clyde

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search