Deputy assigned to Florida school 'never went in' during shooting, sheriff says - Page 2

**Aguila Blanca** · February 23, 2018, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MachinegunTony

I don’t blame the cop. He’s being held as a scapegoat.

The cop wasn’t wrong morally to set up a defensive situation and wait. I’m sure this cop had a family, too

Cops aren’t paid to die, and a rifle verus handgun situation is a bad uneven situation, as evidenced by the cop that was killed on video by Micah Johnson. I don’t have to explain to this group why in a pistol versus magazined rifle fight, the rifle will have a huge advantage.

Sorry, but you are incorrect. The SRO was wrong, both legally and morally. Since Columbine, the protocol in active shooter situations is for the first responder(s) to make immediate entry and to engage the shooter. It doesn't matter if he has a family -- he had a job to do, a duty to perform, and he failed to perform. Even police officers on LEO forums are calling him a POS for not going in.

He is not being made a scapegoat. He didn't do his job. That's why he was suspended. As for the rifle vs. handgun -- he didn't know what the shooter was armed with -- and the bottom line is that it doesn't matter. The shooter could have been armed with an M2 machine gun and a rocket launcher -- it was still the SRO's duty to enter and engage.

Don P · February 23, 2018, 11:54 AM

Quote:

I don’t blame the cop. He’s being held as a scapegoat.

The cop wasn’t wrong morally to set up a defensive situation and wait. I’m sure this cop had a family, too

Cops aren’t paid to die, and a rifle verus handgun situation is a bad uneven situation, as evidenced by the cop that was killed on video by Micah Johnson. I don’t have to explain to this group why in a pistol versus magazined rifle fight, the rifle will have a huge advantage.

Anyone who thinks the cop should have charged in with his handgun only needs to watch this video. https://youtu.be/murLU0us4eY

Also, from a legal perspective, the cop has no legal obligation to intervene, and this is case law that has been confirmed multiple times and confirmed again in 2005 in the SC case Castle Rock v Gonzales.

It’s a highly publicized and widely held myth that cops have to pull you from a burning car or save you in a shootout. The inaction might result in heavy political pressure afterwards, but that’s a different perspective.

I don’t fault the cop at all. It’s not his obligation to die.

I totally disagree, here is a link to info about the Texas Tower shooter from back in 1966, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Univer...tower_shooting

Double Naught Spy · February 23, 2018, 12:05 PM

Quote:

He is not being made a scapegoat. He didn't do his job. That's why he was suspended. As for the rifle vs. handgun -- he didn't know what the shooter was armed with -- and the bottom line is that it doesn't matter. The shooter could have been armed with an M2 machine gun and a rocket launcher -- it was still the SRO's duty to enter and engage.

Right, and his SRO training takes into account that the active shooter may be more heavily armed, armored, etc. I don't know why people think that just because somebody has a bigger gun that they will necessarily win the fight. Ignorance?

TruthTellers · February 23, 2018, 12:31 PM

I'm reading posts here that say the cop isn't obligated to die... true, he's not obligated to die, he's obligated "to protect and serve."

Standing outside and not engaging the shooter is failure to follow protocol (funny how so many law enforcement agencies failed protocol with Cruz) and it cost lives. Even if the officer doesn't kill the suspect, he can slow him down or draw his fire away from students/faculty.

That's the reason why those engagement protocols are in place, to minimize loss of life. Standing outside doesn't minimize anything other than the officer's masculinity.

Also, rifle vs pistol isn't an advantage for officers, but it's better than rifle vs pencils and textbooks. If anyone here remembers an off duty cop working security at an art show in Texas killed two guys with AK's, who were going to shoot up the art show because they had pictures depicting a certain religious figure, with his pistol and he was unscathed.

The biggest issue here, as we saw in Pulse in 2016, is when mass shooters are active, the police are standing down when the protocols are clear that you engage.

If police are going to stand down, then there's no excuse to say that concealed carriers would make mass shootings worse because, given the last few shootings, an armed non-LEO in the building would have stopped these shootings faster than police would have.

After the past few years, local and federal law enforcement has lost all credibility and I've lost all faith in them. I'm tired of their failures that lead to unnecessary loss of life, I'm tired of seeing police chiefs with 250k salaries testifying that permitless carry endangers law officers when it's obvious law officers endanger non-LEO's, I'm tired of their legal defense teams being paid by taxpayers... I want all pensions, salaries, and funding for LEO, local and federal, cut in half and have that money diverted to re-opening mental hospitals.

Glenn E. Meyer · February 23, 2018, 01:04 PM

Is there more to this discussion that just complaining? The perceived personal failure of the SRO will be investigated.

Many departments train for active and quick entry. Why he didn't even if trained is something we can't parse now? People freeze - it's a built in response.

Let's wind this down with facts rather than just yelling. It's terrible, I grant you that.

Machineguntony · February 23, 2018, 01:18 PM

There is a difference between standard operating procedure, which is an administrative concern, and the case law.

The jurisprudence is quite clear, both in common law and case law, and recently reaffirmed in 2005, that the police have no duty to rescue or intervene, so long as they did not create or contribute to the circumstance that required rescuing, even if there is a crime happening right in front of their eyes.

Administratively and politically though, I’m not saying that the cop won’t get fired or that he won’t be the scorn of society. Departments often create standard operating procedures that dictate action, but that’s an administrative penalty if theres a violation of the SOP.

As to whether it is morally right or wrong to intervene, I’ll leave that up to you guys to debate further.

fredvon4 · February 23, 2018, 01:26 PM

I should not get into this but cannot help self

too much we do NOT know

Twice (in a combat zone) I was lone when the bullets were flying.... I was not sure of the inside of the area, cover , how many shooters, how many non combatants, my training required I seek info, seek back up, asses the situation, then ACT...which at the time I did but the act of intel gather took me some time and a LOT of indecision cuz help (squad radio) was minuets out

Again... just cowering and not acting, if true, is shameful... BUT I can create a lot of scenarios in my mind where I fully understand the time lag to engage or enter

SIGSHR · February 23, 2018, 02:06 PM

Cops aren't paid to die. Nor are firemen. Or military personnel. But they are paid to act, and hopefully trained to react.

zukiphile · February 23, 2018, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fredvon4

I should not get into this but cannot help self

too much we do NOT know

Twice (in a combat zone) I was lone when the bullets were flying.... I was not sure of the inside of the area, cover , how many shooters, how many non combatants, my training required I seek info, seek back up, asses the situation, then ACT...which at the time I did but the act of intel gather took me some time and a LOT of indecision cuz help (squad radio) was minuets out

Again... just cowering and not acting, if true, is shameful... BUT I can create a lot of scenarios in my mind where I fully understand the time lag to engage or enter

I agree with all of that.

When I first read about the SRO, my reflex was contempt. I don't know enough to condemn his behavior, but my contempt was deep and instant. Contemplating what he heard while he waited didn't help.

It is uncomfortable to ponder the short distance between depravity and excellence in any of us. A momentary failure to conquer a rational fear can produce tragic inaction in anyone, even in a good person.

This isn't a defense or a condemnation of the SRO.

RETG · February 23, 2018, 04:01 PM

Is everyone posting here about the cop being a coward able to step into his shoes and run into the building? Have all here who called the cop a coward been in the situation he was in?

I will not stand up for the cop, but I do not know the full circumstances as to why he did not react and at least get into the school and access the situation.

I'm assuming most here can tell the difference between the rapid fire sound from a AR vs, a handgun round. There is a distinct difference. At least to me there is.

When I was very young and very stupid and in the service, there were times I headed into a firefight cause I knew I could not be killed; that is how foolish we were when we were young. And that was in a war in the jungles of 'Nam (even if never a declared war) .

After college, I went to work for the US government, I ended up after 30 years serving in two different agencies and can say I never had to run into a building where there was active gunfire; I was lucky, but it was not unusual.

However, in that 30 years, there were many times I had to enter a location; with other agents, expecting to be shot at and sometimes we were, most times, we were not. (Surprising how people don't shoot at people who are already pointing guns at them and ready to use them if necessary.)

The few times we were in situations where people started to shoot at us we naturally fired back more out of self-preservation than because we were big, bad and brave.

I had a debate earlier with a friend in regard to arming teachers or others in the school and how worthless he said that would be considering a trained cop was afraid to enter the building. I explained there needs to be a complete different mind set to enter a building with an active shooter vs. being in a building when the active shooter starts shooting.

In the first scenario, to enter the building is a true act of heroism, in the second it is pure self-preservation and people will do more to save themselves than to save others. That is a fact of life. So,if this same cop, or another cop, or a teacher, janitor, principal, etc., were in a school and a nut comes in unloading a rifle, pistol, shotgun, whatever at them, they are more likely to shoot back then likely to run into the building; that is just life.

So before we all jump on board and call this cop a coward, make sure you know what you would do under the same circumstances. Before I would personally make a decision I would want more information in regard to the entire event.

**Aguila Blanca** · February 23, 2018, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RETG

Is everyone posting here about the cop being a coward able to step into his shoes and run into the building? Have all here who called the cop a coward been in the situation he was in?

I have not been in that exact situation but I have been under fire -- in Vietnam. And I freely confess that I was scared spitless. However, I was in a sandbag bunker that was under attack, so I didn't have the option of waiting outside. Nonetheless, I understand that gunfire engenders fear.

That said -- he put on his uniform and went to work that morning. Responding, entering, and engaging the shooter was his job -- his duty. If it were a military situation, I have no doubt that he'd be facing a court martial for dereliction of duty. It's like deciding to get a carry permit. Newbies are advised to consider whether or not they could actually pull the trigger if the situation arose. If they can't answer "Yes," they shouldn't carry. In this case, if the guy wasn't prepared to do his duty, he should not have taken the SRO position.

Respectfully, I don't have to know what I would have done under the same circumstances to call the guy a coward. I don't want to be a police officer, I have never wanted to be a police officer, so there's no way I would ever be in his situation. That doesn't change the facts: He WAS the point man. It WAS his job to enter and to engage. He didn't do it. A Coral Springs officer who was in the first wave to enter said they (the Coral Springs officers) ran right past the guy in the parking lot, and he didn't even come in after them to provide backup.

TailGator · February 23, 2018, 04:57 PM

I can understand the possibility of unexpectedly freezing under fire, but as I understand the reports, he was not under fire and made a choice while in a safe location not to put himself in harm's way. I'm not sure that is the same. As others have said more eloquently, he took the job and drew paychecks for, among other things, being the person on site if something like this happened. It was part of his duty, part of his job description, and he didn't do it. I can't respect that, personally.

zipspyder · February 23, 2018, 05:02 PM

It's up to 3 or 4 cowards now...all from the Sheriff's office.

Quote:

apparently this deputy was not the only one sitting on his ass outside. the next 3 officers sat outside as well. responding officers from another city were the first ones to go in, while Israels 3-4 deputies all sat outside.

spacemanspiff · February 23, 2018, 05:03 PM

Its difficult to really put into perspective. Did the SRO know the location of the shooter? How close in proximity was he to the shots being fired? Was there anyone relaying information to him on radio?

I think if we know what information the SRO had we would have a better idea of what he was faced with.

In the end though, the answer will be the same: Having an armed person on school premises is NOT a guarantee that an active shooter is going to be stopped.

That also brings up other questions. Did the shooter know that the school had an armed SRO? Was he expecting to have to fend off a defender?

Psychedelic Bang · February 23, 2018, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062

It is very unlikely he was trained to wait outside.

It looks very much like you are right, and I was wrong. I didn't know - my background is not law enforcement by any stretch of the imagination.

I still believe that the Sherriff himself should resign.

UncleEd · February 23, 2018, 06:06 PM

Zipspyder brings up the latest report.

Search it out.

City police highly critical of county police.

thallub · February 23, 2018, 06:29 PM

Quote:

It's up to 3 or 4 cowards now...all from the Sheriff's office.

Reports are saying four deputies refused to enter the school.

Quote:

Some Coral Springs police were stunned and upset that the four original Broward County Sheriff's deputies who were first on the scene did not appear to join them as they entered the school, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. It's unclear whether the shooter was still in the building when they arrived.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sou...id=HPCOMMDHP15

cjwils · February 23, 2018, 07:27 PM

Cops not willing to risk their lives to protect hundreds of school kids should have previously requested other work.

berettaprofessor · February 23, 2018, 08:25 PM

Quote:

The person who should resign is Sherriff Scott Israel

+1. Lots of changes need to happen but Israel's sacking is an absolute necessity based on the stories available now.

I get more infuriated with every news story I read. Now more deputies waited outside? And the worst today, was this CNN Opinion piece that used the fact that the deputy waited outside when he should have gone in as proof that "a good guy with a gun" doesn't always stop the bad guy. I can't believe even Chris Cillizza is deranged enough to draw this conclusion.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/polit...sis/index.html

But then I've noticed, Cillizza never allows comments on his "opinions"...because I've always wanted to and never found any.

tony pasley · February 23, 2018, 08:41 PM

His action has caused another twist, I have been contacted by 9 people who now want to learn to shoot. They now realize they can't rely on any one but themselves for their own defense.

**Aguila Blanca** · February 23, 2018, 09:06 PM

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...omment-page-1/

Quote:

(Via CNN) When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff’s deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.

Well, that goes a long way to explaining (even more than before) why Sheriff Israel was so, ah, um ... "circumspect" ... in his (non) discussion of who went in first. He's perfectly happy to have allowed the Coral Springs officers to take all the risk, while he tries to grab all the glory for his department.

We had an expression for people like him when I was in the Army -- "Lower than whale [poop] at the bottom of the ocean."

Bartholomew Roberts · February 23, 2018, 09:07 PM

Cillizza is an idiot. He tweeted something about how fair and thoughtful the CNN town hall was. I mean, sure... it is hosted by a former Handgun Control Inc. employee, has scripted questions, and the host allows the stacked audience to shout epithets at all the pro-RKBA people; but aside from that it was the picture of unbiased news.

**Aguila Blanca** · February 23, 2018, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psychedelic Bang

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062

It is very unlikely he was trained to wait outside.

It looks very much like you are right, and I was wrong. I didn't know - my background is not law enforcement by any stretch of the imagination.

You don't need to be law enforcement. The change in strategy/tactics has been widely and frequently discussed ever since Columbine.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/fl...ons/index.html

**Tom Servo** · February 23, 2018, 09:28 PM

The fundamental idea behind gun control is that we should delegate our protection to the state. The incident they're using to prove that is one in which the state failed to do so at nearly every level.

In The Ten Ring · February 23, 2018, 09:41 PM

"Protect and serve" is false advertising according to several rulings of the US Supreme Court. According to the highest court in the land, police are under no legal duty to protect anyone, only, "society as a whole." (Whatever that means).

I have a very low tolerance for anyone that puts themselves first and won't stick their necks out for a stranger. Oh and yes, I've been burned a few times doing that. I can still look myself in the mirror though.

I think the sheriff is throwing his guy under the bus pretty quickly but it is an excellent example, along with the failings of the FBI, the school system, the sheriff's office, the parents, the health care workers, and federal and state law how you can't count on govt to protect you. And those same people tell you "give up your guns so we can protect you."

February 23, 2018, 12:31 PM	#29
TruthTellers Senior Member Join Date: October 22, 2016 Posts: 3,888	I'm reading posts here that say the cop isn't obligated to die... true, he's not obligated to die, he's obligated "to protect and serve." Standing outside and not engaging the shooter is failure to follow protocol (funny how so many law enforcement agencies failed protocol with Cruz) and it cost lives. Even if the officer doesn't kill the suspect, he can slow him down or draw his fire away from students/faculty. That's the reason why those engagement protocols are in place, to minimize loss of life. Standing outside doesn't minimize anything other than the officer's masculinity. Also, rifle vs pistol isn't an advantage for officers, but it's better than rifle vs pencils and textbooks. If anyone here remembers an off duty cop working security at an art show in Texas killed two guys with AK's, who were going to shoot up the art show because they had pictures depicting a certain religious figure, with his pistol and he was unscathed. The biggest issue here, as we saw in Pulse in 2016, is when mass shooters are active, the police are standing down when the protocols are clear that you engage. If police are going to stand down, then there's no excuse to say that concealed carriers would make mass shootings worse because, given the last few shootings, an armed non-LEO in the building would have stopped these shootings faster than police would have. After the past few years, local and federal law enforcement has lost all credibility and I've lost all faith in them. I'm tired of their failures that lead to unnecessary loss of life, I'm tired of seeing police chiefs with 250k salaries testifying that permitless carry endangers law officers when it's obvious law officers endanger non-LEO's, I'm tired of their legal defense teams being paid by taxpayers... I want all pensions, salaries, and funding for LEO, local and federal, cut in half and have that money diverted to re-opening mental hospitals. __________________ "We always think there's gonna be more time... then it runs out."

February 23, 2018, 01:04 PM	#30
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	Is there more to this discussion that just complaining? The perceived personal failure of the SRO will be investigated. Many departments train for active and quick entry. Why he didn't even if trained is something we can't parse now? People freeze - it's a built in response. Let's wind this down with facts rather than just yelling. It's terrible, I grant you that. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

February 23, 2018, 01:18 PM	#31
Machineguntony Senior Member Join Date: June 22, 2013 Posts: 1,277	There is a difference between standard operating procedure, which is an administrative concern, and the case law. The jurisprudence is quite clear, both in common law and case law, and recently reaffirmed in 2005, that the police have no duty to rescue or intervene, so long as they did not create or contribute to the circumstance that required rescuing, even if there is a crime happening right in front of their eyes. Administratively and politically though, I’m not saying that the cop won’t get fired or that he won’t be the scorn of society. Departments often create standard operating procedures that dictate action, but that’s an administrative penalty if theres a violation of the SOP. As to whether it is morally right or wrong to intervene, I’ll leave that up to you guys to debate further. __________________ Sent from Motorola DynaTac 8000x

February 23, 2018, 05:03 PM	#39
spacemanspiff Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2002 Location: alaska Posts: 3,498	Its difficult to really put into perspective. Did the SRO know the location of the shooter? How close in proximity was he to the shots being fired? Was there anyone relaying information to him on radio? I think if we know what information the SRO had we would have a better idea of what he was faced with. In the end though, the answer will be the same: Having an armed person on school premises is NOT a guarantee that an active shooter is going to be stopped. That also brings up other questions. Did the shooter know that the school had an armed SRO? Was he expecting to have to fend off a defender? __________________ "Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard

February 23, 2018, 08:41 PM	#45
tony pasley Senior Member Join Date: April 13, 2006 Location: western north carolina Posts: 1,641	His action has caused another twist, I have been contacted by 9 people who now want to learn to shoot. They now realize they can't rely on any one but themselves for their own defense. __________________ Every day Congress is in session we lose a little bit more of our Liberty.

February 23, 2018, 01:26 PM	#32
fredvon4 Junior member Join Date: January 18, 2010 Location: Lampasas Texas Posts: 154	I should not get into this but cannot help self too much we do NOT know Twice (in a combat zone) I was lone when the bullets were flying.... I was not sure of the inside of the area, cover , how many shooters, how many non combatants, my training required I seek info, seek back up, asses the situation, then ACT...which at the time I did but the act of intel gather took me some time and a LOT of indecision cuz help (squad radio) was minuets out Again... just cowering and not acting, if true, is shameful... BUT I can create a lot of scenarios in my mind where I fully understand the time lag to engage or enter

February 23, 2018, 02:06 PM	#33
SIGSHR Senior Member Join Date: September 13, 2005 Posts: 4,700	Cops aren't paid to die. Nor are firemen. Or military personnel. But they are paid to act, and hopefully trained to react.

February 23, 2018, 04:01 PM	#35
RETG Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2009 Location: Somewhere in Idaho, near WY Posts: 507	Is everyone posting here about the cop being a coward able to step into his shoes and run into the building? Have all here who called the cop a coward been in the situation he was in? I will not stand up for the cop, but I do not know the full circumstances as to why he did not react and at least get into the school and access the situation. I'm assuming most here can tell the difference between the rapid fire sound from a AR vs, a handgun round. There is a distinct difference. At least to me there is. When I was very young and very stupid and in the service, there were times I headed into a firefight cause I knew I could not be killed; that is how foolish we were when we were young. And that was in a war in the jungles of 'Nam (even if never a declared war) . After college, I went to work for the US government, I ended up after 30 years serving in two different agencies and can say I never had to run into a building where there was active gunfire; I was lucky, but it was not unusual. However, in that 30 years, there were many times I had to enter a location; with other agents, expecting to be shot at and sometimes we were, most times, we were not. (Surprising how people don't shoot at people who are already pointing guns at them and ready to use them if necessary.) The few times we were in situations where people started to shoot at us we naturally fired back more out of self-preservation than because we were big, bad and brave. I had a debate earlier with a friend in regard to arming teachers or others in the school and how worthless he said that would be considering a trained cop was afraid to enter the building. I explained there needs to be a complete different mind set to enter a building with an active shooter vs. being in a building when the active shooter starts shooting. In the first scenario, to enter the building is a true act of heroism, in the second it is pure self-preservation and people will do more to save themselves than to save others. That is a fact of life. So,if this same cop, or another cop, or a teacher, janitor, principal, etc., were in a school and a nut comes in unloading a rifle, pistol, shotgun, whatever at them, they are more likely to shoot back then likely to run into the building; that is just life. So before we all jump on board and call this cop a coward, make sure you know what you would do under the same circumstances. Before I would personally make a decision I would want more information in regard to the entire event.

February 23, 2018, 04:57 PM	#37
TailGator Senior Member Join Date: May 8, 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,787	I can understand the possibility of unexpectedly freezing under fire, but as I understand the reports, he was not under fire and made a choice while in a safe location not to put himself in harm's way. I'm not sure that is the same. As others have said more eloquently, he took the job and drew paychecks for, among other things, being the person on site if something like this happened. It was part of his duty, part of his job description, and he didn't do it. I can't respect that, personally.

February 23, 2018, 06:06 PM	#41
UncleEd Senior Member Join Date: April 13, 2013 Location: N. Georgia Posts: 1,150	Zipspyder brings up the latest report. Search it out. City police highly critical of county police.

February 23, 2018, 07:27 PM	#43
cjwils Senior Member Join Date: November 28, 2010 Location: Washington state Posts: 401	Cops not willing to risk their lives to protect hundreds of school kids should have previously requested other work.

February 23, 2018, 09:07 PM	#47
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Cillizza is an idiot. He tweeted something about how fair and thoughtful the CNN town hall was. I mean, sure... it is hosted by a former Handgun Control Inc. employee, has scripted questions, and the host allows the stacked audience to shout epithets at all the pro-RKBA people; but aside from that it was the picture of unbiased news.

February 23, 2018, 09:28 PM	#49
Tom Servo Staff Join Date: September 27, 2008 Location: Foothills of the Appalachians Posts: 13,059	The fundamental idea behind gun control is that we should delegate our protection to the state. The incident they're using to prove that is one in which the state failed to do so at nearly every level. __________________ Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe

February 23, 2018, 09:41 PM	#50
In The Ten Ring Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2018 Posts: 380	"Protect and serve" is false advertising according to several rulings of the US Supreme Court. According to the highest court in the land, police are under no legal duty to protect anyone, only, "society as a whole." (Whatever that means). I have a very low tolerance for anyone that puts themselves first and won't stick their necks out for a stranger. Oh and yes, I've been burned a few times doing that. I can still look myself in the mirror though. I think the sheriff is throwing his guy under the bus pretty quickly but it is an excellent example, along with the failings of the FBI, the school system, the sheriff's office, the parents, the health care workers, and federal and state law how you can't count on govt to protect you. And those same people tell you "give up your guns so we can protect you."