280
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
280 points (97.0% liked)
News
23618 readers
3362 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What bothers me most about this is the huge amount of ignorance all sides have on this subject.
The issue IMO, is the fucking AR-15. Police Officers immediately went in when they knew there were problems, but when the subject had an AR-15 that could literally shoot through school walls (ie: Police Officers were outgunned and out-matched), they retreated.
Yes, there was a few hours where they were too scared to do anything, further traumatizing the children / teachers. But this is fucking it. Talk about the firepower and the tactical decision to retreat.
Handguns CANNOT compete against an AR15. The AR15 has superior power, penetration, and accuracy. The officers made the right decision to retreat, regroup, and further come up with a new plan initially. Though their cowardice in the face of the AR15 is what needs to be highlighted most of all.
There's nothing wrong with being scared of a bigger, more accurate, more powerful gun with more ammunition. If they truly were outgunned, then retreat was the best option (otherwise, officers would have died and that would have forced a retreat while carrying a slain officer around, a much harder task). Shit gets bad to worse in a combat situation if you don't outgun the opponent.
Dinky handguns won't do shit against the body armor of the attacker either.
This is literally the case where liberals need to come together, understand the mechanics of the gun involved and push for better gun control laws. If officers in Texas get outgunned and are forced to retreat, then support those officers and push for gun legislation. Everyone knows these bigger guns serve as cop-killers and ultimately fuck our society over. Just quit being dumbass snowflakes about blue-lives-matter or pro-Police stances or whatever.
Being pro-Police here AND anti-gun is the right move in this case. But instead, Liberals fuck over their own politics because they're too braindead to play their cards right.
Conservatives clearly care more about guns than Police Officers. Punish the Conservative view ya pansies.
The cops had AR15s, body armor, helmets, flash bang grenades, the works. They also outnumbered the shooter 376 to 1. The shooters vest had no armor plating.
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/27/uvalde-texas-school-shooting-timeline/
Also note: I'm talking about 11:40am. These are the pre-SWAT police officers who rushed into the building almost immediately after the shooter entered the building.
SWAT doesn't arrive until 12:10pm.
So no. For the time-period between 11:40am to 12:10pm, Police are just armed with whatever they got. Normal officers don't go around with Flash Bangs, Body Armor, AR15s. Most officers just have a handgun until SWAT arrives.
Standard procedure literally nationwide is that normal officers are expected to go in with what they have. That's exactly what happened in Nashville less than a year later:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting
The body cam video is public. Officers responded with what they had. Yes, there's an officer with an AR. There are also officers clearing rooms with handguns and in plainclothes. And one of the officers that engaged the AR-wielding shooter did so with their duty handgun.
They absolutely wear the former every day and many these days have either an AR or a shotgun in the trunk of their patrol vehicle.
I agree otherwise, but the armor a cop wears on patrol is completely useless against even soft-core 5.56, you need plates
Depends on the department but police vests being carriers with ceramic plates is far from uncommon these days. I know for a fact that's the case for my local department.
Wow, that's something I've never seen before
It's part of why you're seeing many departments move from internal (under the uniform) vests to external vests.
It also helps get gear off their very heavy duty belts.
May want to read you own article before posting it....from the article at 11:35, a few minutes after the gunman entered the school....
" Three Uvalde police officers rush to the same door that the gunman used to enter, which was closed. Surveillance footage shows the officers all have pistols, and two of them have rifles. One officer has external armor, and two are wearing concealable armor."
They had armor, pistols and 2/3 had rifles.
This is a tragedy any way you slice it. There is so much gun reform that needs to happen, and police did not handle things well here. People with guns are hard situations to handle, but police handled a bad situation on a way that made it worse.
The officer who actually cornered the gunman, and put in the call for SWAT at 11:40 only had a pistol.
Which is commendable: to go into a situation knowing you are outgunned. The people with pistols in that first group 100% should be commended for going in with inferior weaponry.
Cool.
Now take that highly-penetrative AR15 and shoot it into a school building, knowing full well that the bullets will penetrate the walls and kill the people on the other side of the school.
Even when everyone has an AR15, the shooter still has the advantage, because he had the children hostage. There were also questions on whether the school was clear before any potential shootout (see the problem with AR15's huge amount of penetration: shooting through the attacker and hitting children in another room is a serious concern still even as SWAT arrives).
Even when you give everyone the works, the problem at play here was the AR15 in the hands of the shooter, which required the police to take a step back and rework tactics entirely.
Thinking from the perspective of the cops side will 100% give yall a ton of evidence and logical arguments to fuck up the pro-gun AR15 lobby. Just think damn it.
.223/5.56 will not penetrate a cinder block wall
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3Gp3hbTmXA
Also, most cops carry AR15s or a similar rifle in their cop car.
Good job highlighting your ignorance to Uvalde. Did you read the police log yet?
Read the fucking log. Have you read the log yet? What time was this radio message sent?
Interesting, but they still stood by after SWAT arrived, so your point is moot.
The original police officers tussled with a shooter with body-armor and superior AR15 firepower until they cornered him. And that wasn't good enough for yall dumbasses.
These original officers responding to the call were god damn heroes. And if anyone read the log they'd know.
Blame SWAT for being shitty and taking their time. But... even then... I have the AR15 penetrating walls / killing other people issue for good guy with gun vs bad guy with gun. I don't think its very easy or clear to figure out the wall strength, which directions are "safe to shoot at", etc. etc.
There's a lot to think about here, and that's not even covering the hostages. Just figuring out how to clear the other rooms and making sure enough of the area is clear enough for heavy weaponry is a big enough deal before you send in SWAT and possibly murder some children in the crossfire.
In any case: my point is clear. The AR15 is the big issue. We seriously should be pushing to ban the AR15 rifle, and any other weapons of similar penetration / muzzle velocity.
I just watched the video, there are two officers in the hallway with rifles at 11:40am.
I'm not surprised that a rag-tag team of officers without radios was unaware of the firepower on their sides.
In any case, the officers who were chasing down the shooter with only pistols are heroes. The situation would have been much worse without their action.
The radio-call I highlighted there is timestamped at 11:40am. Its a real call from the scene. And that's only 5 minutes after the shooter entered (and was already after the firefights that happened at 11:38 IIRC). In any case, we're well within the quick action / quick response of the first team, who were largely fighting an uphill battle with pistols, a lack of tactical radios, and other problems.
This doesn't change the fact either, that these officers at 11:40 were not a SWAT team. They were just normal officers. Officers don't get (and shouldn't get) military style / warrior training.
And I refuse to give officers more military/warrior training. We already are dealing with an overly militarized police force. I am 100% against any discussion where your conclusion is "Police need bigger guns and need to be meaner".
Don't they though? https://www.koin.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/614684716/congressional-police-reform-must-include-ban-on-warrior-style-police-training-human-rights-group-says/
This is relatively recent in the great scheme of things.
I'd prefer it if we went back before warrior-cop mentality. Cops aren't soldiers. In fact, any cop that tries to be a soldier becomes worse at doing cop-jobs (and vice versa. Soldiers aren't cops, we shouldn't be putting soldiers on the frontlines of "Win the hearts and minds" of foreigners like we did in Afghanistan).
I think most people would agree with that statement.
The inaction afterwards, when the police chief arrived, is the issue.
That is fair.
You have spoken in a clear, concise, and convincing manner. Well done! You've swayed this person.
And you are of course correct in your implication we need to begin design and production of the AR16 posthaste! A gun that shoot through 3 walls is the clear solution. Well done sir!
But in all seriousness you are correct. A nation littered with mentally unstable morons and high-powered rifles is a potently and predictably tragic way to be.
It is outrageous that you are getting downvoted for such a well put together set of comments. Thankyou very much for taking the time. I'm embarrassed for the people who downvote because they know you're right and they dislike the conclusion.