Mass Shooting at San Antonio Elementary School

[Arturo Bandini]

Is it still 1st amendment ?

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2022, 01:15 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Is it still 1st amendment ?

I wouldn't recommend going so "1st amendment" with a last name like this, personally. 

[Belsnickel]

(08-19-2022, 01:15 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Is it still 1st amendment ?

In short, yes.

[*pally*]

(08-19-2022, 01:15 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Is it still 1st amendment ?

From what I understand for it to be a violation of the 1st amendment, it must be a specific threat towards a specific person or group of people.  This is too broad

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2022, 10:43 PM)pally Wrote: From what I understand for it to be a violation of the 1st amendment, it must be a specific threat towards a specific person or group of people.  This is too broad

What if he said if im elected to the school board you have my permission to enter the school and shoot students?

[hollodero]

(08-19-2022, 08:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: In short, yes.

Though I'm more American in respect to freedom of speech than most Europeans are, this imho goes too far. This is a direct threat, after all, and a call to resist the government of the United States by the ultimate means.

At the very least his person should be excluded from running for office and I'm glad they would be in my country.

[*pally*]

(08-20-2022, 12:00 AM)Nately120 Wrote: What if he said if im elected to the school board you have my permission to enter the school and shoot students?

I would say yes it is a threat...I have no idea what a court would decide on this one

[*Nately120*]

(08-20-2022, 12:52 PM)pally Wrote: I would say yes it is a threat...I have no idea what a court would decide on this one

It's the same in theory as what he said, but yeah I feel like the court of public opinion would demand the 1st take a backseat.  Or maybe not. 

[BengalB]

(08-20-2022, 04:41 AM)hollodero Wrote: Though I'm more American in respect to freedom of speech than most Europeans are, this imho goes too far. This is a direct threat, after all, and a call to resist the government of the United States by the ultimate means.

At the very least his person should be excluded from running for office and I'm glad they would be in my country.

I wouldn't call this a call to do anything. He said if he is elected, Floridians will be permitted to perform an act.

Also, if you think he is being serious about Floridians acting out in this manner, you've missed the point entirely.

[GMDino]

(08-20-2022, 12:52 PM)pally Wrote: I would say yes it is a threat...I have no idea what a court would decide on this one

If I recall these things correctly it has to be a statement that can be acted on immediately (or very quickly) to be wrong/illegal.

(I'm not a lawyer, but I did see one on tv.)

But twitter banned him so that's good.

I didn't see DeSantis or any Florida GOP condemn his statement/him, but I admit I might have missed it after the ban took place.

[GMDino]

Update:

https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-school-shooting-justice-department-report-police-16b59efa5c5015d685d917c3f0f26256

Quote:[color=var(--headlineColor)]The police response to the Uvalde shooting was riddled with failures, a new DOJ report says[/color]













0 seconds of 1 minute, 57 secondsVolume 0%






 

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]Family members of Uvalde, Texas school shooting victims reacted to the Justice Department’s report that identifies “cascading failures” in law enforcement’s handling of one of the deadliest massacres at a school in American history. (Jan. 18)
Videos
3
Photos
21

[color=var(--color-byline-authors)]BY ACACIA CORONADO, ERIC TUCKER, JAKE BLEIBERG AND LINDSAY WHITEHURST[/color]
Updated 9:56 PM EST, January 18, 2024
Share
UVALDE, Texas (AP) — Police officials who responded to the deadly Uvalde, Texas, elementary school shooting waited far too long to confront the gunman, acted with “no urgency” in establishing a command post and communicated inaccurate information to grieving families, according to a Justice Department report released Thursday that identifies “cascading failures” in law enforcement’s handling of the massacre.[/color]

The report, the most comprehensive federal accounting of the maligned police response to the May 24, 2022, shooting at Robb Elementary School, catalogs a sweeping array of training, communication, leadership and technology problems that federal officials say contributed to the crisis lasting far longer than necessary. All the while, the report says, terrified students inside the classrooms called 911 and agonized parents begged officers to go in.

“Had law enforcement agencies followed generally accepted practices in active shooter situations and gone right after the shooter and stopped him, lives would have been saved and people would have survived,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said Thursday at a news conference in Uvalde after Justice Department officials briefed family members on their findings. The Uvalde victims, he said, “deserved better.”

Even for a mass shooting that has already been the subject of intense scrutiny and in-depth examinations — an earlier report by Texas lawmakers, for instance, faulted law enforcement at every level with failing “to prioritize saving innocent lives over their own safety” — the nearly 600-page Justice Department study adds to the public understanding of how officers failed to stop an attack that killed 19 children and two staff members.

[color=var(--color-module-title)]RELATED COVERAGE

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]
[color=var(--color-promo-text)]Uvalde families dig in for new test of gun industry protections[/color]
[/color]
[color=var(--color-primary-text)]
[color=var(--color-promo-text)]Uvalde schools suspend entire police force after outrage[/color]
[/color]
[color=var(--color-primary-text)]
[color=var(--color-promo-text)]Texas school shooter left trail of ominous warning signs[/color]
[/color]



The flawed initial response was compounded in the following days by an ineptitude that added to family members’ anguish, according to the report.


0:00 / 53

AP AUDIO: Justice Department report finds ‘cascading failures’ and ‘no urgency’ during Uvalde, Texas, shooting
AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports.

One family member spent hours pulling glass out of an injured son’s body because some of the surviving children had not been screened for medical care. A county district attorney told families that they would need to wait for autopsy results before death notifications were made, prompting some to yell: “What, our kids are dead? No, no!”[/color]

Hospital staff “untrained in delivering painful news” told some family members that their loved ones had died, while in other cases, families received incorrect information suggesting that a child had survived when they had not. At one point, an official told waiting families that another bus of survivors was coming, but that was untrue.

“Mirroring the failures of the law enforcement response, state and local agencies failed to coordinate, leading to inaccurate and incomplete information being provided to anxious family and community members and the public,” said Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta.

The law enforcement response was massive, comprising at least 380 personnel from 24 local, county, state and federal agencies.
But the problems began almost immediately with a flawed assumption by officers that the shooter was barricaded, or otherwise contained, even as he continued to fire shots. That “mindset permeated throughout much of the incident response” as police, rather than rushing inside the classrooms to end the carnage, waited more than an hour to confront the gunman in what the report called a costly “lack of urgency.”

The gunman, Salvador Ramos, was killed roughly 77 minutes after police arrived on the scene, when a tactical team finally went into the classroom to take him down.

“An active shooter with access to victims should never be considered and treated as a barricaded subject,” the report says, with the word “never” emphasized in italics.

In other errors, the report says, police acted with “no urgency” in establishing a command center, creating confusion among police about who was in charge. The then-school district police chief, Pete Arredondo, discarded his radios on arrival, deeming them unnecessary.

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]Family members and others affected by the Robb Elementary shooting leave a meeting where Attorney General Merrick Garland shared a report on the findings of an investigation into the 2022 school shooting, Wednesday, Jan. 17, 2024, in Uvalde, Texas. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]Dora Mendoza, right, is hugged by a friend as she leaves a meeting where Attorney General Merrick Garland shared a report on the findings of an investigation into the 2022 school shooting at Robb Elementary School, Wednesday, Jan. 17, 2024, in Uvalde, Texas. Mendoza is the grandmother of 10-year-old Amerie Jo Garza who was killed in the shooting. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)[/color]

Though he tried to communicate by phone with officers in the school hallway, “unfortunately, on multiple occasions, he directed officers intending to gain entry into the classrooms to stop, because he appeared to determine that other victims should first be removed from nearby classrooms to prevent further injury,” the report says.[/color]

Uvalde, a community of more than 15,000 about 85 miles (140 kilometers) southwest of San Antonio, continues to struggle with the trauma left by the killings and remains divided on the issue of accountability. Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell has said she’s still considering whether to bring criminal charges.

President Joe Biden said in a statement Thursday that the report identified “multiple points of failure that hold lessons for the future” and that “no community should have to go through” what Uvalde did.

In Texas, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott initially praised the officers’ courage, saying the reason the shooting was “not worse is because law enforcement officials did what they do” and that they had been brave in “running toward gunfire for the singular purpose of trying to save lives.”

But that narrative crumbled under scrutiny, as a report from a panel of state lawmakers and investigations by journalists laid bare how a mass of officers went in and out of the school with weapons drawn but didn’t enter the classroom where the shooting was taking place.


[color=var(--color-primary-text)]
Artist Abel Ortiz, second from right, gives Attorney General Merrick Garland, center, and Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta, right, a tour of murals of shooting victims, Wednesday, Jan. 17, 2024, in Uvalde, Texas. The Justice Department is planning this week to release findings of an investigation into the 2022 school shooting. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)


“The actions of the responding officers, combined with the ‘heroic’ storyline that started with (a spokesperson for the Texas Department of Public Safety) and continued the next day during the Governor’s and director’s news conference, dealt a serious blow to public confidence in local and state law enforcement,” the report states.[/color]

The city of Uvalde said in a statement that it had requested the federal investigation and fully cooperated with it and had “already implemented changes in leadership, new personnel, new training, and new equipment.”

The report intentionally omits the identity of the gunman or any explanation of a possible motive. But it does include page-long remembrances of each of the victims, including 10-year-old Jose Flores Jr., who loved cars and the Houston Astros, and Amerie Jo Garza, who on the morning of the shooting had celebrated her appointment to the honor roll.

And it highlights anguished and panicked quotes from a 911 call by students trapped in the classroom — “Help!” “Help!” “Help!” “I don’t want to die. My teacher is dead” — experiencing “unimaginable horror” while officers stood just outside in the hallway.

“I hope that the failures end today,” said Kimberly Rubio, whose daughter Lexi Rubio was killed in the shooting. “My child, our children are named in this report because they are dead.” Of the officers who failed, she said: “They should be named.”

Velma Lisa Duran, whose sister Irma Garcia was one of the teachers killed, said before the release of the report that she was daunted by the prospect of reliving the circumstances of her sister’s death and what she really wanted was criminal charges.

“A report doesn’t matter when there are no consequences for actions that are so vile and murderous and evil,” said Duran. “What do you want us to do with another report? ... Bring it to court,” she said.

The federal review was launched just days after the shooting. Since then, how police respond to mass shootings around the country has come under closer scrutiny.

The families of some of the Uvalde victims have blasted police as cowards and demanded resignations. At least five officers have lost their jobs, including two Department of Public Safety officers and the on-site commander, Arredondo.

No one has been charged with a crime.
___
Bleiberg reported from Dallas, and Tucker and Whitehurst reported from Washington, D.C.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

So essentially what I said at the time. Command paralysis coupled with the unwillingness of on the scene officers to jeopardize their career by ignoring orders. If shots are being fired then you enter the scene, that's SOP. This also highlights what a cluster F things become when multiple agencies respond to the same incident. Horrifying failure by admin on this one. I will add that the current climate does not help in these instances. When officers, especially at command level, become more concerned with the potential public response after the incident than actually dealing with the incident at hand you get these kind of cascading failures. This is no way excuses the actions of Uvalde PD, but it goes a long way towards explaining them.

[*Nately120*]

(01-19-2024, 12:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So essentially what I said at the time.   Command paralysis coupled with the unwillingness of on the scene officers to jeopardize their career by ignoring orders.  If shots are being fired then you enter the scene, that's SOP.  This also highlights what a cluster F things become when multiple agencies respond to the same incident.  Horrifying failure by admin on this one.  I will add that the current climate does not help in these instances.  When officers, especially at command level, become more concerned with the potential public response after the incident than actually dealing with the incident at hand you get these kind of cascading failures.  This is no way excuses the actions of Uvalde PD, but it goes a long way towards explaining them.

What's to worry about?  Just let it play out and within 48 hours people will be back to complaining about litter boxes and taxpayer funded sex dungeons for elementary school students. 

Schools are weird.  I live in a very red part of PA and at the latest school board meeting the main talking point of one of the board members was that the school needs to teach American history and make sure it is taught in English.  Apparently a bunch of redneck farm kids are supposedly learning American history in Spanish here?  Hell if I know.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-19-2024, 04:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: What's to worry about?  Just let it play out and within 48 hours people will be back to complaining about litter boxes and taxpayer funded sex dungeons for elementary school students.

Your livelihood for starters.  Fear of making a decision because it might be wrong and cost you your job is an epidemic in law enforcement right now.  I can't tell you how many times I've asked for a decision on a matter only to get a "I'll get back to you" that never comes until time constraints force me to make a decision.  I won't even get in to the fear of potential criminal charges, because that would get the usual suspects in a tizzy. 

Quote:Schools are weird.  I live in a very red part of PA and at the latest school board meeting the main talking point of one of the board members was that the school needs to teach American history and make sure it is taught in English.  Apparently a bunch of redneck farm kids are supposedly learning American history in Spanish here?  Hell if I know.

People tend to be touchy when their children are involved.  It certainly doesn't always coincide with common sense.

[*Nately120*]

(01-19-2024, 08:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Your livelihood for starters.  Fear of making a decision because it might be wrong and cost you your job is an epidemic in law enforcement right now.  I can't tell you how many times I've asked for a decision on a matter only to get a "I'll get back to you" that never comes until time constraints force me to make a decision.  I won't even get in to the fear of potential criminal charges, because that would get the usual suspects in a tizzy. 

There goes the last good union.

[GMDino]

(01-19-2024, 04:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: What's to worry about?  Just let it play out and within 48 hours people will be back to complaining about litter boxes and taxpayer funded sex dungeons for elementary school students. 

Schools are weird.  I live in a very red part of PA and at the latest school board meeting the main talking point of one of the board members was that the school needs to teach American history and make sure it is taught in English.  Apparently a bunch of redneck farm kids are supposedly learning American history in Spanish here?  Hell if I know.

More worrisome is that they were trained properly and didn't follow it due to fear or stupidity.

Or both.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-19-2024, 08:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: More worrisome is that they were trained properly and didn't follow it due to fear or stupidity.

Or both.

Or neither, as has already been explained.  When you're ordered not to go in and you choose to go in anyways you're almost certain to lose your job, even if things go well..  If they don't go well, you'll lose your job, potentially be charged criminally, and you'll also potentially be civilly liable as you acted outside of policy (depending on your jurisdiction).  It's a lose/lose for the line officers, who iirc wanted to go in but were ordered to stand down by admin.  If you really want to play your cop hating game direct your vitriol at the people making decisions instead. Or you could continue to look clueless and vindictive.

[GMDino]

(01-19-2024, 10:20 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or neither, as has already been explained.  When you're ordered not to go in and you choose to go in anyways you're almost certain to lose your job, even if things go well..  If they don't go well, you'll lose your job, potentially be charged criminally, and you'll also potentially be civilly liable as you acted outside of policy (depending on your jurisdiction).  It's a lose/lose for the line officers, who iirc wanted to go in but were ordered to stand down by admin. 

[/quote]

So fear from the line officers of losing their jobs.

Stupidity from the people making the decisions.

One internet point for me! 

(01-19-2024, 10:20 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: f you really want to play your cop hating game direct your vitriol at the people making decisions instead. Or you could continue to look clueless and vindictive.

And one more personal insult from you.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Quote:So fear from the line officers of losing their jobs.

Or being charged criminally, or civilly.  For some reason you ignored that point, I wonder why?  Have you ever been in a situation where you had to make a potentially life or death decision that could drastically affect your entire life?  I'm going to go out on a limb and guess, no.  Being an armchair QB is easy, as you prove here on a daily basis.

Quote:Stupidity from the people making the decisions.

One internet point for me! 

Actually, no.  Anyone with an iota of reading comprehension would see the exact opposite.

Quote:And one more personal insult from you.

Being a professional victim must be exhausting.  

[GMDino]

(01-20-2024, 12:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or being charged criminally, or civilly.  For some reason you ignored that point, I wonder why?  Have you ever been in a situation where you had to make a potentially life or death decision that could drastically affect your entire life?  I'm going to go out on a limb and guess, no.  Being an armchair QB is easy, as you prove here on a daily basis.

Actually, no.  Anyone with an iota of reading comprehension would see the exact opposite.

So fear. Doesn't matter if you want to add more reasons to be afraid to do what they were taught.  It was fear.

And stupidity from the people above them.

I've made some tough decisions in my life.  At least three that could have drastically affected me and the people I love.  But thank you for again thinking you know more about me than I do.

(01-20-2024, 12:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Being a professional victim must be exhausting.  

I wish we were still allowed to put quotes in our signatures.