tvc184

I have a question for those that may know…. Let’s say a school goes to a single entry point with metal detectors and security. Let’s say that teachers and administrators also have to go through the safe security. If there is no such single point security with metal detectors, it is not a big deal however…… Let’s say a teacher is carrying a concealed weapon completely legally in Texas both with the consent of the school district and principal and also with additional training in the Texas school marshal program. Does the teacher carry the gun on his person or bring it in before the school year starts and leave it locked away, never to retrieve it to go in and out of the school, check it periodically as should be, etc. What I am getting at is that if that teacher goes through the security, it will light up like a Christmas tree and part of the program is basically anonymity. So do all teachers get a pass and not go through security since one or more of them may or may not be armed? I am assuming that only students are visitors and not faculty and staff have to go through security: I am just wondering, if only “certain” teachers were allowed to go around security, it might not take long to lose that anonymity.

Check out this retired Marine’s opinion on what gun laws should be. Compare that to an actor. If you had to choose between them, which proposal would you go with?

[Hidden Content]

And to show the opposite effect from Uvaldi, about 70% of the comments were something like, now that is how you protect a school. The problem is that they have no idea what happened but it is acceptable to kill the guy trying to pull out on door. Hopefully there is nothing to this and the guy tried to pull a gun or something like that and this is a clear cut case of self-defense for the officer(s). At this point however it has kind of a lynch mob mentality feel to it.si

Uvalde backlash? Justified? It is way too early to tell reading some of the reports, (knowing the media could be absolutely bogus) the man was acting strangely so the police shot him. This is the best I could tell from the several articles I have read but like always, the story may change or more details coming out. A man goes to an Elementary school which gladly has the doors locked. He’s yelling something and trying to get in and when he can’t he goes around the school and tries other doors. The articles keep using the term, aggressively trying to get in the door. Does that mean pulling or yanking hard, trying to pry it open or what? There is a police officer inside and saw what was happening. He called for back up from the city police. There was some kind of struggle outside of the school and the man was shot and killed. So far there has been no mention of any weapons or any threats, just a man acting strangely and pulling on doors. Maybe the shooting had nothing to do with the school and the doors. Maybe he was an angry parent and wanted to confront the principal but was not armed and was not making any threats. When the police tried to detain him for maybe disturbing the peace, he might’ve tried to grab an officer’s gun.. Realistically that would have nothing to do with the school and could have been on a person stopped for jaywalking. But I have yet to find any details of what actually happened. I have seen more than 100 comments on various forums. One on a local Facebook forum said shoot and ask questions later. Is that the Uvalde backlash? If an angry parent goes to school, are some police officers going to gun that person down in order to not be second-guessed and called a coward in the media? Maybe when we find out what happened, if ever, perhaps it will be a justified shooting that is not even really debatable. Without those details however it gives me a moment to pause and wonder if this is a response by going entirely in the other direction, shoot and then find out if it was justified. In my career I have seen upset parents argue with school officials. Although always aware of what might happen, I have never been in a situation that even seem close to pulling out a weapon, much less killing someone in those situations. [Hidden Content]

When kids are getting mowed down in the school, I wonder if that teacher would mind another teacher being armed? Here is this scenario with that teacher you spoke who of is adamantly against teachers being armed. Two years later a guy walks into the school and start shooting outside of that teacher’s room. The “I don’t like other teachers with guns” teacher is frozen in terror but sees a teacher from across the hall step out and shoots and kills the suspect who only managed to kill one student and injured another. Instead of several dozen injuries and deaths, it is over. The one who said, I don’t like other teachers to be on, should say: 1. I am so glad that the other teacher was armed. 2. I realized that countless children's lives were saved but it was wrong for that teacher to be armed and to step out and end the threat so quickly. I wish that we had not allowed guns in school.

That is because it now violates their rights to put them in an institution.

OK, anybody but Trump. Everybody understands that. But when you would vote for anyone but Trump, no matter the candidate, why the old white guy? The anybody but Trump attitude makes the Democrats look even more stupid. Here is what that basically means. Trump is so bad that I would vote for a semi-intelligent octopus. Okay, awesome. The Democrats are always pushing any kind of minority, regardless of qualifications. Look at the current Press Secretary. She walks out to take the job for the first day and announces that she’s a quadruple minority. Everything since then appears to have been a disaster. Now they are having guest speakers such as a Korean boys group, a movie star to talk about gun control, etc. and then running her out the door. But OK, if that and what do you want go for it. So here is the scenario. Anybody we put up against Trump will probably win. We don’t have that semi intelligent octopus but we have a female pacific islander/Asian who is a Hindu. We have a male who is the mayor of a large city and he has a husband. We have black female counterpart to Bill Clinton. The list was long and varied. According to the Democrats, anybody could’ve beat in Trump. What a great chance to get someone in there other than a white male. ANYBODY but Trump WILL WIN!!! But who did the rank and file Dems choose when it could have been “anybody”? No, the anybody but Trump argument doesn’t make the Democrats look smart, he makes them look stupid. Not because they wanted someone else but because they could have put in anyone else and chose not to.

Yes, these aren’t road rage. This shooter is supposed to have started making comments about shooting up a school four years ago. That is the problem with a person that has time to plan. He can pick his target, decide when he wants to hit it, have back up plans, decide how he wants to commit his carnage like what weapons, etc.

You don’t have to take an intelligence test to vote which is also a right, just like the Second Amendment.

That is almost comical. You can’t link all is in the Democrat mindset…. or only when it comes to them? On January 6, 2021 we had a mass protest in the capitol. It was claimed to be an insurrection, which it absolutely was not as they did not try to overthrow the government. But every conservative and every Republican across the nation is branded that’s trying to overturn the government. One cop gets convicted of assault or some kind of homicide and all policeman are evil and racist. If there are 20,000 crooked cops out there, 98% still don’t fall in that category yet the Democrats paint with a mighty broadbrush. The most powerful black woman in United States history was Condoleezza Rice. She was appointed and remained in her position under a Republican presidency. She was the first and only black female Secretary of State. Up until the Obama presidency, the most powerful black.male in US history was Colin Powell. Again, under a Republican president. The lowest unemployment in recorded American history for blacks was under a Republican president. I could keep going on however current statements almost daily by the media and democratic politicians is that Republicans are all racist. It seems funny that you say can’t link all yet everything the Democrats say in this day and age links every Republican. They just as well say, “you people”.

They were wrong because she is such a disaster that even the Democrats won’t back her up. If she is a president then she will almost certainly get the nomination in 2024. They might be dumb but they aren’t stupid. The only thing keeping Biden in power now is Kamala Harris.

So you are admitting, just like Hillary‘s nomination, that it was rigged?

He said “you don’t need”. He has not done anything yet but if you think it he won’t take every gun that he can get his hands on through legislation, you were either not telling the truth or you have your head in the sand. Here is a what if scenario. Let’s say something miraculous happens and they find out that by next week if they hurry, they can pass a law that makes all rifles and all 9mm handguns illegal to own, even if you own it today. You don’t think that law would be passed by the Democrats and they would all get together and say, this is not right because we believe in the Second Amendment? Right….. The goal is to seize all guns available just like just like what happened in Australia.

Let’s get real here, he was not merely ousted in an election. He was the subject of a recall so the liberal citizens of San Francisco how to start a petition and get the recall on the ballot. This guy was so bad that they did not want to wait until the next election cycle. This guy was in office for two years and only got to complete half of his term. I suspect that US congressman are probably lucky that they cannot be subject to recall elections. The tide is starting to turn early. Can the Democrats conjure up enough mass shootings, gasoline shortage to blame on somebody else, and try to get back in the game for this coming November? I think there is still time for them to wag the dog. I expect another virus to appear or some kind of military action to rally around the president or some more mass shootings or something to try to get emotions back in the game. It is obvious that performance and incompetence might be about to sink the Democrats for a long time but there is still time for them to find a solution.

The claimed party of inclusion needs to take a look in the mirror. This last presidential election saw the most diverse set of people ever run on the Democratic (or any) side. We had black female, openly gay male, Asian, openly of a different religion other than Christianity or Jewish and so on. The Democrats had literally almost any demographic to choose from and who do they come up with, an elderly white guy who’s almost 4 years older than Trump. For all the talk from the people that are liberal, not the politicians, showed that their actions don’t back up their rhetoric. They had a Samoan female Hindu who was a United States military member, a homosexual male who is the mayor of a major city, black female who was a federal prosecutor and a senator and on all down the line. Who did the rank and file Democrats choose…. the old white guy. Then they will lecture you about inclusion……

Here is yet another video that list some details about the shooting in Uvalde. It is a long podcast but the first part is devoted to the shooting. You have to get past his advertisement in preparatory talk and I think you can actually drag it to the 4 minute mark to start listening. It’s an editorial piece written by some Georgia law enforcement or something similar. He basically list a media claim and then debunks it with what they know or believe they know. The part about the shooting discussed in the editorial runs 7 minutes or to about the 11 minute mark so watch 4-11 minutes. I think it is about the 7 1/2 minute mark when the narrator talks about the stupidity of the commanding officers by making comments but they have no clue as to their accuracy. After the 11 minute mark he talks for another minute or two using a bit of profanity about the media will not retract what they have done even if proven (likely) that they were completely wrong.

Well then you haven’t been paying attention. Even the president the other day said that the 9 mm round blows lungs out of the body. HUH??? Then he said there is no reason to use them for self protection or hunting and all we should have is the .22. Has he done it yet? No because it’s against the constitution. He cannot make his own laws and they have to come from Congress. If you don’t think the president wants to take self-defense handguns, much less rifles, you have not been paying attention. That is but one small example of the rhetoric coming out from the left.

Sits off a few hundred meters away and sprays a packed football stadium….. Then drives away.

Correct…. but let’s not include evil companies like Exxon Mobile that enable drunk drivers.

They wouldn’t which is what is so disgusting. The news is using video mostly of two people (mother and funeral home employee) as their experts on tactics, capabilities, gear and ability. I guess next time CNN or Fox News reports on some US military action, they can consult a random high school freshman as their experts to see if the strategy is correct.

It was self-inflicted. It’s already being said but this is been a public relations disaster with police commanders giving opposite bits of information. Call me if they should know better. They’ve been on the job for years and they’ve all been to public relations schools. I’ve been to the schools. They tell you what you should say, when you should put the information out, confirm it, etc. Once you put out false information and retract it, you’ve now giving people the reason to believe that everything that follows is a cover-up.

Reading such nonsense still being put out, I think I might have found the answer and everybody knows it or has seen it previously. I just watched some alternate news site they put out of a video from yesterday it shows the same woman in the same video and is essentially making the claim that she was able to get past the dangerous situation where the office was able to. Utter garbage and an outright lie. Then the news that has been making the rounds, apparently one of the guys that made the original 911 calls from the funeral home, after he ducked rounds from an AR15, went inside to get his gun and came back out and could have stopped it at that point but the police would not let him. I guess this guy was going to get his 9 mm pistol and killed a guy in the street in a gun fight like the opening scene from Gunsmoke. What a true stupidity. And I don’t know if the stupidity comes more from the guy or the media it now has this expert claiming that it could have been injured at that point. Disregard the fact that the guy was already in the school by that time… Back to the reasoning. Like a lot of studies, they were not looking for answers or research. They came to a conclusion ahead of time, the police made huge mistakes. Then they sent out to find evidence to back up an opinion. I’ll look here’s an expert woman that drove for 40 minutes to get to the school and she knows more in the state and federal tactical teams. Here is a funeral home director who was denied stopping the incident before 19 children were killed. And the media runs with it….

I was reading another sports forum a couple of days ago. One of the former member chairborne experts posted a video of a fire fighter going through a steel door within about five seconds. it was a demonstration on how they attack fires. I watched it and just like the police officer breacher in the video said, it takes one guy to set the Halligan tool and another guy to use a hammer to drive the wedge into the extremely narrow door gap. you simply cannot do it with your hand. As the police officer said you might have to do this several times before you could actually make entry. They’re being video that he chairborne ranger expert show, the fire fighter was able to do it in about five seconds. Why so much faster??? The simulated deadbolt that they showed was a 1/4 inch piece of wood. Yep, A firefighter broke a 1/4”x2” board and the expert said that is proof that the steel reinforced door with a 2 inch deadbolt could’ve been entered in five seconds. You can’t make this stuff up. It is amazing how far someone will come up with some completely nonsensical excuse to criticize the officers.

Yes, they should consider all possibilities. I have practiced with my team on assaulting a bus if it was stationary sneaking up in a blind spot, hitting the master kill switch in the rear engine compartment (might be tougher with EV) and having swat officers run and brace themselves against the bus while other officers use them for a ladder and fire into the bus through the windows while another team assaults from the door. We have assaulted ships and docks from ground and water and so on. Assault from the top is extremely dangerous from a suspended ceiling with no support. You can’t go in a room or two away and creep up through an attic or crawl space. It would require climbing a ladder or several and rolling into a room blind with a guy with a high power rifle waiting. You could lose four officers almost immediately and never completely make entry. But I would guess that they looked at every option including sheet rock walls. It is much easier to discuss than it is to perform. All of those take specialized equipment. We don’t know what equipment they had, if any. As the video I posted said, it was a 40 minute or more gap where there were no shots fired. At that point it is no longer an active shooter because there is no longer any active shooting, no matter what the media says or the talking head commanders and speculators.