Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Resource Officer Resigns, Stayed Outside and Did Not Engage Shooter

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Resource Officer Resigns, Stayed Outside and Did Not Engage Shooter

Sheriff Scott Israel said Deputy Scot Peterson should have “went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-florida-shooting-sro-20180222-story.html

The Florida school shooting story gets worse.

According to the Sun Sentinel, Deputy Scot Peterson resigned Thursday.

After video surfaced, corroborating witness reports confirming the absence of Peterson’s involvement an investigation was initiated Wednesday and Peterson was suspended without pay.

From the Sun Sentinel:

The police officer assigned to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School resigned Thursday, under investigation for failing to enter the building as a gunman opened fire and killed 17 people.

Sheriff Scott Israel said Deputy Scot Peterson should have “went in. Addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

Peterson, 54, came under scrutiny after 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz entered the school with an AR-15 rifle and killed 14 students and three educators on Valentine’s Day.

Peterson has been a school resource officer at Stoneman Douglas since 2009. He began working for the sheriff’s office in 1985. His annual salary in 2016 was $75,673.72, according to sheriff’s office records.

The Sheriff’s Office released documents Thursday showing that Peterson was put under an internal investigation the day before. Israel said that Peterson was suspended without pay.

The agency also announced that it was placing two officers on a restricted assignment while a separate internal investigation took place.

Sheriff Scott Israel was a might bit defensive during CNN’s open forum last night. I think we now know why.

At every step of the way, law enforcement dropped the ball. The FBI, police department, school officials — everyone was aware this particular individual was on the fast track to massive mayhem. No one intervened. No one investigated. No one shot back.

And now we find out that the officer working for the sheriff’s office stayed outside, refusing to step up to the call of duty and take Cruz out. I’m sympathetic to the pressures of active shooter situations, but Peterson had one job — to protect students from exactly this type of situation or at the very minimum, do everything in his power to mitigate the damage.

We don’t need more gun laws. We need law enforcement and administrators to do what we pay them to do.

Updates:

Since we published this post, more information has become available, none of it good.

According to the Miami Herald, the sheriff’s office received a tip in November that Cruz could be a school shooter, a tip that was unfortunately ignored:

In November, a tipster called BSO to say Cruz “could be a school shooter in the making” but deputies did not write up a report on that warning. It came just weeks after a relative called urging BSO to seize his weapons. Two years ago, according to a newly released timeline of interactions with Cruz’s family, a deputy investigated a report that Cruz “planned to shoot up the school” — intelligence that was forwarded to the school’s resource officer, with no apparent result.

The FBI received a similar tip in January and also failed to follow up.

The full timeline of fail as published in the Miami Herald:

▪ Feb. 5, 2016: A Broward Sheriff’s Office deputy is told by an anonymous caller that Nikolas Cruz, then 17, had threatened on Instagram to shoot up his school and posted a photo of himself with guns. The information is forwarded to BSO Deputy Scot Peterson, a school resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

▪ Sept. 23, 2016: A “peer counselor” reports to Peterson that Cruz had possibly ingested gasoline in a suicide attempt, was cutting himself and wanted to buy a gun. A mental health counselor advises against involuntarily committing Cruz. The high school says it will conduct a threat assessment.

▪ Sept. 28, 2016: An investigator for the Florida Department of Children and Families rules Cruz is stable, despite “fresh cuts” on his arms. His mother, Lynda Cruz, says in the past he wrote a racial slur against African Americans on his book bag and had recently talked of buying firearms.

▪ Sept. 24, 2017: A YouTube user named “nikolas cruz” posts a comment stating he wants to become a “professional school shooter.” The comment is reported to the FBI in Mississippi, which fails to make the connection to Cruz in South Florida.

▪ Nov. 1, 2017: Katherine Blaine, Lynda Cruz’s cousin, calls BSO to report that Nikolas Cruz had weapons and asks that police recover them. A “close family friend” agrees to take the firearms, according to BSO.

▪ Nov. 29, 2017: The Palm Beach County family that took in Cruz after the death of his mother calls the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office to report a fight between him and their son, 22. A member of the family says that Cruz had threatened to “get his gun and come back” and that he has “put the gun to others’ heads in the past.” The family does not want him arrested once he calms down.

▪ Nov. 30, 2017: A caller from Massachusetts calls BSO to report that Cruz is collecting guns and knives and could be a “school shooter in the making.” A BSO deputy advises the caller to contact the Palm Beach sheriff.

▪ Jan. 5, 2018: A caller to the FBI’s tip line reports that Cruz has “a desire to kill people” and could potentially conduct a school shooting. The information is never passed on to the FBI’s office in Miami.

▪ Feb. 14, 2018: Nikolas Cruz attacks Stoneman Douglas High. Peterson, the school’s resource officer, draws his gun outside the building where Cruz is shooting students and staff. He does not enter.

Scot Peterson, (now) retired campus officer

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

This is just one person that didn’t do his job.
The FBI also received reports and did nothing. Nobody has been fired or disciplined.
The school board also failed to do their part and nobody has been punished.

It’s so easy to go blame the gun.

    MarkS in reply to Exiliado. | February 22, 2018 at 8:22 pm

    I’m of the opinion that they didn’t “fail” to do their job, they each made a conscious decision not to do their jobs

    nobody has been punished
    ————————
    I’d guess no one ever will. The sheriff is a big liberal from little I read about him. Long on assigning blame rare to actually accept it or do anything about it.
    You or I would be prosecuted or ostracized one way or another, liberals never face consequences as long as they mouth the right “feelz”.

This guy will likely land a job in Jeff Session’s office, heading his klinton/obama corruption and treason squad.

He’s perfect for it.

4th armored div | February 22, 2018 at 7:28 pm

this cop needs to be charged as accessory after the fact.
a coward should never be a cop or soldier in a job that is voluntary NOT mandatory/draftee – this guy wither froze or thought this job an easy gig.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to 4th armored div. | February 22, 2018 at 10:27 pm

    Wanna bet what political party he’s registered with?

    I’ll give you one guess!

    SNARK!

      So I guess it won’t be good enough to put a sign in front of school stating that there are armed guards. It will have to read “School is protected by armed Republican guards with the courage of Donald J. Trump”.

      Guess whether Trump mentioned school shootings during his State of the Union Address. Guess whether he put any money in his budget for ‘hardening schools’. Guess if Trump had any plan or had given any thought to school shootings before 2/14/18.

      You get one guess per question.

      /stop smirking

    Brave Sir Deputy Ran Away
    (No!)
    Bravely Ran Away, Away,
    (I Didn’t!)
    When Danger reared its Ugly Head,
    He Bravely Turned his Tail and Fled
    Yes Brave Sir Deputy turned about,
    and gallantly he chickened out
    Swiftly taking to his feet,
    he beat a very Brave retreat,
    Bravest of the Brave, Sir Deputy!!!

And the acting deputy director of the FBI just had a press conference where he said his primary purpose was to make sure people didn’t lose confidence in the FBI.

The police have no duty to protect you or your children. They never have.

Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)

    alaskabob in reply to ish. | February 22, 2018 at 7:47 pm

    Which will be the defense for the sheriff. A wake up call to the public that they do not have to go in… and left the defense to the disarmed in the building to do the JOB of the deputy. Some “medals of honor” given cops are for mistakenly saving private citizens when they thought it was their fellow peace officers.

    Armed take over of the city council chambers in Riverside, Ca…. police on the floor immediately intervened… against police policy and saved lives.

    Geologist in reply to ish. | February 22, 2018 at 7:51 pm

    Ish, this means that the parents have no valid cause of action against the police department. It does not mean that the Department cannot punish/discipline/suspend the school cop for his dereliction of duty.

      Enlighten me. How can he be disciplined for not doing his job, but can’t be sued for his negligence?

        alaskabob in reply to MarkS. | February 22, 2018 at 8:43 pm

        Wait until it dawns… if that will be permitted to get out… that police have no legal duty to intervene. I am tired of this knee-jerk pitch fork and torches onslaught by the Left, CNN et al… now they will rewrite the script that since police can’t/won’t save us disarming will.

        That’s a great question.

        The answer seems to be that unless the police assume a specific duty to protect a specific person in a specific situation (engaging in a rescue, or taking someone into custody), there’s no liability. The guy at the school was no different than a police patrol car in the neighborhood driving off upon hearing gunshots in the area.

        Had this guy engaged in a rescue attempt, then ran away, he’d be liable. But at least he’d have tried. Now, he escapes liability, but is branded forever as an incredible coward.

        (Btw, if the guy worked for a private security company under contract, there could have been a negligence case against the guy and his employer.)

        regulus arcturus in reply to MarkS. | February 22, 2018 at 9:59 pm

        I’m 100% certain an enterprising lawyer (or 10) will go after FBI, the school district and sheriff, and probably others.

        There’s no defense for this gross negligence resulting in death.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to ish. | February 22, 2018 at 7:58 pm

    Which is why it makes more sense to arm the people who care for the kids everyday.

    Yes. But could be ‘no.’

    There is the ‘duty to rescue,’ and once police get involved in a rescue (same for anyone, really), they have a duty to act reasonable in executing the rescue.

    Then there is the “special relationship” doctrine:

    “In Williams, Chief Justice Bird cited three factors as evidencing a relationship of dependence:
    (1) the plaintiff was physically unable to investigate the accident on her own; (2) the officers
    had “assumed the responsiblity of investigating the accident”; and (3) it was reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff would rely on the officers’ expertise, and that others would also expect the officers to perform investigative tasks. 34 Cal. 3d at 33, 664 P.2d at 146-47, 192 Cal. Rptr. at 242-43 (Bird, C.J., dissenting)

    Law Enforcement Liability and the Special Relationship Doctrine:
    https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=38303

    There’s also Castle Rock v. Gonzales:
    (Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone:)
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZS.html
    Good reading:

    CA law review: Police Officers’ Duty to Rescue or Aid: Are They
    Only Good Samaritans:
    https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2094&context=californialawreview

    BOTTOM LINE: PROTECT YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT, BECAUSE YOU’RE ON YOUR OWN!

    TX-rifraph in reply to ish. | February 22, 2018 at 8:56 pm

    Perhaps he had no legal duty to do so but he did have a moral duty. As a former city cop, I cannot comprehend his cowardly behavior. All of the cops I worked with long ago would have engaged this shooter regardless of personal risks. The kids would be priority #1. This guy makes me sick.

      gospace in reply to TX-rifraph. | February 22, 2018 at 9:39 pm

      Just a reminder. Ever since I can remember, liberal philosophy has been that we all, as individuals, have no moral duty to do anything. Except support the state, which will then take care of us, except when it doesn’t.

      amatuerwrangler in reply to TX-rifraph. | February 22, 2018 at 10:45 pm

      Same here, TX. I was a city cop too, way back when, and the guys (and gals) I worked with could not have been kept out of that building…. This guy is a disgrace and will be an example used by every cop hater on every blog comment thread forever.

    Mac45 in reply to ish. | February 22, 2018 at 9:14 pm

    Warren likely would not apply, here.

    In this case, the Deputy was aware that a crime was taking place, as he had both been notified of it and could hear it occurring and took no action to stop a criminal act, which resulted in the deaths of 17 people. Also, it is very likely that there is an SOP that directs a deputy to enter the building, attempt to locate the shooter and engage him. This has been the case in most departments since right after Columbine.

    There is a good case against the deputy for lack of performance. Criminal charges are going to be much harder to prove. The Sheriff should attempt to have the deputy, who is eligible for retire, stripped of his pension from the state.

      justaguy in reply to Mac45. | February 23, 2018 at 12:15 am

      Everyone emotionally agrees that the 54 year old should have entered the building. The question for the police department is what does the SOP actually say about active shooter procedures when you are outside of the building? Is back-up necessary? Police teams uses several people when they enter to clear a building. Do the SOPs say enter the building alone or with a partner/team?

      Again, many of us would have entered the building alone– possibly against SOP/protocol alone to save lives. But maybe he gets to retire instead of facing punishment because it might be hard to administratively punish him if the SOPs weren’t clear.

        Mac45 in reply to justaguy. | February 23, 2018 at 1:03 am

        When I was o the jobn, the SOP was that, if you heard gunfire, you advised your location, the suspected location of the shooter [if it was possible to determine] and then you entered, without waiting for backup. The theory was that a significant number of lives could be lost if the responders hesitated before entry. Responders, following Columbine, were expendable. Not what the line troops want to hear. But, we knew the job was dangerous when we took it. If back-up was arriving on scene, the first responder might wait until they had deployed from their vehicles. But, we are talking only a minute or two at most.

        Anonamom in reply to justaguy. | February 23, 2018 at 9:45 am

        This may not be popular, but you are correct that the deputy may be able to hide behind policy. MANY agencies’ policies do, in fact, mandate that a single officer wait, gather information, and delay action until backup arrives. The policies are frequently written from the perspective of trying to minimize the liability of the police entity, not necessarily to do the right thing. And that’s another unpopular fact: The law is pretty clear that there is virtually no legally-enforceable compunction for law enforcement to act. There are, however, reams of cases on how and when officers can sue their employers (ultimately, us.)

        Please note: I am not saying that I agree with this. In fact, I am a vigorous dissenter. But, honestly, I’m in the minority. Personally, I am more a fan of the unwritten policy at the agency from which my husband retired: One riot, one deputy.

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Anonamom. | February 23, 2018 at 12:34 pm

          Sadly some departments policies these days say that patrol officers are to “Observe” and (I can’t remember how it was worded) basically cordon off the scene, then wait for a full tactical team.

          The truly sad part is that if someone with a CCW had been close enough to respond they still couldn’t have because doing so means they would be arrested and charged with a felony regardless of the outcome.

    Immolate in reply to ish. | February 23, 2018 at 11:58 am

    If they don’t want to be former police, they most certain do have such a duty. Case in point: Scot Peterson.

You hope LEOs will have the stones to do what is necessary in a clinch, but the human element and centuries of combat say that can and will go wrong.

Him and God will have many discussions about this.

He’s one of many who failed these kids.

“The police officer assigned to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School resigned Thursday, under investigation for failing to enter the building as a gunman opened fire and killed 17 people.”

And the really good news. He has IMMUNITY from lawsuit.

And the response from the left, “We need more government, not less.” “We need to take away all guns from the law-abiding.”

    4fun in reply to pfg. | February 22, 2018 at 8:44 pm

    And the response from the left, “We need more government, not less.” “We need to take away all guns from the law-abiding.”
    ————————
    Don’t remember where I read it but one wag asked a liberal “If Donald Trump is Hitler, are you sure you want to be disarmed?”

    If you listen to the left, you are committing suicide.

Well, so much for guards.

We need law enforcement and administrators to do what we pay them to do.

Well, until these paragons arrive, we’ll need something else. Like maybe the Second Amendment. We already have that; no need for more government solutions which will fail.

Regardless of the court decision, tell me then what is their purpose? To “earn” huge pension and disability benefits? To eat free donuts? To sit around in parked cop cars sleeping? Looking forward to your response –although you never will. Jerk

If I was one of those teachers I’ve heard screeching about how they don’t want to have to carry guns… well, I guess I’d be re-thinking that position right about now.

I mean, if you’ve got police on the premises and they can’t protect you, what are your other options?

There is exactly one person responsible for your safety…some may come to help, but only one who is responsible for your safety…

Please God give me the strength if called…

John 15:13

We must not allow the Left to control the narrative here. We are already hearing argument of “see? Good guy with a gun, and it did no good” as ways to diss reasonable and sensible civilian concealed carry rules.

In fact, this is yet another government failure! Not a good guy with a gun, but a nothing with a badge. More government incompetence.

We should redouble our efforts for national carry laws.

    MarkS in reply to unommin. | February 22, 2018 at 8:28 pm

    Agreed, this was not a Good Guy!

    Another Ed in reply to unommin. | February 23, 2018 at 2:02 am

    Ah, but there is national right to carry law. This is it:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” -Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

    http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/huldah/170710

    Unfortunately, we have let some people tell us that the Second Amendment means something other than exactly what it states, and have allowed government – Federal, state and local, to infringe it. It would appear the free State is not secured.

    So, people, what are you going to do about that?

At this point, I don’t believe anything Sheriff Israel has to say without proof. Maybe the Deputy was a coward and his failure to act added to the death total, and maybe Israel is deflecting blame onto a man who actually had no opportunity to act.

Show us the video.

I’m wondering if the school resource officer was operating under the old doctrine of “stay outside and wait for SWAT”. Since he’s being allowed to resign, instead of being fired, he’ll still qualify for his pension. Two other deputies are under investigation as well. It certainly sounds like there was no active shooter plan put in place if his deputies didn’t know what to do. Poor training and poor leadership on the part of Sheriff Scott Israel.

    Probably the same for most sheriff’s departments in the US.

    If they trained for an active shooter and put in place the means to stop it, they’d be criticized by the left and the idiots teaching at these schools. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

    Liberalism kills. It created the likes of Nikolas Cruz, but only a gun stopped Cruz and took him prisoner.

    Mac45 in reply to Sanddog. | February 22, 2018 at 9:24 pm

    There used to be a enter and engage SOP for an active shooter, especially in a school, at the Broward Sheriff’s Office. It has been that way in most large departments since right after Columbine. In Florida, a person’s pension rights can be revoke if he is convicted or terminated for certain offenses prior to retirement. In this case, the Sheriff does not have to accept the deputy’s resignation and can terminate him, as it takes a certain amount of time to official resign. The Sheriff could file a complaint against the deputy with the Department of Ethics which could vote to strip the deputy of his pension.

The worst thing is that this coward will have a fat pension for the rest of his useless life.

    5 4 fighting in reply to Tolstoy. | February 23, 2018 at 8:18 am

    It’s difficult to wrap my brain around the cowardliness of this sheriff deputy and how he stood there and listened to the shooting and did nothing. He’ll get his pension but he’ll have to live with his decision for the rest of his miserable life. Or perhaps not and do the right thing.

    Immolate in reply to Tolstoy. | February 23, 2018 at 12:05 pm

    Don’t bet on it.

What a sickening story. How could an armed law enforcement officer stand outside for FOUR minutes hearing the shots ringing out inside? As TX-rifraph said, above, it’s hard to understand how the guard could fail to do something with people being murdered.

I wonder if this guy was ever on the street at all? Maybe he was a long-time deputy at the BCJ and got the gig at the school so he could get to 30+ on easy street? No self-respecting street cop would’ve done that.

As I have stated before, I was a LEO for over 30 years. As such I often try to explain why LE may not do things thw way that those outside the profession expect. I’ll comment on this.

If this report is accurate, and there is no evidence that it is not, then the actions of this deputy are morally criminal, if not legally criminal. Since Columbine, 1999, virtually every LEA in this country mandates its officers to enter, locate and engage in an active shooter situation. To refuse to follow that SOP is an offense. It is also, probably, the offense of cowardice and nonfeasance, if not misfeasance, as entry is a required action.

In this case, the Sheriff is under no obligation to accept the depuy’s resignation, as he is the subject of an active investigation, one which could possibly result in criminal charges. As such, the deputy is not eligible for retirement, while the investigation is ongoing. If he is found to have committed the violations, his pension can be revoked, especially if criminal charges are filed. And, all of this should be done.

I can find no excuse for this man’s actions. There is, seemingly, no defense for them. It is bad enough that the school had insufficient security resources to stop this shooter. It is bad enough that the FBI did not follow its own procedures with regard to notification of its local offices and local authorities. To have an armed deputy sheriff refuse to go into harm’s way to discharge his duty to protect society, is sickening. I am incapable of expressing my overwhelming contempt for this man. At the very least, his pension should be revoked. And, incarceration is a very good option.

    thetaqjr in reply to Mac45. | February 22, 2018 at 11:58 pm

    How does one go about firing the cowards in LE? Certainly, SP is not the only Lord Jim charged with protecting innocents.

    How do the superiors identify these Jims? Remember, LEOs do not even hold jobs that are the most dangerous. LE jobs are not even in the top ten of most lethal jobs. Most LEOs never have their courage tested.

    Was yours ever tested? Has your Jim been tested? Most men’s physical courage has not been tested. Mine has not been. I talk a good game, but down deep, outside the crucible, I wonder about myself. Some folks will inevitably arrive late, some not at all. If that deep distress were not part of the nature of men, this discussion would have no meaning.

      It depends upon the man and the situation. It is always based upon how the man reacts to hazardous situations. Sometimes it is possible to tell that a man is not temperamentally suited to the job, before he refuses to perform in a critical situation. In these cases, the man is usually eased out of the profession. Other times it can not be seen until a failure occurs in a critical situation.

      Personally, i had been tested before I ever got into LE. Times were different and there was a war on. Many LEOs, of my generation, entered that profession after serving time in the military. And, the times were more demanding of a man meeting the standards expected of a man. I was tested several times during my career.

      In the Parkland shooting, we saw untried young people perform outstanding acts of heroism. We saw many students and teachers perform well, even though they were probably terrified. Then we have Deputy Peterson. A shocking contrast in courage.

      People have a tendency to want to get mad. To be outraged. This may make one feel good. But, it doesn’t feed the bulldog. In this case, there were several mistakes made. The school was not secure. A single armed officer does not lend much, if any, security to a campus of that size. The FBI did not follow its own procedures for responding to tips on suspicious persons. The Sheriff’s Office may, or may not, have failed to act in the past, where Cruz was concerned. And, finally, we have Deputy Peterson, who failed in his duty to society in general, and the people at the school, in particular.

      People have short memories. They are aware of the failure of Deputy Peterson. However, they forget the number of LEOs who die enforcing the law and protecting society. 14 LEOs have died, due to gunfire, so far in 2018. 52 homicide related deaths occurred in 2017. There were 133 total job related deaths of LEOs that same year. This does not include those injured and crippled by job related injury.

        Immolate in reply to Mac45. | February 23, 2018 at 12:18 pm

        My best friend of 35 years who is an active duty officer in Florida related a story to me this week. He was responding to a call of a man with a rifle and another man in a house that was part of an abandoned neighborhood, along with one junior young officer who has a new baby and one part-time officer who is also a firefighter. There was a county cop on site with a K9. The county cop refused to use his dog to enter the home in question because “he liked his dog.” My friend, unwilling to put his junior partners in danger, entered the home, where it turned out nobody was currently present.

        I have advise to men out there in the world. Get right with God. Pray for salvation and know that you have a place in heaven so that, when things go south, you have the fortitude and personal courage to hold your own life in no esteem and to behave like a man. Hold Philippians 1:21 in your heart as your eternal motto, as every man should.

        Peterson is a man with no chest. The world has no use for such persons.

regulus arcturus | February 22, 2018 at 10:01 pm

A major contributing factor to this tragedy was the policies of liberal Broward County and this liberal school district.

Critical reading –

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/22/broward-coward-armed-county-sheriff-cowered-outside-building-refused-to-confront-parkland-school-shooter/#more-146160

Sheesh! What next? Will we find out that the shooter had a police escort for his Uber ride to the school?

This is horrific. “In November, a tipster called BSO to say Cruz ‘could be a school shooter in the making’ but deputies did not write up a report on that warning. It came just weeks after a relative called urging BSO to seize his weapons.”

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/966853645441667072

Is Jake Tapper starting to wake up, or just feeling guilty about the part he played in that farce of a “town hall”?

PROTECTING HIM LIKE HE DIDN’T PROTECT THE KIDS: Armed police are guarding the home of the deputy who resigned over his lack of action in the Parkland school shooting.
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/289449/

And this:

“The sheriff’s deputy who did “nothing” while Nikolas Cruz killed seventeen people also refused to share information on Cruz with state social services during a 2016 investigation into his home life. https://t.co/cvAXqtH3yA?amp=1

https://mobile.twitter.com/scottbix/status/966832499568586752

    “The sheriff … refused to share information on Cruz with state social services during a 2016 investigation ..”

    “refused” wow. Quasimodo is thinking, “At least I’m not that guy”.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to elle. | February 23, 2018 at 12:50 pm

      Wait…what? Florida must have very different and much more lenient mandatory reporting laws than my state.

      If I refused to share information during an investigation I would be charged with interfering in the investigation and absolutely would lose my Nurses Licenses. Then if it turned out I was no reporting abuse or neglect I would be charged with Felony Child Endangerment.

      Just to clarify I have no problems with the laws here, it just amazes me that they could be more lenient than that.

On that day, where were the heroes among the students, the students themselves, those ones so vocal now about having been abandoned by the Constitution and adult caretakers? Where were those mature, brave junior and senior athletes, the hes and the shes, who could have completely overwhelmed that 130#, cat-eyed dwarf? Where were their senses of self-defense and self-sacrifice?

    They were busy freaking out, like most kids their age would.

    And like most kids their age, they have no business trying to govern anybody, let alone the rest of us.

      That is a question that I haven’t seen answered yet. The left has paraded around these kids as victims.

      My question is, were they really? I mean sure all the kids in that school were scared and traumatized, but “victims”? Just because you were in the building and heard the gunshots is not the same as those that actually came under fire.

      I looked up some of the kids that were in the “townhall” the other night, strangely enough I can’t find any real information as to what they were doing. My guess is that most of them were never actually in danger or if they were in danger were hiding behind the kids that were being proactive or were in parts of the school that never faced any real danger. Especially those worst two disrespectful entitled snotty little putz’s.

He was observing the Twilight Amendment that recognizes abortion rites as an unalienable right of the People and Posterity to be processed under a layer of privacy (behind the wall, inside the chamber).

    n.n in reply to n.n. | February 23, 2018 at 1:32 am

    re: abortion rites, People, Posterity

    Or perhaps just an exclusive rite held by women, psychopaths, and conventional criminals.

Weird wrinkle. In my timeline, the police officer didnt resign, he ate his revolver.

“In older more civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have they would throw themselves on their swords” – Serenity

Scott Peterson appears to be the kind of officer Broward County want to have protecting them. When seconds count the police will be there in minutes and if they get their sooner they might not act.

Bucky Barkingham | February 23, 2018 at 8:01 am

We are told by our moral and political betters that we don’t need guns because the police will protect us. Here is a great example of how well that works.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Bucky Barkingham. | February 23, 2018 at 1:01 pm

    Yea well these are also the same group of people who tell us only police should have guns and then turn around and accuse the police of being bigoted murders who should be disarmed.

It’s even worse:

(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.

https://wsvn.com/news/local/report-coral-springs-police-upset-at-some-broward-deputies-for-not-entering-school/

Just a reminder that the worst school massacre in american history was done with dynamite, by a disgruntled employee.

There are a number of alternatives to guns. Pressure cookers, automobiles.

It seems to me that not reporting crimes in order to increase grant money is fraud. That used to be a crime. has anyone accused the school system and the sheriff’s office of fraud? If not, why not?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend