DK Firearms

Active Shooter at Robb Elementary in Uvalde

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • easy rider

    Summer Slacker
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2015
    31,489
    96
    Odessa, Tx
    Im not supportive of how police handled this situation at all, but the decision to prevent the funeral worker from going inside has nothing to do with whether this officer could have killed the shooter at this moment. By the time the funeral home worker was stopped, I believe the shooter was already inside, so he wouldn’t have shot him before getting inside.
    Don't know that either.
    Venture Surplus ad
     

    easy rider

    Summer Slacker
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2015
    31,489
    96
    Odessa, Tx
    So many experts on the shooting and none of us were there.
    So now it is all speculation and arm chair.
    I wish it had never happened so there would be no discussion.
    Well, when you have a situation that bolsters "common sense" gun control advocates into pushing new laws. Without the outrage of how a situation should have been handled. Should we just sit back and say nothing?
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    …But I know I've been shot at….
    I’ve been shot at (a lot), mortared, and rocketed and done a lot of shooting and bombing. Never once when engaging the enemy did we ever stop and think ‘what’s my backstop?’.

    Once a threat/target is identified and the decision to engage occurs, the thought process is ‘am I on target’? Yes = engage, no = can I get on target?

    If what is reported is true, and knowing the LEO had a long time to think about the response, then it’s well within reason to assume the LEO was not confident is his ability to employ a rifle.

    Nobody would have blinked an eye if he simply said “I never had a clear shot.”
     

    etmo

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 25, 2020
    1,220
    96
    Cedar Creek, Tx
    Even if he had taken a bad shot or several, wounding or killing a few students in the school, the outcome would have been better than what we got.

    Better for society in general, absolutely. But would you say better for the cop who has to live with the fact that he blew a little kid's brains all over the wall because he missed a moving target at XYZ yards? It's the cop, not society, that has to pull the trigger and bear the heat of the aftermath. These guys aren't robots; I think it's really tough to expect them to treat "10 kids saved and you only killed 3 kids" as a win just because the arithmetic is on society's side.


    A non-LEO citizen could have legally engaged the threat.

    Totally true, could have under the letter of the law. But if that non-LEO misses, and splatters the kid's brains all over the wall, do you think the jury is going to say, "Good try, better luck next time!" and let him walk? No way. Some Soros-backed ADA is going to try and score political points prosecuting this non-LEO citizen as a gun nut vigilante trigger-happy assassin, and sure as chit the whiny soccer moms and leftists on the jury will convict him and he gets to spend 10 years in jail with Bubba. He loses his job, his house, his future paying for lawyers and trials that take years.

    I think it's only that special type of person who could not live with themselves if they didn't take the shot that would ever take such a shot. I don't know what %age of the population they are, but I don't think such people are common.
     

    oldag

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 19, 2015
    17,425
    96
    Havok1 and oldag both make good points. Reasonable men may disagree and I acknowledge they may be right and I may be wrong.

    But I know I've been shot at and I've been kidnapped and at no time did I lack the presence of mind to make good decisions, taking into account the totality of circumstances. I expect at least as much from police officers. It's going to be hard to convince me that a policeman who sees an active shooter on a school campus and fails to shoot can possibly be doing the right thing.
    Some are judging while knowing very little of the situation.

    What if the scenario was:

    1. 150 yard shot
    2. Perp striding quickly
    3. Backstop is a window for a classroom.
    4. LEO probably assumes the entry door is locked so he will have a better shot soon
    Do you take the shot?
     

    oldag

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 19, 2015
    17,425
    96
    I’ve been shot at (a lot), mortared, and rocketed and done a lot of shooting and bombing. Never once when engaging the enemy did we ever stop and think ‘what’s my backstop?’.

    Once a threat/target is identified and the decision to engage occurs, the thought process is ‘am I on target’? Yes = engage, no = can I get on target?

    If what is reported is true, and knowing the LEO had a long time to think about the response, then it’s well within reason to assume the LEO was not confident is his ability to employ a rifle.

    Nobody would have blinked an eye if he simply said “I never had a clear shot.”
    A tad different being a war zone and being at a school.
     

    Havok1

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 10, 2021
    1,774
    96
    US
    I’ve been shot at (a lot), mortared, and rocketed and done a lot of shooting and bombing. Never once when engaging the enemy did we ever stop and think ‘what’s my backstop?’.

    Once a threat/target is identified and the decision to engage occurs, the thought process is ‘am I on target’? Yes = engage, no = can I get on target?

    If what is reported is true, and knowing the LEO had a long time to think about the response, then it’s well within reason to assume the LEO was not confident is his ability to employ a rifle.

    Nobody would have blinked an eye if he simply said “I never had a clear shot.”
    The only people talking about a “backstop” are the people in this thread. Neither the NYT article or any other article I’ve read have said the shooter was between the kids and the police. We have no idea if the kids were between the police officer and shooter yet everyone can say for certain that they could have taken the shot without knowing this.

    Also still waiting to know how fast that target is moving during the qual shoot you mentioned earlier.

    And yeah, in war nobody cares about a “backstop” but these aren’t kids in fallujah. They are kids that live in the same town as the officer.
     

    benenglish

    Just Another Boomer
    Staff member
    Lifetime Member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    23,932
    96
    Spring
    But would you say better for the cop who has to live with the fact that he blew a little kid's brains all over the wall because he missed a moving target at XYZ yards?
    Valid point. No matter how he handled it, he was doomed by circumstance to forever deal with detractors and guilt. That guy is going to go through Hell no matter what. My heart goes out to him. Even if I think he screwed up, I still feel for him.
     

    jrbfishn

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 9, 2013
    28,315
    96
    south of killeen
    Havok1 and oldag both make good points. Reasonable men may disagree and I acknowledge they may be right and I may be wrong.

    But I know I've been shot at and I've been kidnapped and at no time did I lack the presence of mind to make good decisions, taking into account the totality of circumstances. I expect at least as much from police officers. It's going to be hard to convince me that a policeman who sees an active shooter on a school campus and fails to shoot can possibly be doing the right thing.
    I have read past here, and still have to agree with Ben.
    Risk vs reward.
    The cop, for whatever reason, decided the risk of missing the shooter was greater than the reward of taking him out. And in return, cost the lives of a lot more innocents.
    Because he was scared to take a chance, the cop gets to live with the fact that he had the opportunity to eliminate the threat and failed to do so and allowed many others to die.


    Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
     

    easy rider

    Summer Slacker
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2015
    31,489
    96
    Odessa, Tx
    It's no wonder so many are against teachers being armed. If you get it in your mind that every shot taken in defense of yourself and others could end with a child accidentally shot, I guess we should just give up and let the killer have his way. When all the children are dead from the shooter, at least you can go in with a clearer conscience.
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    … But if that non-LEO misses,..
    Qualified immunity, so no trial. Nobody wants collateral damage, much less to kill a kid, which is why the pros work hard enough with their tools to keep that from happening as much as possible.

    But the risk you should be assessing isn’t “what’s my backstop?” The risk you should be assessing is “what happens if I don’t stop the threat?” You have one job to do in an active shooter scenario: neutralize the threat.

    So yes, I’m going way back to what I’ve said plenty of times here, which is that whatever tactical expertise you think the average cop, much less an underfunded, small town, small school district cop has, you’ve already given them too much credit.
     
    Top Bottom