ARJ Defense ad

"It is sickening" to call the Boward Deputy a Coward

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!
  • diesel1959

    por vida
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 7, 2013
    3,837
    96
    Houston & BFE
    [QUOTE="GeorgeandSugar, post: 1694657, member: 33397"]If there is tactical gear to include an automatic weapon is this policy across the US with police and sheriff departments? I wonder if Petersen had any pre-positioned gear he could have accessed? He was outside at the time. Why was he outside or was he inside and then exited to take up a position outside until backup arrived?

    Lots of unanswered questions.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Broward County S.O. has some Deputies that are rifle-qualified, but certainly not all of them on patrol It seemed like Deputy Peterson was NOT rifle-qualified and did not have one in his vehicle. As far as "tactical gear", he had a pistol, at least two extra mags, body armor, handcuffs, a taser and/or a baton of some sort. Maybe even some OC. But what's most important--he had tactical training and thirty-year's worth of experience in the job. He wasn't an armed security guard. He was a licensed, certified peace officer and a Deputy Sheriff.

    He has more tactical training and experience than the perpetrator had years on this Earth. He had a duty to act and let me explain very clearly why. First off, it could be said that even in the pre-Columbine-era, an officer would have a duty to act; however, the truth is that the standard procedure before Columbine was for the first officer(s) on scene at a situation like the Parkland School would be to surround and hold the perimeter as best they can until heavier backup--such as SWAT--could get on the scene. That was pretty standard at that time. HOWEVER, post-Columbine, it became apparent that it was completely inappropriate for officers to allow an active shooter to have his way without any impediments or resistance being offered. Keep in mind that there's a HUGE difference between an "active shooter" and a "barricaded subject/hostage-taker". In the latter, it's still pretty much accepted practice to surround and wait for more resources (SWAT, snipers, hostage negotiator, etc.) to arrive. However, in the former, there is shooting and/or killing underway, you have an "active shooter" and the new training to all officers calls for the first officer(s) on scene to do the best they can to form a hasty team with what they have on hand, and make immediate entry to STOP THE KILLING. That's the key right there. That goes for even if the perpetrator is armed with a long-gun and the officers only have pistols. They key is to stop the killing. It may not have been possible for Peterson to have saved all seventeen lives or even many of them; however, if by making entry, locating the shooter, approaching tactically, and placing well-aimed fired in his direction, he may have been able to save some of those precious, innocent lives. The idea is to give the shooter something more to think about or focus on than just his fatal fantasy and evil plan. Asking Peterson to have made entry--even alone--was not a suicide/Kamikaze-mission. He was armed & trained and was the MOST CAPABLE person on-scene and those folks were counting upon him to live up to his oath. He did not do so and it is more than appropriate to call him a coward.
    Gun Zone Deals
     

    F350-6

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 25, 2009
    4,237
    96
    You don't need a badge or ribbon to prove what you an do. You need the correct mental mindset, practice, and the inner belief that action is the right thing to do when the time comes.

    If your primary goal is self preservation, then the reaction will be different than if your primary goal is accomplishing the mission or protecting others.

    And even with all the training, and even previous gunfighting experience, it doesn't tell you how you will act in a one on one situation until the time comes.

    Yes I've been shot at before. But whatever the excuse, it doesn't change the fact that some failed to do their job. I have witnessed a less than honorable discharge for the same reason.
     

    avvidclif

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 30, 2017
    5,794
    96
    Van Zandt County
    You don't need a badge or ribbon to prove what you an do. You need the correct mental mindset, practice, and the inner belief that action is the right thing to do when the time comes.

    If your primary goal is self preservation, then the reaction will be different than if your primary goal is accomplishing the mission or protecting others.

    And even with all the training, and even previous gunfighting experience, it doesn't tell you how you will act in a one on one situation until the time comes.

    Yes I've been shot at before. But whatever the excuse, it doesn't change the fact that some failed to do their job. I have witnessed a less than honorable discharge for the same reason.

    Well said. My primary point is we have people on here saying what they would do when all they know is what they THINK they would do. None of them did their job in my opinion. But that's kinda like AHoles, everyone has one. I started out, unlike some, withholding judgement until more facts (training primarily)were know. With more info I feel like they screwed the pooch.

    I know for a fact that when I turned in my paperwork to retire I told my sergeant that I was not going out on the street again, period. I would be a hazard to myself and the other officers I worked with because I would be overly cautious. Until the day I turned in the papers I wasn't worried and was fine. With the end in sight my perspective changed literally overnite. They understood and gave me BS chores around the station to do for 2 weeks. Call it what you want.
     

    diesel1959

    por vida
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 7, 2013
    3,837
    96
    Houston & BFE
    Why would an officer with 30 years experience not be rifle trained?
    Many departments don't have a patrol rifle program. The departments that do can often limit the ability to supervisors (yeah, that's actual truth right there). Other departments that have a patrol rifle program will not permit an officer to carry a rifle unless and until they go through an appropriate course of instruction--often at the officer's own cost--and then, even after that course, the officer must qualify with the department with that firearm. Frequently the times/places to qualify are not at the same time as normal handgun qualification and/or at inconvenient times. And then, they also often require the officer to provide their own rifle (from among an "approved" list). And then there are departments that have a patrol rifle program will issue the qualified officer a rifle that is not at all to the officer's liking and the officer declines the "opportunity". Whatever you might think about this, the fact is that MANY departments throw up MANY hurdles for officers to jump before they will be permitted (pronounced "trusted") to have a patrol rifle available to them while on patrol.

    There have been MANY large city police departments that have absolutely refused to allow patrol officers to have access to long guns other than a shotgun. The trend is to allow more long guns to be available; however, old "habits" die hard--unfortunately.
     

    GeorgeandSugar

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 30, 2017
    270
    46
    Como
    Many departments don't have a patrol rifle program. The departments that do can often limit the ability to supervisors (yeah, that's actual truth right there). Other departments that have a patrol rifle program will not permit an officer to carry a rifle unless and until they go through an appropriate course of instruction--often at the officer's own cost--and then, even after that course, the officer must qualify with the department with that firearm. Frequently the times/places to qualify are not at the same time as normal handgun qualification and/or at inconvenient times. And then, they also often require the officer to provide their own rifle (from among an "approved" list). And then there are departments that have a patrol rifle program will issue the qualified officer a rifle that is not at all to the officer's liking and the officer declines the "opportunity". Whatever you might think about this, the fact is that MANY departments throw up MANY hurdles for officers to jump before they will be permitted (pronounced "trusted") to have a patrol rifle available to them while on patrol.

    There have been MANY large city police departments that have absolutely refused to allow patrol officers to have access to long guns other than a shotgun. The trend is to allow more long guns to be available; however, old "habits" die hard--unfortunately.

    Thanks for clarifying this point. I was trying to figure out what tactical gear is available to officers and whether that gear is stowed in their vehicles. So what you are saying is you cannot have a automatic weapon in your vehicle until you have met department training requirements. Sounds like BC Sheriff’s did not meet that standard. Sounds also as though the SWAT is only ones with better tactical gear. You would think everyone is qualified to handle a long rifle. I hope this changes for the future.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     

    easy rider

    Summer Slacker
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 10, 2015
    31,538
    96
    Odessa, Tx
    Thanks for clarifying this point. I was trying to figure out what tactical gear is available to officers and whether that gear is stowed in their vehicles. So what you are saying is you cannot have a automatic weapon in your vehicle until you have met department training requirements. Sounds like BC Sheriff’s did not meet that standard. Sounds also as though the SWAT is only ones with better tactical gear. You would think everyone is qualified to handle a long rifle. I hope this changes for the future.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Well, the sheriff there thinks that no civilian should have an automatic rifle, so I'm sure the bad guys have been given notice.
     

    F350-6

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 25, 2009
    4,237
    96
    ...I know for a fact that when I turned in my paperwork to retire I told my sergeant that I was not going out on the street again, period. I would be a hazard to myself and the other officers I worked with because I would be overly cautious. Until the day I turned in the papers I wasn't worried and was fine. With the end in sight my perspective changed literally overnite. They understood and gave me BS chores around the station to do for 2 weeks. Call it what you want.

    That's an important piece of information for all involved to understand. Good for you admitting it up front and avoiding any possible situations, even though the likelihood of an altercation was likely very low. No need to risk getting someone else hurt if your motivation has changed. Even if the change is understandable.
     

    satx78247

    Member, Emeritus
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2014
    8,479
    96
    78208
    [QUOTE="GeorgeandSugar, post: 1694657, member: 33397"]If there is tactical gear to include an automatic weapon is this policy across the US with police and sheriff departments? I wonder if Petersen had any pre-positioned gear he could have accessed? He was outside at the time. Why was he outside or was he inside and then exited to take up a position outside until backup arrived?

    Lots of unanswered questions.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    I mentioned this in the other thread.
    My SIL is a deputy, and has a department issued AR that he carries at all times.
    Difficult to imagine none of the 4 waiting outside only had handguns at their disposal .[/QUOTE]

    ZX9RCAM,

    As I've said elsewhere, the 4 deputies evidently had ONLY their side-arms, as the sheriff said in an interview that they intend to train their officers with rifles in the immediate future & thereafter issue the street officers AR15s.

    yours, satx
     

    satx78247

    Member, Emeritus
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2014
    8,479
    96
    78208
    To All,

    In addition to my career in the USA Military Police, I've been a LA Deputy Sheriff & a city marshal in TX. = In neither case did I have a rifle issued by the department.
    (In south LA, I routinely carried MY privately owned pump-rifle in the prowl car & as a city marshal, I had access to a department/city-owned pump shotgun but no rifle. - It was a Winchester Model 1897 riot-gun.)

    yours, satx
     

    diesel1959

    por vida
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 7, 2013
    3,837
    96
    Houston & BFE
    Thanks for clarifying this point. I was trying to figure out what tactical gear is available to officers and whether that gear is stowed in their vehicles. So what you are saying is you cannot have a automatic weapon in your vehicle until you have met department training requirements. Sounds like BC Sheriff’s did not meet that standard. Sounds also as though the SWAT is only ones with better tactical gear. You would think everyone is qualified to handle a long rifle. I hope this changes for the future.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    No--I'm saying you can't have a semi-automatic patrol rifle (aka carbine/AR15/Mini-14/whatever) in your patrol vehicle unless the department permits it and that the departments FREQUENTLY throw up speed bumps that make it difficult or impossible for the officers to overcome.

    The issue of FULL-AUTO (machinegun) availability to patrol officers is an entirely different matter. The vast majority of departments in this country do NOT permit their officers access to machineguns for use during patrol. There are some who permit submachineguns for officers on certain tactical teams and there are some who permit M-16 and/or other full-auto patrol rifles for specialized patrol units. There are a minuscule number of departments that permit rank-and-file patrol officers to have full-auto weapons in their patrol vehicles.

    Rank-and-file patrol officers are well-served by having access to semi-automatic patrol rifles in their vehicles. That's the bottom line; however, all too many departments are reticent to permit this, for one reason or another.
     

    45tex

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 1, 2009
    3,449
    96
    There was a day in the academy when an instructor(back in the "80s) told us "understand guys, you are not required to die for the job. You have a duty to do something, to act, if sounding the alarm is all you can do. That's what you do."
    You cannot prejudge those Deputies based on what the media tells you. The media will not tell all. They will not tell you anything today that does not fit their prejudice.
     

    Younggun

    Certified Jackass
    TGT Supporter
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jul 31, 2011
    53,753
    96
    hill co.
    There was a day in the academy when an instructor(back in the "80s) told us "understand guys, you are not required to die for the job. You have a duty to do something, to act, if sounding the alarm is all you can do. That's what you do."
    You cannot prejudge those Deputies based on what the media tells you. The media will not tell all. They will not tell you anything today that does not fit their prejudice.

    I won't argue he was required to die for his job. But he's a coward just the same who stood outside while innocent children were murdered.

    Not like he was going to defend the building against seal team 6. Just some jackass with no training and a bulkding full of targets.

    Hope the decision he made crushes his soul for whatever time he has left in life. I have no pity.
     
    Top Bottom