Tragedy at New Jersey Police Station
Fox announced today: “Three cops reportedly shot inside New Jersey police station.” What distracted me at first was the wording of their title. We often talk about how mass murders never happen at police stations, because these cowards look for soft targets like schools and other “gun free” zones. Did some dingleberry finally try a crazy stunt?
No, as Fox Philly reports, even though they also ran a potentially misleading title: “3 Officers Shot At Police Station, Suspect Killed, Officials Say.” Gloucester Township Police had brought a suspect to the station for processing on a domestic violence charge. He “got into as [sic] violent struggle with officers at the station” and was able to “obtain a firearm.” He shot one officer in the gut and inflicted “very minor” wounds on two others, before being shot to death by defensive fire.
So yes, a model citizen (thank you, Andy Sipowicz) tried shooting up a police station. But no, he didn’t introduce the firearm.
When I interviewed about reserve police, the detective said “complacency kills.” Did the officers get complacent, thinking they were in the station and nobody in his right mind would try something? Can somebody who commits domestic violence be considered in their right mind?
Gun banners say because we now live in modern, civil society, we should disarm and let the police handle all criminal issues, including violent attacks on private citizens. What does this incident say about the veracity of their claim? And who in their right mind thinks we’re civilized? Of course, to be a gun banner you must reject reality early and often.
But those same gun banners, devoted to mythological buzz-phrases and catchy sound bites, may only read the title and say: “See, those NRA goons are idiots! Cops didn’t stop this shooter from attacking a police station.” Thought this conveniently ignores how cops stopped the shooter before anybody was killed. (Did I say gun banners like to ignore reality?)
But that leaves one relevant question: If we put cops in schools, will somebody will take away their guns and start shooting? Or does this indicate there needs to be more than one armed, trained defender per school?
Weigh in below.
We often talk about how mass murders never happen at police stations,
Even if he had gone there to shoot him some cops, this wouldn’t (technically) qualify, as a mass shooting, per the FBI, requires a minimum of four victims. Indeed, this would go down as yet another example of how having armed response on-site is what keeps the body-count down.
True, should have said attempted mass murders.
“Or does this indicate there needs to be more than one armed, trained defender per school?”
Truthfully I don’t think schools should have armed guards. Take it from someone who had to attend a school that, while not full of armed guards, had twenty full-time security guards on campus daily to help keep the peace between the warring factions (blacks and browns always found a way to riot with one another and it had nothing to do with oppression from the minority white groups). It is not fun having to be under constant surveillance; adding guns to that mix would make school truly feel like prison.
Schools should have armed teachers with concealed carry permits. This does not have to extend to all teachers but to those teachers who volunteer to undergo training and those teachers whose classroom are closest to the entryways of the school. The principal and administrative staff should mandated to receive firearms training as well as be required to have concealed carry permits. This is not a panacea of course but I think it would be preferable to having armed guards at school.
On the question of us having a civil society this is entirely a myth that can only last as long as people believe that we have a civil society. Once people no longer believe that myth our civil society ends. Too bad many of our self-appointed betters are doing everything they can to undo the civil society that took over 200 years to build for this country, several millenia for the world to carve out for those alive today.
Note my wording. A trained, armed defender could be a police resource officer, a private guard, a school teacher, the principle, a volunteer private citizen, etc. Here in Texas, some legislators are looking into legislation that more clearly encourages looking at all options. One told me that he doesn’t think armed teachers will go over in his district, but he’s interested in encouraging the locally-elected school board to identify the option they’ll be comfortable with.
As for your experience, sorry for your experience. My wife had a similar one in let’s-all-get-along San Francisco, and getting whitey was definitely on the menu. Sounds like you were in a prison environment. Take out your preface about school, put the same words in the mouth of a convict, and it’s a believable narrative. And prison guards carry guns for self-defense and to help keep peace. Once people throw off the fiction of civility, force is the only thing they respect. This is another reality check people need to understand. You can’t sing Kumbaya to sooth the savage beasties until you get their attention.
“And prison guards carry guns for self-defense and to help keep peace.”
Few prison guards are armed other than with a baton and pepper spray and maybe a taser. The risk of an inmate(s) seizing the weapon is too great inside the secured areas. Usually only those in the tower where the prison is so equipped, on perimeter patrol, and transporting prisoners outside the facility carry a firearm. The reason some inmates wear some friendly color like blue or green and some wear bright yellow or orange is so the guards can know who they can shoot. You can shoot a fleeing felon, but not a fleeing misdemeanant, so the misdemeants get the friendly colors. Where the facilities are available prisons also like to keep sentenced felons in a separate facility from misdemeants for the same reason.
“Or does this indicate there needs to be more than one armed, trained defender per school?”
Yes. There should always be at least two, in case one is disabled or disarmed.
The logical progressive solution to this, of course, is to disarm the cops as well. Clearly their having firearms didn’t stop a shooting at a police station. Only if we disarm police officers can we have a healthy, civil soviety.
I only mention this because I spent a significant amount of time last week debating someone who *actually* said this.
That conversation must have been painful. My condolences. I used to be one of those people. Treatment is available.
No, obviously, the solution is to create a new federal agency that will post armed guards at police stations.
…
I couldn’t resist.
Police officers should not carry in a school. I teach and I know that school fights are chaotic affairs and an officer could be disarmed rather easily in the scrum. Most prisons don’t allow their guards or police to carry for the same reason. That being said, a weapons locker or lockers would be a reasonable compromise.
Actually, an armed locker would be an obstacle to fast response. That said it would seem that thinking along the lines of a prison would suggest those on hall patrol would have batons or some such while there may be some one(s) who are armed but not doing a patrol duty. I like the idea of armed teachers or administration but wonder how many would do it?
Ah, the “it could happen so let’s not do that” argument. Do you have at least some anecdotes where school resource officers were disarmed by students? On the other hand, using your “it could happen” logic, it could also happen that an armed defender stops a mass murder at school before it happens. So thank you for making the point that armed defense in school is a logical discussion to have.
Technology already, for a number of years, has had the answer. Why it has been ignored, I do not know. A “gun”, rifle or pistol, can (actually has) been produced which can only be fired by a “bio-metrically” approved “owner.”
There actually was a case of a guy taking an AK to a police station in Virginia and starting a firefight. It looked like a case of “suicide by cop” with the added issue of getting a little payback for perceived wrongs. I forget the details, but seems to me there was one officer killed and several wounded before the bad guy got taken out.
I recently read that a “School Resource Officer” in AZ costs $95k a year + benefits. I guarantee you that if you offered a $25k a year subsidy to any teacher/administrator who volunteered to go through the certification course and carry every day, you’d get lots of takers.
Side note: There are vast differences between elementary, middle, and high schools. Each needs a different approach.
As an “older” Vet, I would do it for a lot less. I am sure that to protect our kids or grand children you would fine a lot of volunteers!
If a gun ban ever happens, the police won’t need guns when they go to a crime scene. By the time they show up all they’ll need is a piece of yellow chalk.
More guns is obviously the solution. When will somebody be publishing just how many more guns in the hands of the sane are needed to defend from the minority insane and to overthrow the impending tryannical government? Even our military makes such contingency planning. Maybe the NRA can work this out and get federally mandated laws passed so everybody who looks sane at the time of purchase can be mandated to purchase and own weapons.
Under the original National Militia Law, that was exactly the case. Every male citizen who qualified to serve in the militia was required to furnish his own arms and kit.
One of the many reasons why the American Militia proved so inadequate as to be termed by Washngton as “leaning on a broken (walking) stick”. was this apparently onerous requirement imposed upon the citizen militiaman. They simply didn’t but the guns.
It appears that the private sector market is addressing the need to equip private citizens with military grade shoulder weapons without the support of the Feds or the States. Since 2004, more than a million AR-15 pattern rifles are sold to private buyers every year in this country.
“If we put cops in schools, will somebody take away their guns and start shooting? Or does this indicate there needs to be more than one armed, trained defender per school?”
To your question about your one relevant question. First, I doubt the relevance of those questions. That’s because it’s not really a matter of solving a problem with armed guards. Three or four armed guards at schools would not prevent a determined gunman and even if it did, there are many other target rich locations for mass shootings. If The gunman in Newtown Conn. had encountered an armed guard or two, he would simply have shot them first. That boy had a well formulated plan of attack and an armed guard would have slowed him down by maybe 5 seconds. More importantly in the larger picture is the fact that multiple armed guards at schools will mean less of them in the supermarket, libraries, malls and roadways. So, your questions are not relevant, only unhelpful and pointless speculation. Now, I suppose you can urge the people of this country to post a squad of heavily armored and armed soldiers on every street corner and in every business, school and home. Or, you can be sensible and urge that gun carry permits be the rule, not the exception. Whether they are concealed is kinda beside the point. Personally, I would prefer to see who is carrying. But, concealed or not, carry permits for responsible adults is the answer. That, and being able to hit your target. Knowing there are probably a dozen or so people armed with handguns in any given crowd will certainly deter most violent criminals. Knowing that any deranged gunman will be immediately engaged by return gunfire will promote a nice feeling of security.