@yourmomma, you would probably have to limit the type of powder that is sold (slower, less efficient powder equaling less force - I think) to limit the velocity of the round if that were actually a legitimate concern. But there are so many other things in play, like the performance of the slug on impact, which have a far greater effect on lethiality that I don’t honestly know how much good it would do. Coupling that with the fact that muzzle velocity plays a significant role in accuracy at distance, so efficient powders would still likely be available for those applications, and it is not likely that much could practically be done to slow the round down considerably.
“As an active police officer he knows from training the difference between a firecracker and a gun shot. Even I can tell the difference.”
@GloriaVaughn So, on a campus with multiple buildings, say you were in one building and a noise was occurring in another building AND you got a call about firecrackers (according to Peterson’s report through his attorney) you could tell with absolute certainty both that it was a gun, not firecrackers, and you could pinpoint exactly where the noise was coming from?
“from his time there, he has a much better idea of where the sound is coming from”
Assuming he had heard gunshots or similar sounding loud sounds on campus before.
I’ll continue to wait for more info.
^FWIW, having heard a lot of reports of non military weapons both in the field and on the range over the years, I am not sure I could distinguish between some type of large firework and a small caliber discharge from a building or two away, over cement. Whether a trained cop or a military vet could do better, I have no idea.
So one shot, maybe. Certainly multiple reports would be worth investigating though. Even if it was a series of m80’s going off, I would think the school resource officer should go and investigate.
It would be really interesting to hear the call logs.
Also as an aside, and relative to the issuing school officers rifles, I asked one of our investigators (retired sheriff’s deputy) if he would prefer to engage a school shooter with a sidearm or a long gun and he quickly said his sidearm. he said it is quicker to point (meaning aim), doesn’t get in the way going around corners and through rooms and is accurate enough indoors. For whatever that is worth.
If we were to regulate/control bullets instead of guns, we don’t need to talk about guns or the constitution. Guns without bullets can’t kill anyone. Why is controlling bullets rarely mentioned?
Whoever gave that order was incredibly stupid. They scraped wait-for-backup protocol for rapid response.
Which is the truth, body camera or firecracker?
Isn’t the firecracker thing a red herring? Even if the SRO believed it was only firecrackers, I find it hard to believe the training protocol was to take cover behind a building rather than go investigate. In other words, whether it was firecrackers or shots, training protocol would be to investigate and engage…
I don’t think we can apply the “stopping power” research about hunting to the effect of bullets at close range. You don’t hunt deer in classrooms and cafeterias. What happens to the deer flesh shot at hunting distances is not going to be the same as what happens to human flesh shot at a range of 15 feet. The radiologist is comparing handgun bullet wounds (probably from close range) to AR-15 wounds from close range.
Here’s an article from Field and Stream that gets at what I’m saying (my bold in the quote):
The “acre or two of hamburger” is exactly what the radiologist was talking about as well. That high-velocity bullet does a world of damage. What’s spoiled meat on a dead deer is ruined flesh on a person.
@doschicos “So, on a campus with multiple buildings, say you were in one building and a noise was occurring in another building AND you got a call about firecrackers (according to Peterson’s report through his attorney) you could tell with absolute certainty both that it was a gun, not firecrackers, and you could pinpoint exactly where the noise was coming from?”
- No one but him has stated anything about firecrackers. No one from the school district or the police department has said anything about it.
- Being that close to the shots being fired, yes, you can tell.
“Assuming he had heard gunshots or similar sounding loud sounds on campus before.”
You don’t have to hear gunshots in the school before to know what the normal sounds of the school/buildings are. The closest thing sounding like a shot in a school is percussion. He would know which building the percussion room is in and what hours band meets. You can clearly hear the area that the shot is coming from just like you know if a dog is barking if it is coming from a neighbor on the left, right or behind you. Only you used the term pinpoint, not me.
Even if it was firecrackers shouldn’t he have investigated?
Here are questions I have about the SRO. I know we won’t get the answers.
- What is the procedure for those in the video room to communicate with the SRO when he is needed? Example, If they see a fight(incident) on a part of campus, do they have direct communication with the SRO so that he can intervene?
- Did the SRO try to communicate with the people in the video room.
This is where I think the SRO truly failed. The people with the best information would be those in the video room monitoring all the cameras around the school. He should have quickly called them to find out what they know. They might not know if it was fireworks, but I believe they would definitely know if it was an active shooter.
"The closest thing sounding like a shot in a school is percussion. "
That’s a stretch and I know percussion.
"This is where I think the SRO truly failed. The people with the best information would be those in the video room monitoring all the cameras around the school. He should have quickly called them to find out what they know. "
According to the articles talking about things from the SRO’s viewpoint, it sounds like he was in contact with the video room. It also sounds like the video room situation was pretty fubar since the videos were on a delay of something like 26 minutes.
Who really knows though without more detail, tapes, transcripts of the calls, etc. I wonder if they will ever be made public.
@“Cardinal Fang”, I am saying the converse of what I think you think I am saying. My point is the farther the bullet travels the more likely it is that muzzle velocity and what that means to a slug on impact (what your quote is addressing) matter. At three hundred yards, sure. Which is the conclusion of your field and stream article. At twenty feet say, like in a classroom, I don’t see how it can possibly make that big of a difference in survivability.
At base, I agree with the author of the article where he concludes
Sigh
Have you ever fired a semiautomatic rifle in your life? Remington .223 and NATO 5.56 rounds are not large caliber ammunition as far as rifle rounds go.
@doschicos "The closest thing sounding like a shot in a school is percussion. "
That’s a stretch and I know percussion.
Guess you have never heard a broom stick hit a snare drum.
Roethilisburger, I have not, but my husband, father, father in law, and brother all have on behalf of their country. Like many vets, they do not believe civilians should have assault weapons. More to the point of this thread, whether rationally or not, the police officers responding to the event may have been concerned that they were out-gunned. Maybe they were not out gunned, maybe the fear was baseless, but it may have explained some of their actions.
This. Keep a little distance and keep thumbing shells in. Leave the AR-15 at home.
As to the OP: Their responsibility is to lay their life down for the protection of their charges. If they can’t do that, they shouldn’t take the coin. You just need to winnow out the ones that are going to hesitate due to worry they’ll be crucified for making a mistake. Which they surely will.
^Maybe they hesitated because, oh, you know, they didn’t feel like dying on Valentine’s Day.
If Valentine’s day was the reason, maybe they might should have skipped law enforcement. Listened to the aptitude test - not to mention their hearts - and… become a florist?
That’s fine and exactly why those that choose to should be armed. If I’m being attacked, I want to defend myself. Not wait for someone to decide what to do. Having worked in rough neighborhoods you realize quickly that the police can only investigate after the fact.
@Ohiodad51, what I think you are saying is that at short range, muzzle velocity doesn’t make a difference to survival.
And what I am saying is, I think you are mistaken. Energy is proportional to the square of velocity. A bullet traveling three times as fast is nine times as energetic. That is why the doctor says that a handgun shot at close range puts a hole in your liver but an AR-15 shot turns your liver to puree and then you die.
Here’s more about how devastating those wounds are:
Read the article for further graphic descriptions of AR-15 wounds; http://www.philly.com/philly/health/science/20160616_Doctors__High-velocity_Orlando_rifle_inflicts__quot_devastating_quot__wounds.html