Sheriff Bob

[Unregistered]

I think running toward gunfire has a reasonable expectation that getting hurt or killed is in the equation. Also think it is a valid concern that has been brought up about compelling you to enter, by yourself, by policy with zero discretion. Wanting to have at least one backup with you before entering is not only reasonable, it should be policy. What risk I decide to take willingly, that's on me. The difference between "shall" and "may"

[Unregistered]

I think running toward gunfire has a reasonable expectation that getting hurt or killed is in the equation. Also think it is a valid concern that has been brought up about compelling you to enter, by yourself, by policy with zero discretion. Wanting to have at least one backup with you before entering is not only reasonable, it should be policy. What risk I decide to take willingly, that's on me. The difference between "shall" and "may"

Policy says “shall.” Guess you and the Sheriff disagree. Guess you will lose that battle. Try it and see what happens?

[Unregistered]

Policy says “shall.” Guess you and the Sheriff disagree. Guess you will lose that battle. Try it and see what happens?

Let's not forget Sheriff Bob said General Orders are suggestions and guidelines open to interpretation. That's all they are and that's all they will ever be.

[Unregistered]

Bob is afraid to many of you would be cowards.......cant have that, its embarrassing! Glad to see so many of you didnt take offense to having no discretion, and being ordered in no matter what the circumstances. Bob thinks so much of you that he is even willing to have you go without a backup. Leadership would mean he would have to take the heat and justify a backup which up until now, wouldnt have been unreasonable to the public.

[Unregistered]

Policy says “shall.” Guess you and the Sheriff disagree. Guess you will lose that battle. Try it and see what happens?

Hahah. You idiots. Which policy is that? The active assailant policy? I’d you think you are required to sprint into gunfire, you’re crazy. You have discretion on how you move. And I’m all about saving kids and shwacking the bad guy, but you can move smart and safe. The premise some people have is that we will somehow magically drop the bad guy with no resistance. Tell you a few people who will never, ever go running into an active shooter case, most of the command staff. I’m sure they talk about how they would face danger, but that’s total bull shit. And do you really think the command staff stay current on firearms training? Hahahha. That’ll be the day. Highest ranking person you will see at In Service is a lieutenant. It all sounds good on the news, but I’d love to see it practiced when George Steffen is first on scene. He’ll hold down the future command post site and wait for minions to dash in. I’m sure those AR’s those big Chiefs have will stay in the canvass cocoon they’ve been in since they were issued.

[Unregistered]

I see Bob says on baynews9, no way guardians would be held accountable if they hesitated to take action. Peterson being charged was a result of many issues. Guess we have our answer, Bob is okay with the arrest. When I watch the video, I see what looks like a another officer with him. As they get to the door of the building, it appears something on the radio prompted him to move quickly to another location. The story go's that there was one down in a courtyard and the shooter was seen heading toward a parking lot. No way that on a hectic scene like that there would be confusion and erroneous information being given out. See, I'm not ready to call him a coward just yet. I dont know what Petersons explanation of what happened yet has been fully released to the public. I know many of you claimed you would have handled things differently.........why would you go into a building, if you thought the shooter was heading toward the parking lot? Shame on all of us to swallow a narrative that seeks to blame only Peterson, when it is painfully obvious that many breakdowns occurred. Its a valid question to ask why others have not been charged? Is he a coward? Might be, but police officers should know better than to judge until they have all of the facts

[Unregistered]

I’m an SRO in a neighboring agency who has a huge problem with being expected to do my job with a 9mm auto. ( And an AR-15 locked in my trunk, where I probably will not be able to retrieve it during an active shooter(s).) The problem with rushing in, with only one officer, is that if you are shot, you are basically arming the shooter(s) with an additional firearm and approximately 50 rounds of ammo. Not to mention an agency radio, which allows the shooter(s) to hear exactly who and how many officers are coming in, and where they are coming in from. We need to have rifles in locked boxes within the schools, some schools should have several depending on their size. We are seriously outgunned and need to level the playing field.

[Unregistered]

Hahah. You idiots. Which policy is that? The active assailant policy? I’d you think you are required to sprint into gunfire, you’re crazy. You have discretion on how you move. And I’m all about saving kids and shwacking the bad guy, but you can move smart and safe. The premise some people have is that we will somehow magically drop the bad guy with no resistance. Tell you a few people who will never, ever go running into an active shooter case, most of the command staff. I’m sure they talk about how they would face danger, but that’s total bull shit. And do you really think the command staff stay current on firearms training? Hahahha. That’ll be the day. Highest ranking person you will see at In Service is a lieutenant. It all sounds good on the news, but I’d love to see it practiced when George Steffen is first on scene. He’ll hold down the future command post site and wait for minions to dash in. I’m sure those AR’s those big Chiefs have will stay in the canvass cocoon they’ve been in since they were issued.

George couldn’t fit through the door. For an assistant deputy chief, he is completely unsat.

[Unregistered]

Problem is you are expected to walk the campus. If it ain’t on you, you ain’t gonna have it. That’s a fact. And a 9mm is a formidable handgun round. What would put us up and over would be red dots on our pistols. Pistol optics extend the accurate range of pistols to fifty yards without trying. If you can take your time you can shoot accurately at one hundred yards. All that with a pistol. A rifle is great, no doubt, but you need to have your equipment on you. So unless you are going to walk the campus with a slung rifle, you will waste minutes getting it. Red dots on pistols is not new. It’s proven tech and makes shooters better. And 9mm rounds are not far from .45’s in terms of stopping power. If this were the military and ball ammo, I’d rather have the .45. But we can carry hollow points that multiply the force. I’d swap my .45 for a 9mm without hesitation. There are 9’s out that allow 17 to 20+ rounds per mag. And 9’s allow far better control. The Glock 17, Glock 45, Sig 320 Tacops, S&W M&P, FN 509 Tactical all have huge magazine capacity. And they are all proven guns, mostly. A Glock 9mm is a no brainer though.

[Unregistered]

Bob also said on baynews 9 that in his opinion Peterson showed clear criminal intent. This is despite being a attorney with a US Supreme Court decision saying differently. Even the Miami District Court has dismissed some of the parents law suits citing this Supreme Court opinion. This is how Bob acts even when he is told he is wrong. Sounds like Bob's judgement is nothing more than my way or the highway whether he is right or wrong.