Police are legally protected for cowardice. This is so hard to swallow. The heartache and sheer insanity of these times knows no bounds.

Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Speaking as a citizen of another Western country, the cowardice & inaction of those police officers involved, absolutely disgusts & infuriates me, as it does many acquaintences. They should be incarcerated for dereliction of duty, permitting mass murder by inaction, gross negligence, faulure to perform their sworn duty if care, & etc. They should all be publicly named & shamed. Disgusting, yellow bellied cowards.

Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

I have a “back the blue” sticker on my rear window. It will not be there this time tomorrow.

Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

They won’t save innocent children from slaughter, but you can be sure they’d happily mace and beat with a baton a little old lady who wasn’t wearing her mask.

These aren’t men. At least not in the key ways (need a reminder? Let’s start with honor and courage) that used to define men.


Expand full comment

Yep. Fellow attorney here. This is what I posted on FB yesterday re: the same issue.

Obviously school shootings are in the news again. I'd like to point out an aspect of the issue that media and politicians never seem to mention (for obvious reasons):

1: Government makes schooling mandatory. Which means that due to various circumstances, most people send their children to government schools.

2: Government made laws generally (with exceptions) preventing government employees, agencies, etc... from being held liable for the results of the acts and omissions of those government employees and agencies under the legal doctrine of "qualified immunity", other immunity doctrines and legal provisions.

3: The result is that, for example, Courts have held that law enforcement officers have no legal duty to protect individuals in the general public. See Warren v. D.C. (horrific facts involving multiple rapes and police inaction to prevent the rapes), among others:

"... the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen."


4: Similarly, generally, a government school and it's employees and law enforcement would not be held liable for failure to protect the children at the school.

"It is historically very challenging to hold a school district legally responsible for a shooting, said Chuck Vergon, a professor of education law at Youngstown State University.

A majority of past school shooting cases featured some kind of warning in advance of potential violence, he said. But it is difficult in most state courts to meet the required standard of proving gross negligence on the part of school officials — that they acted in “wanton and willful disregard” for the safety or well-being of others, he said. “That standard has usually shielded school officials in most school shooting cases from civil liability.”


5: To my understanding of the law (I'd welcome additional information that might show otherwise), private schools could more easily be held liable for failure to protect students. Which could be a reason why school shootings are less common at private schools. Perhaps private schools have better security. Or a better culture that doesn't result in pissing off some students who might come back to shoot up the place.

6: So what we have is government mandating that kids attend school, which - because of various circumstances de facto means that government is mandating that most kids attend GOVERNMENT schools. And government has passed laws to prevent itself from being liable in most instances for failure to protect the children that government mandated be placed in government care.

7: As such, there is minimal motivation - legally speaking - for government to ensure that children are protected in government schools. It is far easier for politicians to stir up division over guns than it is to take action to protect children. Arguing in the media over gun rights gets viewers and attention. Strong, practical action to protect kids doesn't as much.

8: Notice that when government wants to, government is quite able to protect people. Presidents and other prominent politicians have trained guards with guns, as well as substantial other security measures to ensure their protection and safety.

Those government agents KNOW that those methods work to prevent shootings and such. That being the case - even though a substantial percentage of the population is annoyed or angry at a particular politician at a particular time... and even though a small percentage of those people might be annoyed or angry enough to try something desperate.

Yet we rarely see attempts on politicians' and other government officials' lives (the Congressional baseball game incident 5 years ago being a prominent relatively recent exception). Their security is effective - even though there are just as many guns in society that could be used to attack politicians as there are that could be used to attack schools and children.

So why aren't similar measures implemented in relation to schools?

Possible answers:

A: Politicians and other government officials care more about their own safety than the safety of children.

B: Politicians would rather have an issue with which to leverage votes and media attention than to actually solve the issue.

C: Politicians realize that the general public doesn't want that degree of protection for their children because of the disruption and fear that could cause.

But if that's a/the reason, then that implies that the general public is ok with a lower level of safety for schoolchildren than for politicians... and that means that the general public will accept a higher amount of risk for schoolchildren potentially being the victim of a school shooting. That may well be - there are ALWAYS trade offs. We cannot rid the world of ALL risk... and ridding the world of even most risks results in a less than ideal day-to-day life).

These aren't easy issues.

But I can guarantee you that if government were actually legally liable for failing to protect children in government schools, then the children would be a lot better protected than they are now.

Government has chosen not to accept that liability. And the children suffer for it sometimes.

Perhaps we should have a national discussion about THAT issue at the same time that people are arguing about guns.


Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

My x-husband cop and retired BIL trooper went into many volatile situations, not know what was on the other side. Both of these officers would risk their lives and go into an active shooting incident to save children - or anyone. Please don’t condemn ALL police. Investigate, once the truth comes out, those who were at fault should be dealt with.

Expand full comment

The "official timeline" in the linked LA Times article also says:

"He was finally killed after more than an hour, after a Border Patrol special weapons team arrived."

However, a story on Fox News is saying that the Border Patrol officer that shot the killer was off duty and had responded after his wife, a teacher at the school, texted him requesting help.

"An off-duty US Customs and Border Patrol agent saved dozens of children trapped inside Robb Elementary Tuesday after his wife, a fourth-grade teacher at the school, texted him that there was an active shooter, according to a report"


Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

I think there were some cops that wanted to go in because some went in to get their kids in other classrooms.

However I said this three times in the last month as a caller into talk radio. I’m not sure that police and govt law enforcement are with the good guys and it’s time for them to choose. Why? The threat of losing their paychecks and pensions have them following the orders of their superiors and mayors and governors when they know it’s wrong.

How many dads and moms reading this would have gone in as non police officers to save those kids even if they aren’t our own? I bet on many. I would with no hesitation. Why did the police not? They were told to follow the process.

Can’t get the front door open? I don’t wait for a key. I drive my car through it. They were told they have to wait to breach.

Expand full comment

The problem with all of these mass shootings is one of mental health in USA. Teenagers are more and more hypermedicated and making us suffer the consequences. When we start giving them anphetamines as kids, antidepressants as young teenagers and antipsychotics later on, something is not working in the American Health System these days. Nutrition is a big problem and also probable cause for this mental health crisis and we should not underestimate the role of hypervaccination in babies.

This is a more complex problem than it seems.

Expand full comment

Just wait until our military is tested and they don't have to fear being ostracized for doing their jobs. Our world is convoluted, confused and upside down. We cannot expect normal or good outcomes to be the rule anymore.

Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

If it is true they stood outside and did nothing, they have blood on their hands.

Expand full comment

I guess that every real men left the police after some cucks decided to embarrass the corporation by taking "the knee" for blm, antifa, and other criminals. Now these blm-kneeling cowards are all that is left in the police.

Expand full comment

Lots of problems here. Cops vilified for shooting “people of color”, the George Floyd death and conviction, etc. makes them afraid to act out. The security door left unlocked “because the school year was ending” (?!) What I want to see are armed guards on duty at schools and, ideally, armed teachers or the impression of such. But if I was a parent I’d be homeschooling for this and other reasons. And find a cooperative way to do it even if I had little money.

Expand full comment

One news account reported there were only 4 cops. The city has a small police force. One wonders how well the 4 cops were trained in shooting cases like this.

So far I have found no corroboration of the claim that the shooter fired several rounds outside before he entered the school. Wouldn't that info have come from parents? How long had the children been in class?

Accusing the cops of cowardice seems both appropriate and a cheap shot. Were they wearing bullet protection vests? How well had they been trained for shooter intervention? The situation seems more like a unwinnable situation - someone was going to die, so the question came down to who.

Count me as cynical, but I doubt Americans will find common ground - excuses will be made. Perhaps the parents will be found guilty! And the MSM will eat it up.

Expand full comment

Something to consider. The case of Sgt Dan O’Shea, Denver Police Department off-duty SWAT who led a small team of brave police to take on Klebold and Harris in Columbine while the rest of the LEO loitered outside trying to figure out what, if anything, to do as the rampage and carnage of innocent children continued inside. Investigated by his department, local and state prosecutors, sued by parents of a child killed claiming he was shot to death by O’Shea’s “reckless” intervention.

I knew Sgt Dan O’Shea. Long time veteran of DPD, instructor at the police academy, grizzled, tough cop who loved hard, lived life hard, did everything he did in life to the nth. Including putting his life on the line for others in harm’s way. Investigated, suspended and sued for his efforts.

Probably why so many of the LEO responders in Uvalde sat on their asses. And in Parkland. Despite protocols changing in every jurisdiction after Columbine, with hundreds of millions of dollars spent training local police departments. Still doing nothing, money and training wasted as children die in real time while police cowardly afraid to “protect and serve.”

I was with Sgt Dan O’Shea a few years after Columbine the night he took the call from his attorney telling him he was cleared of wrongdoing in the investigation and dropped from the lawsuit. He was a regular at a local bar I was a semi-regular at. Watching that man’s face, seeing his body, his entire being respond to the good news was a moment I’ll never forget. I shared his moment of vindication and the weight of the world that had weighed upon him for so many years after that tragic day leave him was powerful to behold. He bought the entire bar shots to celebrate, hugged many friends, me included as the news sunk in. This is what holds good police back from doing what Sgt Dan O’Shea did. Thing is, really good cops would do it anyways and suffer the consequences. Sgt Dan O’Shea would do it all over again the same way knowing what the next few years of his life would look like. They care that much. Rare today.

Expand full comment

It's not guns or cops. We need serious conversation about "why so many of our country’s most lost, most hateful people are boys with their whole lives ahead of them." Children killing children.


Expand full comment