Connect with us

Guns and Crime

Scot Peterson lawyers up, Sheriff Israel doubles down

Published

on

In case the name was unfamiliar, Scot Peterson was the deputy who avoided confronting Cruz during his rampage. The previous article advised caution in assessing the situation and for good reason. Since the article on Scot Peterson’s cowardice, three more officers were revealed to have been positioned outside the school. So Scot Peterson was not alone. To make matters dramatically worse, an off-duty police officer did go in. It was this story that prompted notoriety about the three additional officers.

This is problematic for Sheriff Scott Israel who forced Peterson to resign, a favorable deal for him, while, so far, leaving the other three officers unscathed for their inaction during the incident. With this revelation, the likelihood of a stand down order increases, as police are generally trained to engage active shooters.

Perspectives

I’m no coward, says deputy who didn’t go inside Parkland school during massacre – Miami Herald

On Monday, Peterson pushed back against the critics in his first public statement, essentially arguing he did the right things in an uncertain, chaotic situation. “Allegations that Mr. Peterson was a coward and that his performance, under the circumstances, failed to meet the standards of police officers are patently untrue,” according to the statement sent from Fort Lauderdale attorney Joseph DiRuzzo.

Peterson said he did not storm the halls looking for the shooter because he initially “heard gunshots but believed those gunshots were originating from outside of the buildings on the school campus,” according to the statement. “BSO trains its officers that in the event of outdoor gunfire one is to seek cover and assess the situation in order to communicate what one observes with other law enforcement.”

He “took up a tactical position” between two other buildings next to Building 12, where Cruz spent six minutes unleashing gunfire with an AR-15 assault-style rifle.

“Let there be no mistake,’’ DiRuzzo’s statement continued, “Mr. Peterson wishes that he could have prevented the untimely passing of the 17 victims on that day.”

“The case is an active internal affairs investigation. In accordance with Florida law, we are prohibited from discussing any details until the case has concluded,” according to a statement released by BSO.

BSO’s policy states that an officer “may” — not “must” — enter a building when an active shooter is attacking, meaning Peterson might not have violated any technical rules. Still, police tactical experts say, most active-shooter training calls for cops to identify the location of a gunman, whether inside or outside.

Fox News: Sheriff Scott Israel battling calls to resign as blame shifts in wake of Florida high school shooting

“Listen, if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, O.J. Simpson would still be in the record books,” was Israel’s bizarre defense Sunday after being asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper if the shooting might not have happened if his department handled things differently.

The comment came following disputed reports that three of Israel’s officers refused to enter Marjory Douglas Stoneman High School as Nikolas Cruz was killing 17 people in the Valentine’s Day rampage.

“Deputies make mistakes. Police officers make mistakes. We all make mistakes,” Israel told CNN. “But it’s not the responsibility of the general or the president if you have a deserter. You look into this. We’re looking into this aggressively. And we’ll take care of it and justice will be served.”

Israel said during the contentious interview that he has offered “amazing leadership to this agency,” adding “you don’t measure a person’s leadership by a deputy not going in to — these deputies received the training they needed.”

Israel also appeared to contradict his own department regarding the reports of Broward deputies not entering the school.

In the CNN interview, Israel slammed a letter from State Rep. Bill Hager to Gov. Scott, which called for his removal on the basis of inaction after at least 23 — and perhaps almost 50 — police visits to the shooter’s home and the reports of his officers standing idle. Israel said the demand was a “shameful, politically motivated letter that had no facts.” He also said in a letter to Scott on Saturday that Hager’s claim that “three Broward Sheriff Deputies were on campus at the time of the attack and chose to take cover themselves rather than stepping up to protect students” is “patently false.”

My Take

I do believe that Scot Peterson is a coward, but he was mistreated by the Broward Sheriff’s Office. The other three officers should have received the same treatment. What’s I’m interested seeing moving forward is whether an officer, such as Scot Peterson will whistle blow about a stand down order. Seeing as he lawyered up, if such event happened, Peterson and his lawyer will be in discussion on how to prove and reveal it. Instead, Sheriff Israel was trying to hide their presence. We have truly come across a vile man in power. The history of his department patching up their crime stats provides a clear explanation for their inaction towards Cruz in the events leading up to Valentine’s Day.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Snatching Defeat from the jaws of Victory: ‘Writing out’ Most Guns with the Bump-Stock ban.

Published

on

By

Bump Stock

The latest Liberty grabber wave has crested, but Trump is about to give them a tremendous victory over the 2nd amendment.

Now that the Sturm und Drang of the March for gun confiscation has ‘died down’ it has become evident that, much like previous movements of the past, it came to nought aside from some localised suppressions of Liberty. The problem is there a vestige of this assault of freedom that is still rearing it’s ugly head, that of the infamous ban on so-called “Bump-Stocks”.

Those who are rightly concerned about this assault on Liberty can still inscribe their opposition with the Moonshine, Cigarettes and Fire-sticks bureaucracy [Better known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms – BATF]  pushing through a new ‘law’ that all by himself, Trump has taken to “Writing Out”.  The deadline is June 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET for everyone to post their opposition to this ‘Law’.

First they came for the Bump-Stocks.

For those who may not care about someone else’s concerns over freedom, just be mindful of a reprise of Martin Niemöller Poem starting with the line: “First they came for the Bump-Stocks, and I didn’t object – For I didn’t care about Bump-Stocks…. Soon enough, they get around to coming after the firearms everyone else cares about, and eventually that will be hunting rifles or shotguns. If you chose to remain silent those guns will be “written out” as well.

But don’t just take our word for it, listen to what the Liberty grabbers have stated in bragging about the subject:

Delaney Tarr [March for Our Lives]

When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.):

Upon being asked if the bill was a slippery slope toward further gun restrictions, she said, “So what? … I certainly hope so.”

Apparently we’re not supposed to notice when the Liberty grabber Left broadcasts their intentions to the world. We’re supposed to let them get a foot in the door of a pretext for further bans before objecting.

Giving up the question.

David Deming over on the American thinker, Made the very important point that sacrificing one more time to the Liberty grabbers of what seems to be nothing is in essence:

If we agree to ban bump stocks because they facilitate rapid firing, we have given up the question. We have agreed in principle that any dangerous gun can be banned and confiscated by an arbitrary executive order. All guns are capable of rapid fire, and all guns are inherently dangerous. Pump-action shotguns can be rapidly fired and reloaded. Jerry Miculek can fire five shots from a double-action revolver in 0.57 seconds. High-capacity magazines most certainly facilitate rapid fire, so they also will have to go. A writer who wants to ban all “private individual ownership of firearms” recently argued that “even bolt-action rifles can still fire surprisingly fast in skilled hands.” He’s right. All magazine-fed guns will be outlawed.

Automatic redefinition.

In point of fact, the ATF previously ruled that Bump-Stocks [and presumably other ways of ‘bump-firing a gun – Fast fingers, Rubber bands and Belt-loops] don’t actually convert ordinary semi-automatic firearms to a “Machine gun” because the trigger has to be pulled for every shot. Now with the President’s authorising this linguistic legerdemain, this definition codified in the law has been blurred to the point that any gun that can be ‘Bump-fired’ could also be banned. However, they can’t very well ban fingers, belt-loops or rubber bands, so they will just ban each and every gun that can fire too fast.

Just ‘Write-out’ this legal requirement and Voila! Any gun that can be fired too fast for the sensibilities of the Liberty grabbers can be thought of as a “Machine Gun” and banned instantly – converting most of the 120 Million gun owners into instant felons. With a bit of training,  most guns can be fired faster, so in essence, letting them change this legal definition could have them ban just about every gun in existence.

The Takeaway.

One might not care about the fate of thousands of inert pieces of plastic or what happens to those who have them. One might not care if someone won’t be able to bump-fire a weapon in this particular way. But we on the Pro-Liberty Right will rue the day that we let this go through in exchange for nothing.

If we let the powers that be arbitrarily proclaim that some guns with these pieces of inert plastic are “Machine Guns’, the day will soon dawn when ALL guns are dishonestly ‘written out’ as the same. It will then just be a slippery slope to everyone having to undergo a background check, registration and of course – TAXES – on guns that we already own. Followed by the inevitable confiscation of those guns.

Those who remain silent now will only have themselves to blame when this happens – so now is the time to stop this dead in it’s tracks. The comment window is only open for a few more days [Jun 27, 2018 11:59 PM ET], make the best of it.

 

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Video Double play: Busting the gun grabber’s musket myth.

Published

on

By

Gun confiscation bingo

Two videos that eviscerate the Liberty Grabbers ‘One shot’ musket myth.

It is a bedrock principle (if they have any) of the Liberty grabber Left that back during the ratification of the US Constitution the only weapons in existence were flintlock musket that took 5 minute to reload. Thus there wasn’t any school violence because it would have taken too long for the perpetrator to kill anyone.

As it typical of the lore of the national socialist Left, this is a lie of the first order. A previous video celebrated the “Assault Weapon” tricentennial, which was bit of the tongue in cheek variety since there were other repeating “Military Style” weapons in existence before this time period. These will be detailed in future articles. Meanwhile we present two videos that also bust the ‘Musket Myth’, one a short presentation from the Royal Armouries on the Jover and Belton “Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket”

Royal Armouries
Published on Aug 30, 2017
Curator of Firearms, Jonathan Ferguson, gives us a peek at the Flintlock breech-loading superimposed military musket, by Jover and Belton (1786)

This is a very relevant piece since the inventor Joseph Belton corresponded with the Continental Congress in 1777:

May it Please your Honours,
I would just informe this Honourable Assembly, that I have discover’d an improvement, in the use of Small Armes, wherein a common small arm, may be maid to discharge eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time, & each one to do execution five & twenty, or thirty yards, and after so discharg’d, to be loaded and fire’d with cartridge as usual.

“It was demonstrated before noted scientists and military officers (including well known scientist David Rittenhouse and General Horatio Gates)”

This destroys the mythology that the founders had no knowledge of this type of repeating firearm technology that existed already.

The second is a humours dissertation on the subject from video raconteur Steven Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/

from a few years ago that also eviscerates this bit of Leftist mythology.

Published on Feb 10, 2015
People have been telling us for years that the 2nd amendment was written in a time of Muskets, and that it doesn’t apply to the evolved weapons of today. Is it true?

So why is this important?

Two primary reasons. One that these factual examples demonstrate that the founding fathers knew of these technological advances. Therefore, they destroy any Leftist pretences that the 2nd amendment be confined to muskets. Second that, school violence is something other than an issue of guns.

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Final pieces of the puzzle voiding the Second Amendment are ready to put in place

Published

on

It’s no mystery to the majority of liberty-loving Americans that politicians of every political stripe have been working feverishly to find new ways to restrict or eliminate our constitutionally protected God-given rights. And there has been perhaps no greater effort in their politically correct but unconstitutional agenda than their attempts to void in word and/or deed our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

While attempts to restrict gun ownership have existed throughout American history, the current movement got its footing from the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). This law, a response to gangland crime during Prohibition, established a framework for the federal government to regulate specific types of firearms and accessories, and it imposed a tax on the manufacture and transfer of firearms defined by the Act.

Though amended by the Gun Control Act of 1968 to address a flaw that nearly voided the NFA, the law has been used to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions involving firearms identified in the 1934 law. Since 1968, the Firearms Protection Act of 1986, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and the NICS Improvement act of 2008—which “improved” background checks required under the Brady Law—have also been added to the NFA.

As you can see in this very brief timeline, the old “slippery slope” adage is true. And in the aftermath of recent shooting events at public schools, the final pieces of the puzzle to void the Second Amendment are ready to put in place.

For example, the omnibus spending bill passed by the GOP-controlled Congress and signed into law by Donald Trump in March included the Fix NICS Act, a bill introduced by Republican Sen. John Cornyn. This so-called “improvement” to NICS gave the government power to deny gun rights to individuals for something as minor as a traffic ticket, and it laid the groundwork for the establishment of a FBI database of all gun owners.

With Fix NICS in the books, and with Republicans and Democrats in one accord on gun control, Washington is ready to take the next logical step toward voiding the Second Amendment—a Nazi Germany-style gun registry. If successfully made into law, these proposals will give the federal government complete control over every gun and gun owner in America, thus giving our Big Brother overlords the power they need to eliminate private gun ownership entirely.

Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) has introduced the Crime Gun Tracing Modernization Act, a bill that will require the federal government to establish a “searchable, computerized database” of all records pertaining to the sale, importation, production, or shipment of firearms. Though he hasn’t advocated a database system “yet”, Nelson’s GOP opponent, Gov. Rick Scott is equally as dangerous following his strong anti-gun position since the Parkland, FL high school shooting.

In the House of Representatives, Democrats have introduced the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act. If passed, it would prohibit gun ownership without a license and would require a valid firearms license to transfer and receive a gun. The bill would also require the US attorney general to maintain a “federal record of sale” system to track every gun purchase made in America.

From laws denying gun rights to adults under 21 years of age to the growing acceptance—even in Washington—of using Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO) to seize firearms from individuals who haven’t broken any laws, many Americans have already lost their Second Amendment rights.

If anti-gun politicians in Washington have their way—and with no Constitutional conservative coalition to stop them, they might—all of America will soon know the reality of living in a country without a Second Amendment . . . and without liberty.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and FacebookSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSSSubscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.