The Uvalde Police Department is the World’s Best Argument Against Gun Control

Shortly after the Uvalde school shooting disaster, the Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, held a press conference praising the Uvalde Police Department (UPD) for their bravery and quick response. The next day, after the truth of what happened came out, he had to recant his praise and instead blast the UPD for their incompetence. Apparently, the police had been in the building within minutes of the gunman entering the school, but they then proceeded to do nothing for nearly an hour while the gunman murdered children in cold blood just a few feet from where the UPD’s finest were cowering. Despite initial reports that the cops were waiting for keys to locked classroom doors which were presenting an insurmountable obstacle, we now know that not only were the cops armed with weapons that could have easily forced the doors open, but the fools/cowards also never checked to see if the doors were locked!! If they had, they would have found out that the doors were not locked, and they did not need keys to enter them. So, despite screams for help, gunfire and the certain knowledge that a shooter was in action, more than dozen armed and armored cops could not be bothered to try to open the doors and save the children being murdered. Can any police department dishonor and disgrace itself worse than that? Would it be possible to imagine a scenario more craven and disgustingly incompetent? Probably not, but this is the UPD we are talking about, and they were worse than anyone could imagine.

As their craven coworkers in the school cowered in the hall and refused to open the doors behind which a crazed monster was slaughtering the children of their neighbors, UPD cops outside the school were bullying and manhandling parents who were trying to enter the school to save their children. Perhaps the UPD did not want to be shown up as the cowards they are by having unarmed parents facing up to an armed murderer while their heavily armed fellow cops huddled in the school hallway hoping the perp would run out of bullets soon. The dereliction of duty displayed by those cops was put into stark relief by the Border patrol agents who showed up and did the cops’ job for them by killing the murderer. What can be more abjectly pathetic than to allow children to be murdered mere steps away from where one stands while holding a loaded weapon and wearing body armor? One can only wish this woman had been in the Uvalde school that day.

It is tempting to dwell on the fact that the miscreant was killed by Border patrol agents who acted heroically, but even that provides cold comfort. Although they meted out the justice the felon richly deserved, the Border Patrol officers also completely failed to save the kids or their teachers. That is not their fault because it was not their jurisdiction, but it definitely highlights the truth of the old saying,“ When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.” Saving the children in that school was the first duty of the UPD, and they arrived in time to stop the shooter once he had entered the school. Yet they showed up and to their everlasting shame, they did absolutely nothing.

Horrible as that is, a truly awful and heart-breaking fact just released is so sickening that the other failures now seem like normal UPD procedure. Unbelievably, an armed UPD officer was on the scene after the shooter had been firing shots at the school and saw the perp heading toward the school with a rifle. The officer was armed with a rifle and requested permission to engage the shooter but did not do anything because no one answered his call!! No one answered his call!?!?!? Think about that. An armed officer sees a perp headed toward an elementary school carrying a loaded rifle from which the perp had already been firing rounds at said school. The officer’s first instinct and action are not to engage the murderous thug. Instead, he calls to ask permission to do the only thing that would make sense in the situation. Why? Because he works for a bureaucracy, and in a bureaucracy, policy and procedure are sacrosanct. They take precedent over everything, and that includes the lives of children and adults. Knowing that is the case and knowing that killing or wounding the perp without bureaucratic approval would leave him playing the Lone Ranger against the legal system, and likely without his own department’s support, the cop called for permission to do what he already knew was the only possible action. Why was his call not answered? Because his boss or supervisor was likely “hiding under his desk” doing what bureaucrats do best, avoiding responsibility. Tragically, a few miles away innocent children were literally hiding under their desks praying for the help that would never come because the adults entrusted with their safety had neither the courage nor the competence to make the decision that would save them.

The shooter in the Uvalde school died and good riddance. God will deal with him as needed. However, the lessons that Uvalde provided are not being disseminated as assertively as they should be. First, it proves that the police do not have the safety of the public as their top priority. Individual officers do, but you cannot count on their intentions when their department gives them conflicting instructions. Second, it proves that armed personnel in the school will always be able to react to a situation more quickly than a police force that is less familiar with the facility and the people in it. Third, it provoked the Democrats into their usual anti-gun mindlessness and proved that they will use dead children to sell policies to grieving Americans. Fourth, it shows once again that deranged killers are typically cowards and choose the most helpless victims they can find, so publicized gun free zones are danger zones. Finally, it definitively demonstrates that giving up one’s guns, and with it the right to effectively defend oneself and one’s family from armed criminals is a fool’s errand. The Founders tried to protect us from our own gullibility by explicitly giving all Americans the right to keep and bear arms. Any American who gives that right away to a government that gives protection of the likes of UPD in return is irredeemably stupid. Unfortunately, history has shown us that a UPD type response is for more likely than the response of the Border Patrol team that killed the Uvalde shooter. When it comes to self-defense another old saying apples.” If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, arm yourselves!

If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN

Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: AFNN_USA

 

22 thoughts on “The Uvalde Police Department is the World’s Best Argument Against Gun Control”

  1. Let’s say that the Uvalde Police had burst into the room in which the killer was holding and shooting children, and opened fire on the shooter. Consider what would have happened if any of the autopsies showed that a specific victim was not shot by the gunman but by a police officer’s bullet.

    As far as I have seen, no one has raised that issue, but that’s just the kind of bureaucratic worrying that would infect a police department.

    This is like the Breonna Taylor case. The police burst in, armed with a legal, no-knock warrant, and the lovely Miss Taylor’s boyfriend fired at them. The police then did, returned fire, and killed Miss Taylor. So, who was castigated? Not Miss Taylor’s boyfriend, but the police serving a valid, no-knock warrant!

    Don’t think that hasn’t had an effect on police departments everywhere.

    Reply
    • I would recommend reading the initial AAR on the shooting from ALERRT. One of the critical missed points is that officer had legal justification to engage, and for whatever reason, asked a supervisor for permission.

      They make a legitimate point that the suspect was at almost 150 yards, which is more than required for qualification in Texas, and presumedly more than what the UISDPD shot at. And their would be an issue with people in the back if he missed. However, I’ll say it, after being a cop for 25 years and a soldier for over 20, he should have taken that shot.

      I’ve made this point countless times since the Uvalde shooting, we need to wait for the full report to come out. It is beginning to come out, and I’m seeing a lot of issues. One thing I defianialy wanted to confirm was if the room had windows. Two, both very breech-able, so that was an opportunity lost.

      Read the report (about 15 actual pages), not good.
      https://alerrt.org/#

      Reply
      • On the other hand, any standard patrol carbine (M4/similar) will do 150yd all day every day, as long as the shooter does his part–they’re designed to be effective out to 600 in the hands of a basic infantryman, and over in the Rockpile the 10″ Mk 18 variant was reliably getting faceshots on Osama Groupies as far out as 300-400yd.

        Reply
        • Got you there. I’m 57, my eyes are showing it, but I’m still accurate in the 100yr range, iron sights. I don’t use scopes, I have faith in technology. when I desperately need it, it will fail.

          That being said, if this is accurate (The mayor says one of his officers did not have that shot), he should have taken the shot, no supervisor is needed. They already have a report of shots fired, the suspect is walking to the school with a rifle. At that moment, no question, the officer has fear for the life or serious bodily injury of 3rd persons. He fires, he may mill (147 yard shot) but it would at least get the suspect worrying about his ass, may cause him to take cover, giving the cops time to respond.

          Reply
          • Funny thing… we have an Eotech with addon laser module on my gal’s C8A3 (it’s set up to replicate the setup a gunboard buddy who’s a CF gunplumber carried on his AFG deployment), and C. is adamant that aside from starting with the optic on for the basics she wants to learn “the Right Way” using iron sights for heavy training then put the RDS on once she’s got the hang of those. And then me… well, my good eye is 20/400 and due to a neurology quirk I have to look at the world sideways and through polarized lenses, and my friends in blue back in my college days and I ate well because of sucker bets with attitude-problem cases about “lunch for everybody says you can’t outshoot the blind kid.” Greasy Taco Del Mar burritos never tasted so good as when they came from making some jackwagon take the Walk Of Shame across the parking lot… 😀

            Admittedly, it was a bit of a sleeper move because I’m left-handed and such things invariably arose while I was training a right-hand string…

          • Addendum: And yeah, cases like this are an exception to the Backshoot Rule. Call me harsh, but I still think it would have a beneficial “Example Effect” if these guys have to start asking themselves “would I rather go through life para- or quadriplegic?” (h/t Ziva on NCIS)

          • Absolutely! Almost all the cops on that scene were derelict in their duty, and some were even actively violating the right of parents to defend their children. It was disgusting and shameful. Every one of those cops should lose their jobs.

    • You engage in absurd hypothetical scenarios. Accidental shootings are always an inherent risk. Police officers are highly trained to accurately point and discharge their weapons. You pose your hypothetical scenario as though the better choice would be to DO NOTHING AT ALL rather than risk an errant shot. Is passive-action scenario the better of the two choices to you?

      Reply
      • You have assumed that I think this better; I merely pointed out that this is the kind of bureaucratic lesson which has been taught to the police.

        Reply
      • I do not think Dana Pico disagrees. I also think that his point about bureaucratic mindsets once again argues for each citizen retaining his right to self-defense.

        Reply
    • I am sure it has, which is just another argument for ensuring that every citizen retains the right to own a weapon with which to defend themself.

      Reply
  2. Why have we not found out how the killer got his guns?
    The gun store may have had a payment plan, but no one is going to give an unemployed 18 year old loser living with his grandmother credit for two Daniels ARs plus optics & ammo.
    Daniel ARs are expensive.
    So were talking over $4k easy.
    Was it his father, who had to approve the purchase? Maybe
    Was it the FBI?

    Reply

Leave a Comment