ChatterBank2 mins ago
'deputy Is A Coward'
To quote Trump the deputy that did not wade into the recent high school shoot 'is at the least a disgrace at the worst a coward'
Now I have recently been watching a series of programs investigating the mass shootings in America and all the trained professionals on there stat that you should not enter as an individual but wait until there are at least 3 armed trained professionals.
So is Trump right is the deputy a coward or a disgrace or did he do the right thing?
The man has now resigned and is being slated by the President - I cannot think what that poor man is going through at them moment.
What are your thoughts please?
Now I have recently been watching a series of programs investigating the mass shootings in America and all the trained professionals on there stat that you should not enter as an individual but wait until there are at least 3 armed trained professionals.
So is Trump right is the deputy a coward or a disgrace or did he do the right thing?
The man has now resigned and is being slated by the President - I cannot think what that poor man is going through at them moment.
What are your thoughts please?
Answers
I think Trump calling the deputy a coward makes the deputy a scapegoat and takes the heat off the rights and wrongs of too many guns in America, if he was waiting for back up as trained and in 90 seconds not knowing what exactly was going on, like one or more shooters, I don't think he was a coward no more than I think teachers being trained to shoot students wielding...
19:22 Fri 23rd Feb 2018
Heroes often go outside the rule book, VE, and above and beyond the call of duty, which is why they are so esteemed, but not being one doesn't imply you are a coward.
I don't want to give the impression that I think he did the right thing because I don't know. But I equally don't know that he did the wrong thing, and if he did the wrong thing, why? Extreme fear for example can paralyse a person, mentally and physically.
I don't want to give the impression that I think he did the right thing because I don't know. But I equally don't know that he did the wrong thing, and if he did the wrong thing, why? Extreme fear for example can paralyse a person, mentally and physically.
I do not presume to judge this or any particular case, Garaman, but I'm reminded of a scene in the film Mutiny on the Bounty (Brando version). Trevor Howard as Bligh at the court-marshall. Judges' summary:
"The court considers it has obligation to add comment to its verdict... you, Captain William Bligh, stand absolved of military misdeed. Yet, officers of stainless record and seamen voluntarily all were moved to mutiny... Your methods..., show what we shall cautiously term an excess of zeal. We cannot condemn zeal. We cannot rebuke an officer who has administered discipline according to the articles of war but the articles are fallible, as any articles are bound to be. No code can cover all contingencies. We cannot put justice aboard our ships in books. Justice and decency are carried in the heart of the captain, or they be not aboard. It is for this reason that the Admiralty has always sought to appoint its officers from the ranks of gentlemen. The court regrets to note that the appointment of Captain William Bligh was, in that respect, a failure."
You could recast moral observation in the current or similar context:
"...what we shall cautiously term an excess of prudence. We cannot condemn prudence. We cannot rebuke an officer who has observed caution according to the Terms and Conditions of his contract of employent...We cannot put courage and self-sacrifice in books.....they are carried in the hearts of...in this respect we [may have] failed".
Need I go on?
"The court considers it has obligation to add comment to its verdict... you, Captain William Bligh, stand absolved of military misdeed. Yet, officers of stainless record and seamen voluntarily all were moved to mutiny... Your methods..., show what we shall cautiously term an excess of zeal. We cannot condemn zeal. We cannot rebuke an officer who has administered discipline according to the articles of war but the articles are fallible, as any articles are bound to be. No code can cover all contingencies. We cannot put justice aboard our ships in books. Justice and decency are carried in the heart of the captain, or they be not aboard. It is for this reason that the Admiralty has always sought to appoint its officers from the ranks of gentlemen. The court regrets to note that the appointment of Captain William Bligh was, in that respect, a failure."
You could recast moral observation in the current or similar context:
"...what we shall cautiously term an excess of prudence. We cannot condemn prudence. We cannot rebuke an officer who has observed caution according to the Terms and Conditions of his contract of employent...We cannot put courage and self-sacrifice in books.....they are carried in the hearts of...in this respect we [may have] failed".
Need I go on?
I can only reiterate that this situation has made a laughing stock of President Trump and the NRA's position that the response to a 'bad guy with a gun' is a 'good guy with a gun'.
That supposes that the 'good guy' doesn't panic, and is willing to risk getting shot dead while trying to shoot the 'bad guy'.
This is not a Trevor Howard, or indeed a Bruce Willis film - this is how things actually play out in real life, with no script, human reactions, and death at the end.
And President Trump thinks that armed teachers are going to behave differently than a veteran police officer? That really does show that he does not live in the real world, any more than do the NRA.
That supposes that the 'good guy' doesn't panic, and is willing to risk getting shot dead while trying to shoot the 'bad guy'.
This is not a Trevor Howard, or indeed a Bruce Willis film - this is how things actually play out in real life, with no script, human reactions, and death at the end.
And President Trump thinks that armed teachers are going to behave differently than a veteran police officer? That really does show that he does not live in the real world, any more than do the NRA.
vetuste - // There is a moral lesson in the quotation. I thought some people would be able to get it. //
There is - and I got it - but its relevance to the scenario we are discussing here is non-existent.
A fictional navy board getting its trolleys in a robble because one of it's officers betrayed the Bitish class system doesn't really find a parallel in a genuine President shifting the blame for a massacre from his own government to a single individual, simply because it will find resonance with his gun-toting supporters.
There is - and I got it - but its relevance to the scenario we are discussing here is non-existent.
A fictional navy board getting its trolleys in a robble because one of it's officers betrayed the Bitish class system doesn't really find a parallel in a genuine President shifting the blame for a massacre from his own government to a single individual, simply because it will find resonance with his gun-toting supporters.
david small, "end of " may be your way of saying you're right and this man was wrong but it's easy being a hero sitting at a keyboard. It's a different story when you are standing at a door with a gun and half a dozen bullets, hearing automatic gunfire the other side and not knowing how many people are shooting.
andy-hughes
//Unfortunately for President Trump, it's made a laughing stock out of his 'good guy with a gun' idiocy.//
You might call them 'good guys', doubt many would agree with you.
I know you refuse to accept it but there's no ifs or maybes about it, this is the very reason many Americans won't give up their guns. They have no faith in the authorities to protect them when needed.
//Unfortunately for President Trump, it's made a laughing stock out of his 'good guy with a gun' idiocy.//
You might call them 'good guys', doubt many would agree with you.
I know you refuse to accept it but there's no ifs or maybes about it, this is the very reason many Americans won't give up their guns. They have no faith in the authorities to protect them when needed.
Spicerack - // andy-hughes
//Unfortunately for President Trump, it's made a laughing stock out of his 'good guy with a gun' idiocy.//
You might call them 'good guys', doubt many would agree with you.
I know you refuse to accept it but there's no ifs or maybes about it, this is the very reason many Americans won't give up their guns. They have no faith in the authorities to protect them when needed. //
I am unsure what you think I 'refuse to accept' - ?
I don't think that the gun situation is down to the fact that Americans don't trust their police, I think it is far more primitive than that. I think American men equate bearing arms with masculinity - pure and simple.
I often quote, and entirely agree with Ben Elton's assessment of gun ownership -
You ask someone if they would like to own a gun - if they say yes, they are instantly and permanently banned from ever owning one.
And before anyone leaps in about farmers and so on and so forth, it is tongue-in-cheek, but the message is still a valid one.
//Unfortunately for President Trump, it's made a laughing stock out of his 'good guy with a gun' idiocy.//
You might call them 'good guys', doubt many would agree with you.
I know you refuse to accept it but there's no ifs or maybes about it, this is the very reason many Americans won't give up their guns. They have no faith in the authorities to protect them when needed. //
I am unsure what you think I 'refuse to accept' - ?
I don't think that the gun situation is down to the fact that Americans don't trust their police, I think it is far more primitive than that. I think American men equate bearing arms with masculinity - pure and simple.
I often quote, and entirely agree with Ben Elton's assessment of gun ownership -
You ask someone if they would like to own a gun - if they say yes, they are instantly and permanently banned from ever owning one.
And before anyone leaps in about farmers and so on and so forth, it is tongue-in-cheek, but the message is still a valid one.