Why Don't Cops/Swat Teams Storm the Shooter?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 21 2007, 11:57 PM) [snapback]427617[/snapback]</div>

Here it is: "Let us consider also that the Sixth Commandment tells us "Thou shall not murder." In the chapters following, God gave to Moses many of the situations which require a death penalty. God clearly has not told us never to kill. He has told us not to murder, which means we are not to take an innocent life. Consider also that the civil magistrate is to be a terror to those who practice evil. This passage does not in any way imply that the role of law enforcement is to prevent crimes or to protect individuals from criminals. The magistrate is a minister to serve as "an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (Romans 13:4).
This point is reflected in the legal doctrine of the United States. Repeatedly, courts have held that the government has no responsibility to provide individual security. One case (Bowers v. DeVito) put it this way: "there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered."

And I agree, bless them all.


And to Cho: he had ordered clips that allow for 15 (something like that) rounds each for at least one of the guns, and apparently had 17 clips on him. Seems like you could run through well over 200 bullets very quickly! One witness said that he changed clips in a matter of seconds and appeared to be well-practiced.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Apr 22 2007, 06:13 AM) [snapback]427738[/snapback]</div>

You can run through 200 rounds very quickly with a semi-auto pistol like the Glock. The only thing that keeps most people from shooting so quickly at the range is that they are concerned about accuracy, and the cost of the bullets. A spree killer has no such incentive, as seeing human fear and suffering is the reward, not getting a close grouping on the target.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Apr 22 2007, 07:13 AM) [snapback]427738[/snapback]</div>

Thank you, that section of the article fairly represents the law and the very concept I was trying to convey. Other than the “public duty†law that some states have for protection of the public at large, no state, federal or any other law can force someone to risk his own life or well being of another. Even the public duty law does not compel them to do so. There are numerous law cases in support of this concept. Are you suggesting that there should be a law which places these people under a duty to risk their lives for ours?

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 22 2007, 05:43 PM) [snapback]427943[/snapback]</div>

I'm not sure when I implied anything of the sort. What I said is that police officers, under the mantra of "protect and serve," seem to feel that they do have a responsibility to protect people, thereby frequently putting themselves in harm's way. It may not be in their mission statement (for forces that don't use such phrases of "protect and serve"), or SOP at their job, but they do. And that's why I hold them in such high regard.

And SWAT is required to. I just looked it up. Part of the job.

Do you feel that this should not be a duty of SWAT, or just police officers in general?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Apr 22 2007, 05:54 PM) [snapback]428035[/snapback]</div>

Yes, as does the Supreme Court of the United States and all other inferior courts in America.


Wildkow

p.s. could you please provide your source for SWAT members?

 

Just back on topic from a news conference today. From the time of the 911 call about Norris Hall to when the police were running up the stairs was 9 minutes. So it really doesn't sound like there was much delay on their part.

Cho Seung-Hui’s shooting rampage inside Norris Hall lasted approximately nine minutes. From the first 911 call at 9:42 a.m., it took the officers only about three minutes to arrive in the area of Norris Hall. Just five minutes later the entry team officers had reached the doors, breached the chains, and made it to the second floor.
http://www.vsp.state.va.us/news_release_04...7_VATech01.shtm