Posted on

Armed Campus Security Officer Stops Maryland School Shooting


March 20,2018

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Hillsdale NJ, Just five weeks after the high school shooting that left 17 people dead in Parkland, Florida, communities across the country are still wrestling with the idea of how to make students safe in schools. Since then the public has been treated to a litany of gun control is the answer , blame the NRA , and student walk outs.

Today a student who shot and critically wounded two fellow students at a Maryland high school on Tuesday morning, died after exchanging gunfire with an armed campus security officer. Yes an armed school resource officer keep the incident from spiraling out of control .

“Our school resource officer who was stationed inside the school was alerted to the event and the shots being fired,” Cameron said. “He pursued the shooter, engaged the shooter; during that engagement he fired a round at the shooter. Simultaneously, the shooter fired a round as well.”

Interesting WCBS 880’s Sean Adams did a report yesterday on one local school Pascack Valley School District has been employing retired police officers to help secure schools. Chip Stalter a former Chief of Police in Hillsdale and Mike Niego a retired Hillsdale police captain..

Perhaps instead of playing the political blame games and organizing “student led walkouts” Ridgewood Schools should get serious about school safety and looking for real answers.

7 thoughts on “Armed Campus Security Officer Stops Maryland School Shooting

  1. “Good guy with a gun.”
    This is a great example of the “good” kind of gun violence. Warms the hearts of parents everywhere. Our local child protesters seem to be unwilling to recognize its value (“We’re not against guns. We’re against gun violence.”).
    The savior in this instance was a non-teacher–a “school resource officer”. How much different or less desirable would it be to expand the “good guy with a gun” category in a given school by allowing qualified and willing teachers inside the school to exercise a concealed carry option?
    “Arm our Teachers…Arm our Teachers…Arm our Teachers!” Isn’t this a much more proactive-sounding protest chant than the feeble and weak: “Am I Next?”
    But no, New Jersey’s teachers’ union, the NJEA, decreed within a day of the Parkland school shooting that nobody within a country mile of NJEA membership shall advance such a policy position, on pain of excommunication, or exile to Elba.
    It’s a blue state “elite society” thing. Therefore it need not square with common sense.

  2. 1. This shows that “arming teachers” (aka having armed personnel in schools) works
    2. No students were killed by the shooter because the shooter was stopped by someone onsite with a gun
    3. The incident was over before the police had a chance to arrive. Students’ lives WERE SAVED.
    and most importantly:
    4. There will be NO WALKOUT to support this success story in stopping gun violence in its tracks in our schools
    5. There will be NO positive coverage of this story since it does not advance the anti-gun (NOT THE SCHOOL SAFETY) agenda
    6. This will be reported and fund raised as a “gun violence in our schools – anti-gun” story

  3. Yes I agree this is a good move.

  4. 6:16… It wasn’t a teacher, it was an armed security guard who obviously knows his stuff, unlike the deputies in Florida who were paid peace officers and demonstrated their value to taxpayers by cowering during the slaughter so get your facts straight. Don’t imply “arming teachers”… False narrative 101. An armed PROFESSIONAL security officer at schools is a legitimate idea but it’s not free or a minimum wage job…. for those who want to arm teachers, I say make it voluntary and shield them from any personal liability if you think that’s a good idea. I don’t think parents of students would think that a good idea. For those who want an armed security officer, don’t complain about the cost.

  5. peesmith…

    “arming teachers” is a liberal talking point attempting to advance a FALSE NARRITIVE that all teachers will be issued guns as standard practice without any training and who will keep wear these weapons as side arms or keep them on their desks similar to other school supplies..
    “arming teachers” is actually ALLOWING teachers or other on-site school personnel WHO ALREADY are qualified, responsible and trained gun owners who will receive additional training as needed and/or fully training and qualifying personnel (who MAY be classroom teachers or school personnel) to become qualified to handle weapons in an emergency situation.
    You know… like the armed security guards and police officers were trained.
    You are just selling a disingenuous narrative to divert attention from the fact that armed onsite personnel IS EFFECTIVE in STOPPING SCHOOL GUN VIOLENCE AND SAVING STUDENTS LIVES.
    Your position is not helping children. It is allowing children to be murdered.
    But you also know this.

  6. In some localities there are armed, trained, teachers. Unfortunately, in the last week alone, there have been 2 accidents, one with injury, as a result of that policy>
    Few trained police officers hit their targets at a range of 10 feet in pressure situations. How would that play out in a classroom? The stats run at around 17% accuracy at 7 to 10 feet under pressure. How many accidentally killed students would that cause? If teachers are assumed to be armed in a school building, then you have placed a target on those teachers. How many school shootings are carried out by people familiar with the building? Those shooters should not be assumed to be stupid. The teacher in a classroom would be shot first. The first shot is the easiest one for the shooter since no one knows what is coming. Why not keep weapons, all weapons, out of the schools? Metal detectors and controlled entrances work. We have seen that even trained peace officers can fail under stress, just as many soldiers have done throughout history.

  7. Why was an earlier comment, not offensive in any way, that disagreed with the pro-armed personnel in schools postings removed? This is not the first time that dissenting opinions have been taken down on this site. How is that consistent with the idea of free and open exchange of ideas?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.