That’s fair, but then in this context, how does mitigating apply?
Is it because they made it less severe somehow? Or this is just from a pure risk assessment standpoint? As in, they mitigated a potential threat to the public?
Ok, yeah I think that last one makes sense if that’s what you’re meaning. (I think my issue may be pedantic af but this is what it looks like when I’m intentionally trying to not be a definition stickler lol)
Based on what I read, they mitigated the situation by shooting the guy outside which resulted in zero injuries inside the school, rather than doing an Uvalde where the shooter was given free reign to continue shooting.
They shot the guy far away from the school, after they identified the car… They did nothing to mitigate the school situation, that was 100% the school worker who did the mitigating by somehow not letting this person in. The mitigation happening in this story does happen, but the cops aren’t the ones doing it, and then taking credit for it is weird, is what I’m trying to get at.
Though let me go read it again, it sounds like you and I almost read different articles…
Yeah, no, the cops weren’t at the school until well after shots were fired.
In a letter to families, obtained by CNN affiliate WHBQ on Monday, the Margolin Hebrew Academy said the suspect tried to enter their school, had a “brief confrontation” with a contract worker and fired two shots from the gun he was carrying, “while retreating from this worker.”
A short time later, Memphis police officers found a vehicle matching the description and stopped the driver. The suspect got out of the truck with a gun in his hand and was shot by an officer, Crowe said.
It’s no Uvalde for sure but this is… Just weird behavior on the cop’s part, I don’t understand it tbh. It’s splitting hairs but I still don’t like them patting themselves on the back using those words because that’s not what happened…
But like my opinion on how mitigation the word should be used, ultimately, this doesn’t matter. Good job to the cops, thank goodness the kids are safe, and hopefully one day I’ll figure out how to be more chill about shit that doesn’t really matter lol
That’s fair, but then in this context, how does mitigating apply?
Is it because they made it less severe somehow? Or this is just from a pure risk assessment standpoint? As in, they mitigated a potential threat to the public?
Ok, yeah I think that last one makes sense if that’s what you’re meaning. (I think my issue may be pedantic af but this is what it looks like when I’m intentionally trying to not be a definition stickler lol)
Based on what I read, they mitigated the situation by shooting the guy outside which resulted in zero injuries inside the school, rather than doing an Uvalde where the shooter was given free reign to continue shooting.
They shot the guy far away from the school, after they identified the car… They did nothing to mitigate the school situation, that was 100% the school worker who did the mitigating by somehow not letting this person in. The mitigation happening in this story does happen, but the cops aren’t the ones doing it, and then taking credit for it is weird, is what I’m trying to get at.
Though let me go read it again, it sounds like you and I almost read different articles…
Yeah, no, the cops weren’t at the school until well after shots were fired.
It’s no Uvalde for sure but this is… Just weird behavior on the cop’s part, I don’t understand it tbh. It’s splitting hairs but I still don’t like them patting themselves on the back using those words because that’s not what happened…
But like my opinion on how mitigation the word should be used, ultimately, this doesn’t matter. Good job to the cops, thank goodness the kids are safe, and hopefully one day I’ll figure out how to be more chill about shit that doesn’t really matter lol