'Systemic failures' in Uvalde shooting went far beyond local police: Texas House report

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

54% : It cited the school district's active shooter response plan, co-authored by Arredondo, which states the chief will "become the person in control of the efforts of all law enforcement and first responders that arrive at the scene."
54% : The question of locked doors came into play again when law enforcement arrived and assumed they couldn't break down the doors of the classroom to reach the gunman.
54% : "However, one would expect law enforcement during a briefing would be very careful to state what facts are verifiable, and which ones are not."
52% : "Hundreds of responders from numerous law enforcement agencies -- many of whom were better trained and better equipped than the school district police -- quickly arrived on the scene."
52% : It has renewed the debate over the role of police, and cast doubt on the theory embraced by many Second Amendment advocates that good guys with guns are the best defense against active shooters.
49% : Notably, the investigation is the first so far to criticize the inaction of state and federal law enforcement, while other reports and public accounts by officials have placed the blame squarely on Uvalde school police Chief Pete Arredondo, for his role as incident commander, and other local police who were among the first to arrive.
47% : The report also reveals for the first time that the overwhelming majority of responders were federal and state law enforcement: 149 were U.S. Border Patrol, and 91 were state police -- whose responsibilities include responding to "mass attacks in public places".
42% : The committee concluded that the person the Uvalde officer saw was a coach who was ushering children inside, and found no evidence that any law enforcement personnel had a chance to engage the gunman outside the school.
36% : Law enforcement failures
31% : The report criticized other officers and law enforcement agencies, many of them better trained, for failing to fill the leadership vacuum left by Arredondo's inaction.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.