I don't dispute that 911 dispatchers should be trained to gather as much information as possible on a call (which is a detriment to us at times, but that is for another topic), but many of them are NOT LEOs and should not be making the call on the legality of the issue. They can inform the person that openly carrying a long gun is not necessarily illegal, but unless the caller is satisfied with the answer that it may be legal they should dispatch an officer to investigate. I personally don't want a 911 operator (aka administrative person) making the decision to not send a LEO. We have seen too many cases where that has not ended well for the caller.handog wrote:The video points out a serious defect within the 911 emergency call system. The LEO in this scenario is only part of the problem. The question is, why was the LEO informed to begin with? The 911 operators should be trained to ask the caller, what is the person doing with the firearm? Is he threatening any one? is it holstered? has he fired it? If the answer is, he is just carrying it, then, no law has been broken and the LEO should not have been dispatched. The LEO, in this case was obligated at that point to see if an actual crime was being committed. The investigation could have been cut short but after admitting no law was broken chose to waste tax payer money by threatening the gun holder with arrest 16 times? I lost count, to a guy who obviously knew his rights.
Search found 1 match
Return to “Thank goodness for YouTube”
- Mon Aug 12, 2013 1:57 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Thank goodness for YouTube
- Replies: 33
- Views: 5311