Wednesday, July 9, 2008

When seconds count...

...the police are a half an hour away.

30-odd minutes that were probably a terror filled eternity for the 23 year old female victim, who was bound with electrical cord and threatened repeatedly with a gun.

Blaming human error, the police department's reaction can be summed up as: "Whoops, we dropped the call. Our bad."


Anonymous said...

I'm in rural Washington, and it could take up to 45 minutes to get a response from the sheriff. Fortunately, WA is a Shall Issue state, and unaccountably is not awash in blood from the shootouts the Brady Bunch keeps predicting. For some reason violent criminals are not as inclined to ply their trade here as in more civilized venues where the "citizens" are disarmed.

TW: ahssw. Not sure, but I think i've been insulted.

HollyB said...

Yeah, that's the problem. The sheeple expect the police to PROTECT them from crime.
Unfortunately, the only way they can do that is by locking up people who have already committed crimes. Those periods of confinement are variable, and except in cases of SERIOUS injury or Death... the length of confinement is not a long time.

Therefore, every adult individual is responsible for his/her OWN safety. I know, with you, Breda, I'm preachin' to the Choir. So consider this comment for your readers who are still on the fence about whether or not to arm themselves or not.

As someone who worked in the Criminal Justice field, and as the family member of LEOs...I KNOW they cannot protect the public 24/7/365. You've GOT to protect yourself. By whatever means you decide for yourself is acceptable, or be willing to be a victim. /off rant

NONE of the above is meant to excuse the PO-lice dept. for the ABYSMAL performance in this or any other case. This sort of blunder is completely unforgivable and if she sues, despite my blog last week about too many lawsuits, I would support her 100%.


Mike W. said...

What I don't understand is how so many people still have their heads in the sand. You can beat them over the head with "the police can't protect you & have no obligation to protect you" and it just won't sink in.

Anonymous said...

"I understand there's such thing as human error, but is there room for human error on an operator of 911?" asked Conner.

Speaking anonymously as a 911 dispatcher... sorry folks, but WE ARE HUMAN TOO. You want human dispatchers, you're going to get human error. Or would you prefer the not-quite-perfect voice recognition of a computer? Or maybe a menu system?

"Thank you for calling 9-1-1. If you need police, please say or press 1. If you need an ambulance, please say or press 2. If you need a fire truck, please say or press 3."
"I'm sorry, I didn't understand that. If you need police, please say or press 1. If you need an ambulance, please say or press 2. If you need a fire truck, please say or press 3."

etc etc etc...

Most of the dispatchers I know and work with understand the seriousness of the job they do. But for someone who has never worked in a field where people's lives are, quite literally, on the line, it's tough to understand the stress and coping mechanisms that are part of the industry.

I haven't heard the call, I don't know how it got lost, and without knowing that, I'm not going to pass judgment right off. I've seen too many cases of managers covering a deficiency in training or management by crucifying an employee.

Anonymous said...

Technology fails, we must accept responsibility for our own safety. Please take a self-defense course, go to your local shooting range and just say "Help, I need somebody to teach me." I guarantee you will get it. Shooters are very protective of beginners and will fall all over themselves to get you started. Try it, it will work.