911 Does Not Mean Police Help

[twiss40cal]

How many of you understand that, by law, the police are NOT required to come to your aid, even to enforce a protection order? I know I didn't. The only legal requirement is for the police to investigate the crime, ie., AFTER the crime has occurred! Yikes! This was decided in a 1989 US Supreme Court case. Anyone want to expand on this? Why hasn't the NRA been screaming about this for the past 17 years?

[Frenchy]

How many of you understand that, by law, the police are NOT required to come to your aid, even to enforce a protection order? I know I didn't. The only legal requirement is for the police to investigate the crime, ie., AFTER the crime has occurred! Yikes! This was decided in a 1989 US Supreme Court case. Anyone want to expand on this? Why hasn't the NRA been screaming about this for the past 17 years?

Actually, they have http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactShe...ad.aspx?ID=191

I would have to see it written in a law book before I would believe the police is not mandated to Serve and Protect, As this is their Motto.

[Steve in PA]

Try getting your facts straight and get a better understanding of the court ruling.

The courts ruled that the police can not be held liable for a crime because they are somewhere else, ie across town on another call, tied up with a person in custody, etc.

Funny how no one sues the fire department because they didn't save your house from burning down.

As for the protection order, the police can and will arrest for violations of the order. If you are talking about the Denver (?) case where the father took the kids and ended up killing them and the mother had called the police. I have read several articles on the matter, most of which claim that the woman wasn't overly upset that the father had taken the kids. I believe there was no indication that he was going to kill them. The police don't have a crystal ball to tell them where the violator was.

[twiss40cal]

see

DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. Dep. of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989)

That ruling is why the police were not held liable for not entering the high school until 45 minutes AFTER the shooting stopped at Columbine: they are ONLY responsible for investigating the crime, not preventing it. We have to protect ourselves and should never expect help from anyone else. Paint is cheap.

This was further reinforced by a DC Circuit Court to include the Fire Department.

Any LE's officers want to comment? Am I incorrect? I don't think I am because I was 1st made aware of this by the then Chief of Police of Milwaukee several years ago and it shocked me to the core, and then made sense because they cannot be everywhere for everyone.

[Frenchy]

see

DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. Dep. of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989)

That ruling is why the police were not held liable for not entering the high school until 45 minutes AFTER the shooting stopped at Columbine: they are ONLY responsible for investigating the crime, not preventing it. We have to protect ourselves and should never expect help from anyone else. Paint is cheap.

Any person worthy of teaching the skills of rescue will tell you that you are not helpful to any one if you need to be rescued your self.
Running into a building where you know you may be confronted by an assult you will not walk away from is for superheroes, as for the LEO, they are men/woman just like you and me.

A Fireman does not “Have” to run into a building or an explosion if the chances of his coming out are next to none. A police does not "have" to run into a fire fight or any situation where his likely outcome is diminished by the elements. Even the military personnel we are so proud of do not have to go into battle if the odds are stacked against them. These are suicide situations that we see in movies that allow us to think firemen run into a blazing building, Police run through a barrage of bullets and save the blonde and even that every military can pull some one off of a bomb.

There are Elites in each of these categories; many say Heroes that have lived such situations. Many times reprimanded later, how ever lightly, for the stupidity they really had.
These men are not supermen, they are not invincible and they are not bullet proof. They have the same right to a quality of life you do, and they furthermore have to ensure the quality of not only your life, but of the %eople around them who may or may not be in direct interest to the conflict they are going to.

While driving out to a “crime” scene, a police has to weigh the consequences of having a traffic accident while racing to the scene to the actual threat. Running over a few pedestrians in order to be the knight in shining armor to one damsel in distress will generally fly over like a lead zeppelin.

The officer will not be condemned if the Lady in distress complains about him being late to her rescue if he had to drive through traffic, or even stop at an accident or emergency that is already confirmed.

Did you know? :

As a dispatcher in a private company, but this also goes to a police dispatcher, if I knowingly allow a confirmed false alarm to continue, and an accident is caused by this, I am liable for that accident? IE: If I know a fire to be a false alarm, but do not let the police and fire department know this and the fire truck hits a child on its way to the fire. I become directly responsible for the child’s safety and not the fire truck driver. Same for a police officer, If while responding to an alarm A police officer has a car accident, and it is later found I could of prevented it by calling out the false alarm if/when I knew of it, I become directly responsible for allowing this officer to believe there was a greater emergency then what was true.
As a general rule, the police/fire/ems will generally still go visit the “victim” but at a much lesser speed. Believe me, our calls are all recorder, time is split in seconds when this happens. My ability to confirm an alarm and stop the emergency vehicules from a potential accident is measured in seconds. We are all out there to save lives, property, and allow a good quality of life. The weakest link can break this chain and cause a catastrophy.
Same holds true if I “Confirm” a fire or robbery. If I say the robbery or fire or medical emergency is confirmed by a third party, I relive my self, and the Officers responding from many judicial procedures if there was a mishap on the way.

In general, the emergency services will respond very quickly to any event that is “confirmed” and this is why you will often see a police car dispatched to a fire before a fire truck ever hits the road. This is done so the fire truck that has a much greater chance of having an accident does not have to speed to a fire that has the potential of being a false alarm. While doing this, the officer in that car may also have in his Queue to go to your home to see about a domestic disturbance. But the threat to the public of having a truck racing through the streets at 40mph with a stopping distance of 200ft canceled if it can be outweighs your need to have some one knocking on your door arrested. Although it may seem silly that the officer be dispatched to a fire to confirm it rather then serve a protection order for you, think of it this way… A fire truck at any speed is a hard thing to control, in traffic; it is possible he might need to have a “path” opened up to even travel. Sending a car out is the more sensible thing to do. That car may very well be the car that was destined to go to your home.

[Siobhra]

In Washington DC a few years ago the EMT's responded to a call at a traffic accident. The victim was a women and hurt bad. As they gave treatment they discovered that she was a Transgender. She had breast and a penis.

They stopped treatment and stood around joking and insulting the victim. Almost 15 minutes went by until another unit arrived on the since to treat her. They took her to the hospital where she died. The doctors said they probably could have saved her if they had got her to the hospital even a few minutes sooner. They were found not guilty because they were not required to give help.

[twiss40cal]

I never intended nor implied that the heroic LE officers and those crazies that run INTO burning buildings that they don't own are anything other than the finest Americans ever created, right along side our brothers in arms and who are in the line of fire. Rather, all I am attempting to do, lamely, is point out that the police are never to be depended on in a time of crisis, whether natural, like Katrina, or the next terroist attack, which we all know is going to happen. Thus, we must all be fully prepared, including stockpiles of ammunition, to defend ourselves, property and neighbors when the time comes in a call to action. If 20 911 calls come in and there are only 10 LE cars available, what does a reasonable person of average intelligence rationally expect to happen? It can, does and will happen again. It is our responsibility to defend ourselves and no one elses.

[twiss40cal]

Based upon the lack of response from LEO or lawyers on my original statement, it appears that I am correct that the police are not required to come to your aid when you dial 911: they are only required to investigate the crime.

[Steve in PA]

Your twisting the ruling.

The police are required to answer any and all calls for service, depending upon the priority of said calls and the availability of an officer to respond.

Reading your statement you seem to imply that a person can call 911 and if the police don't show, oh well. Wrong. The officer(s) on duty would have hell to pay if they did not have a valid reason for not respnoding to the call. They don't pick and choose which calls they will decide to answer.

Your specific call may seem important to you, however the officers may already be on a call or on the way to a call of higher priority. Two similar calls come in at the same time, shots fired at two different houses. Sorry, but the police can't be in two places at once. So your call may be placed on the back burner because the officers are closer to the other call, etc. The court ruling was to prevent law suits based upon these types of scenarios.

So in answer to your statement, "it appears that I am correct that the police are not required to come to your aid when you dial 911"..... you are wrong.

[Steve in PA]

And as far as your Columbine comment, until this incident it was SOP to set up a perimitter and wait for assistance which is why the few responding officers didn't immediately run into the building. Since then, SOP's have changed with the first responding officers forming a team and entering the building.

Also, an officer isn't required to committ suicide when answering a call, one cop against multiple gunmen, etc.

Fireman aren't required to run into a burning building to save your hide either. All they have to do is put water on the fire.