LEO and OC

[Biggdogg]

This statement got me thinking.

I agree this particular officer has no business being a police offier any more than I do. Sounds like he has his own agenda.

Having said that, after reading Joe's statement about having an opinion, it made me think;

Everyone IS entitled to an opinion, but for me, LEO's are not entitled while on the clock, as it related to this. He has no business whatsoever harrassing a LTCH holder or drawing out a traffic stop because he "doesn't like OC". He should probably shut his mouth and ask his superiors for proper training on how to deal with the law abiding public. When training is complete, he should sit behind a desk and shuffle papers.

This sounds harsh, but police officers are to be held to a MUCH higher standard. Know the basics of the laws you enforce or get out of the business. If you don't like your administration's/state's laws, then go flip burgers.

Having been a former LEO, I agree 100% that they are to be held to a higher standard.

Having worked down in the great Republic of Texas, it was mandatory that if you were pulled over on a traffic stop, that if you had a CCH, you were to provide it along with your DL...even if you didn't have your weapon in the vehicle. It was declared in all the licensing paperwork, and in the class that you had to attend to get your CCH, and it was never a problem.

I'm assuming from the context and flow of the thread that they dont' have anything like that here?

 

[jeremy]

I'm assuming from the context and flow of the thread that they dont' have anything like that here?

And you would be guessing right!

 

[Annie Oakley]

If dispatch was able to "screen" calls and only send officers on those runs that are truly a police matter, an officer's workload would be cut in half at the very least. I don't know about the B-ton area but at IMPD if a call comes in it gets dispatched. There are certain things that are broadcast on an FYI basis, but everything else is assigned to an officer. I have been sent on all kinds of runs where the police shouldn't have been called.

What he said. Also there are an awful lot of dispatchers that don't want to do more than just answer the call and send it out. Getting them to get really important details, like on a domestic having then find out if anyone is armed, is difficult. Shouldn't be this way, but it is.

 

[ATM]

What an easily remedied waste of our officers' time.

 

[Donnelly]

Denny347, I guess I might have taken your comments a little too seriously. I certainly wasn't trying to see things from your side of the fence. Didn't think my comments were harsh enough to ellicit a negative rep from Agent007, but I guess he feels that they were.

 

[Denny347]

Denny347, I guess I might have taken your comments a little too seriously. I certainly wasn't trying to see things from your side of the fence. Didn't think my comments were harsh enough to ellicit a negative rep from Agent007, but I guess he feels that they were.

No worries, never sweat the small stuff bro.

 

[Donnelly]

Peace.

 

[Dogman]

What he said. Also there are an awful lot of dispatchers that don't want to do more than just answer the call and send it out. Getting them to get really important details, like on a domestic having then find out if anyone is armed, is difficult. Shouldn't be this way, but it is.

I've known a couple of dispatchers that it was like pulling teeth to get them to just do their job. On the other hand there's a lot of very good dispatchers. I wouldn't do their job, they have to deal not only with the public but also the officers.

 

[Roadie]

While I am not an attorney, I would assume the reason that dispatchers do not screen calls is liability. First time they DON'T dispatch on a call they think isn't worth it, and someone gets hurt, lawsuits all around.

DISPATCH Magazine On-Line - Jury Convicts Detroit Dispatcher

A Detroit (Mich.) jury took about three hours to determine that dispatcher Sharon Nichols was guilty of neglect of duty when she mis-took a 5 year-old boy's 911 call for a prank, and didn't create an incident for dispatch. She will be sentenced in March. The boy called in 2006 to report his mother was unconscious and needed medical help. She was found five hours later when the boy called 911 again and a second dispatcher sent police to scold the boy. The trial judge earlier dismissed identical charges against dispatcher Terri Sutton, who handled the second call, saying she did send officers in response to the boy's call. After the trial, Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor Lora Weingarden told reporters, "I hope that it makes every 911 operator in the city and across the country think real hard before dismissing a call as a prank."

 

[HICKMAN]

Don't worry though, a cracked windshield is cause for you to be asked to give up your fourth amendment rights.

not anymore

 

[ATM]

I wasn't talking about pranks, just people reporting things that aren't illegal such as man with briefcase. (Well it could be a bomb!)

 

[Joe Williams]

I wasn't talking about pranks, just people reporting things that aren't illegal such as man with briefcase. (Well it could be a bomb!)

I've seen briefcases blown up on that basis.

 

[HICKMAN]

Oh just relax, I'm just injecting some humor. I only involve myself when the criticism of my "beloved" profession reaches a certain point.

The marching Chinese was hilarious!

 

[chasekerion4]

not anymore

Thank god.... Even something good CAN come out of this administration (even though they were already there)

Not being political, but the Supreme Court ruling is pretty sweet if you ask me. And long overdue.

 

[Denny347]

The marching Chinese was hilarious!

Thank you thank you, I aim to please.

 

[rhino]

I wasn't talking about pranks, just people reporting things that aren't illegal such as man with briefcase. (Well it could be a bomb!)

Dispatcher "screen" calls all the time. That's their job! First, they have to know what the problem is so they can send the right emergency responders.

Aren't they also trainined in CPR and similar skills so they can talk people through it in an emergency until the medics arrive?

When I've called, they always ask why I'm calling. Like, "What is the nature of your emergency?"

A lot of people make non-emergency calls. Dispatchers obviously handle them. When someone calls to tell their cat has been missing half an hour, does the dispatcher send the SWAT team, FBI, and a priest, or do they tell the person they either can't help them or refer them to someone who can?

There has to be some kind of decision making process for dispatchers, because they obviously get a lot of non-emergency calls that get handled with something less than deploying the 5th Special Forces Group.

So why can't they, when receiving "man with a gun" calls, not simply ask, "What is he doing with the gun?" If he's walking down the street with it in a holster and not bothering anyone, they could easily suggest that the person isn't breaking the law and that they should not call 911 unless it's a real emergency. It's not that hard even for a moron, and most dispatchers are intelligent people who could easily be educated in this regard.

 

[cce1302]

Dispatcher "screen" calls all the time. That's their job! First, they have to know what the problem is so they can send the right emergency responders.

Aren't they also trainined in CPR and similar skills so they can talk people through it in an emergency until the medics arrive?

When I've called, they always ask why I'm calling. Like, "What is the nature of your emergency?"

A lot of people make non-emergency calls. Dispatchers obviously handle them. When someone calls to tell their cat has been missing half an hour, does the dispatcher send the SWAT team, FBI, and a priest, or do they tell the person they either can't help them or refer them to someone who can?

There has to be some kind of decision making process for dispatchers, because they obviously get a lot of non-emergency calls that get handled with something less than deploying the 5th Special Forces Group.

So why can't they, when receiving "man with a gun" calls, not simply ask, "What is he doing with the gun?" If he's walking down the street with it in a holster and not bothering anyone, they could easily suggest that the person isn't breaking the law and that they should not call 911 unless it's a real emergency. It's not that hard even for a moron, and most dispatchers are intelligent people who could easily be educated in this regard.

rep added.
They really need to find out what the MWAG is doing.
I wouldn't be a good dispatcher.
"Hi, um, I wanted to tell you I see a man carrying a gun."
Me- "what's your point?"
"um, he's got a gun."
Me- "yeah, so do I."
"but he's wearing it in a holster."
Me- "What do you want me to do about that?"
"send the police"
Me- "The police already have guns. They don't need to see his."

 

[Annie Oakley]

The training that dispatchers get varies wildly. Some are trained to walk someone through CPR and some aren't. It depends on how much liability their departments want to take on. Yes, they determine what emergency responders need to be sent. It is amazing though how stupid a lot of the calls are and how little info the caller wants to give. Many times the caller gives the initial info and then hangs up. The dispatcher will call them back but a lot of times the person doesn't answer, normally because they have gone to hide in a closet or are out gawking.

Although most dispatchers take their jobs seriously some are just plain lazy and don't feel the need to get detailed info. I was on the road for 3 years before becoming a dispatcher. The others that I worked with had either never ridden with an officer or if they did it was because they were "badge lickers" and were more interested in getting laid by the officer than learning anything about that side of the job.

There is a terrible lack of common sense in an awful lot of people and dispatchers are no different than anyone else. Some are really good, some are really bad.

 

[jsgolfman]

rep added.
They really need to find out what the MWAG is doing.
I wouldn't be a good dispatcher.
"Hi, um, I wanted to tell you I see a man carrying a gun."
Me- "what's your point?"
"um, he's got a gun."
Me- "yeah, so do I."
"but he's wearing it in a holster."
Me- "What do you want me to do about that?"
"send the police"
Me- "The police already have guns. They don't need to see his."

I don't care who you are, that right there is funny.
repped (virtually cause I have to spread the wealth first).

 

[pig957]

I had a conversation with a Ball State Officer the other night and I asked him about his feelings on OC. He was strongly against it and told me if he saw me open carrying that he would make it tedious and whatnot (asking for my LCTH and harassing me during a stop) in order to discourage me from OCing.. Then he asked me why I carry, and I told him for the same reason he does and he was kind of bothered by that and wouldnt agree that it is ultimatly for the same reason. Anyone else have experiences like this with LEO.. Other then me not agreeing with his opinions and whatnot he was a pretty cool dude. IT was a good conversation.

Have you asked any real officers about OC?