When seconds count..................

[Top Cat]

Originally Posted by kawboysix

I'm not sure if I understand the emotion behind some of the comments. Police officers may DETER crime but preventing it is nearly impossible. The punishment in leu of a crime is supposed to be the deterent. Everyone can't have their own personal police ofter by their side at all times to prevent crime from happening to them. That would not be economically possible. Crime PREVENTION is done proactively. Starts at early child hood. If someone is desperate enough and feels they have nothing to lose, then a police officer is not going to DETER them from commiting any crime. They can only PREVENT the crime from happening if they happen to be at the place in question at the time of the occurance.

That being said. As I stated before, This situation is sad as the responding officers were negligent in the performance of their duties. And they SHOULD be held accountable. Unless they can articulate a very good reason for their long response time.

I knew there were law enforcement people on this forum when I posted this and that some of them may think I was condemning all of them.
That is not my intention. My intention was to point out the total idiocy of the politicians who want to make it impossible for the law abiding citizen to protect themselves by passing draconian laws that they themselves do not have to follow.
Here in NY State the deadline for registering your so called "assault weapon" was April 14th. I wonder how many law abiding gun owners were turned into felons by refusing to obey his majesty cuomo's so called "safe act"

[Dave]

Kind of sounds like what happen to Mac.

[kawboysix]

Originally Posted by Top Cat

I knew there were law enforcement people on this forum when I posted this and that some of them may think I was condemning all of them.
That is not my intention. My intention was to point out the total idiocy of the politicians who want to make it impossible for the law abiding citizen to protect themselves by passing draconian laws that they themselves do not have to follow.
Here in NY State the deadline for registering your so called "assault weapon" was April 14th. I wonder how many law abiding gun owners were turned into felons by refusing to obey his majesty cuomo's so called "safe act"

Totally agree with you Tim. I'm on your side. I tokk no offense to your post or any other in this thread. I think its a great discussion you brought in. There was just a couple of other small comments that I was not sure where they were coming from so thought I would chime in. I hope no one else to offense from mine.

Not to get to far off subject but I totally support your right to own and carry and it has had very little effect on me. I firmly believe that the bad guy will always have one no matter what the law says, always seeking an advantage over me. You or any other good guy that wants to carry will be of no concern to me in our encounters as you probably aren't looking to use it against me anyway. It's not why you would carry and it's not what you or I are about.

Everyone should be ready to protect themselves. Hope you never have to but I pray you are ready and able too because I can't always be there.

[spoon059]

Originally Posted by Top Cat

My intention was to point out the total idiocy of the politicians who want to make it impossible for the law abiding citizen to protect themselves by passing draconian laws that they themselves do not have to follow.
Here in NY State the deadline for registering your so called "assault weapon" was April 14th. I wonder how many law abiding gun owners were turned into felons by refusing to obey his majesty cuomo's so called "safe act"

I agree with you 100%. I am a police officer. On a good day we have 5 officers in my beat to handle close to 50,000 residents plus hundreds of thousands of people driving down major highways into Washington DC and tens of thousands passing through the 2 Metro stops in my beat. Figure about 250,000 people passing through during my 10 hour shift... and 5 officers... on a good day. On a regular day we have 3 officers... for a quarter million people.
During morning rush hour it can take me 10 minutes to get from one side of my beat to the other, with lights and sirens on. If you figure it takes 1 or 2 minutes for the 911 operator to take the call, then another minute for the dispatcher to read it and dispatch it... now we are up to 13 minute response time.
That is FOREVER if someone is beating you or trying to shoot you. Try as I might, I can't be everywhere all the time. A well trained citizen with a gun (or even the threat of a well trained citizen with a gun) can often times act faster than I can.
There are basically 2 options for politicians...
#1 is to find EVERY SINGLE GUN in the US and confiscate and destroy them all. That includes unregistered guns, antique firearms, handmade guns, war trophies, etc etc.
#2 is to allow law abiding citizens to carry a concealed weapon.

#1 is expensive and impractical. This is the same government that can't even find illegal aliens. Guns are much harder to find. The cost to send federal agents to every house, vehicle, shed, storage facility, club, office building, etc would be STAGGERING. Even then, how can you ensure that you have seized every single gun? How do you prevent someone from manufacturing their own gun? How do you prevent someone from smuggling them into the country. Remember, this is the same government that can't stop the influx of illegal drugs into the country despite spending HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars on the "war on drugs" the past 30 years. Until that point in time that the government has seized every weapon, you will continue to have gun crime and just decrease the likelihood that a criminal will face armed resistance.

#2 doesn't cost taxpayers a penny. Private citizens will pay a nominal fee to submit to background testing (job created) and some type of annual or biannual training to remain competent with the weapon (another job created). More guns will be sold (more tax dollars and jobs in manufacturing guns) and more ammo will be sold (tax dollars, manufacturing jobs). Citizens are now able to protect themselves and others, but will be held liable for making stupid decisions. Criminals now have to worry about meeting armed resistance, which will likely lower the crime rate. Idiot criminals that still take that risk and lose will be killed off. Less criminals in the system, less tax dollars spent to keep them locked up.

Too bad 1/2 our politicians think option #1 is the best choice, and the other half don't have the balls to introduce effective legislation.

[cactusjack]

I don't think anyone was beating up on the cops here. I don't think we as citizens have an expectation that law enforcement is at our beck and call. Law enforcement has their hands full and morons calling 911 because KFC didn't put the potatoes and gravy in their bucket of chicken exacerbates the problem.

Simply, the police can't prevent all crimes, they can't respond to all calls in a timely manner. It is physically impossible. Citizens need to be able to protect themselves. Certain politicians would like nothing more than to take that ability away from us.

[schoeney]

I am a big supporter of LEO's. My brother retired as one.
Over the years I have learned 2 things. 1)There is always more to the story. 2) All occupations have imperfect people, some good and some not so good, including LEO's.

Which applies to this incident? Don't know...maybe both?

[davidhollinger]

I guess I am on the other side as far as law enforcement goes. I see big cities where they struggle to cover the areas and then people come to our small town and there is a literally a cop every mile and half to 2 miles. We have a population of 84000 or so and we have 83 police officers. That is one cop for every 409 people.They patrol the neighborhoods, parks, downtown and anywhere they have access to. That being said, our town has a very very low crime rate and at times too many cops can be a bad thing, like when I am late for work and need to speed a little. You dont do it here, period. No tolerance, you will get a ticket. It may be inconvenient but its also a great place to live and raise a family. I would say a response time in my neighborhood would be under 6 minutes for police fire and ambulance. We as citizens often assume we have more rights and protection than we actually do. It's easier to explain to the officer why you shot the intruder than it is for the officer to tell your family you were killed by one....

[Monkeyman]

Originally Posted by davidhollinger

We have a population of 84000 or so and we have 83 police officers. That is one cop for every 409 people.

Math was never my strong suit and, I guess, not yours, either. 83 cops for 84,000 people is one for every 1000 people (actually, 1 for every 1012 people if you want to be technical). Of course, that's with the "new math" (whatever that means).