the nerve of some people

[Guest slothful1]

If I was dispatched on a man with a gun call, I wouldn’t care if you are an HCP holder or an off duty cop, if I felt the need to remove you from the restaurant or disarm you that is what would happen.

The thing I'm wondering is why there is such a thing as a "man with a gun call" in the first place. Do you also get called out for "man driving a car", "man with a fishing pole" or "man filling prescriptions at the pharmacy" situations, since all of those require some kind of license or certification?

In other words, if the police receive a call that somebody has seen "a man with a gun", with no indication of a problem (brandishing, belligerent, prohibited location, etc.), why wouldn't the dispatcher just say, "Yeah, so what?"

Edited July 23, 2008 by slothful1
typo

[Rightwinger]

Come on

Everything in life is based on levels and priorities. Guns used carelessly or lawlessly can cause harm and the bad people have them just like we do. Man with a gun means its out in the public so the police must react, even if it ends with nice gun, where'd ya get it? The threat level goes up when you mention car and drunk or wreckless driving as well...its just a car, everyone has them...

Its like triage at the hospital, overnight delivery or anything else, because we can reason, we automatically prioritize things. I'm sure every guy eating a burger who just happens to have a gun scares this stupid lady but now she knows. It might save another call later in her life.

A dispatcher would be terminated for making a statement like that even if if the public were much more educated and tolerant of open carry. Any weapons call demands attention and puts the officer on alert.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

You'll be able to add roughing you up to the complaint as well because if you resist they will restrain you! That means....snick, cuffed!

I'm just saying that with the emphasis on domestic violence in law enforcement they will verify that there is or is not anything going on. They will enter your home and base it on probable cause from the call to check on the welfare of both of you. They are coming in!

As stated in lots of places, violence has settled the most disputes in history. That is power and at that point they have all the power. If you try to shut the door they are coming in. If you try to talk to them at the door and do not let them in, they ARE coming in. Do you see a pattern here? I'm just as proud of being a man and standing up for my rights as anyone, but in this case I'm going to say come on in, honey the police would like to talk to you, I'll be outside. I'll play nice and like I said, I'll be looking to see what asshat has been listening or looking in my window.

If it were a question of "do you own any guns" I'll answer I own lots of things, all personal property kept here on personal property and stand my ground and ask what's going on if it appears they want to come in, I'll wait for them to produce the warrant. There is no immediate threat at that point like there is on a domestic call. If they are coming in at that point they will inform me of the warrant at the intial conversation. I'm for helping LEO all I can to the point where they cross the line. If they say Domestic, I'm going to smile and comply because they ARE COMING IN!

I beg to differ. wearing a badge doesn't make someone some sort of all powerful overlord, iot merely says that the government has granted this man the methods to execute the duties of his job.

most LEOs understand this, and as a result they use their (limited) authority faithfully. others abuse this right and give the rest a bad name.

actually, that's not true. unreasonable search and seizure is directly in contradiction to he fourth ammendment, which reads:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

If an LEO comes to my door, he isn't coming in without a search warrant. this is nothing against the LEO, I don't let anyone in my front door unless I know them. if he insists on coming inside, let him go get a search warrant, I don't engage in criminal activities, so I have nothing to worry about.

if he does come into my home without my approval and without a warrant, he'll have a complaint filed for illegal search and seizure, criminal charges filed for the same, and a lawsuit on his hands for violating my fourth ammendment rights, not to mention the fact that any evidence gathered would be thrown out of court. my rights are non negotiable.

You guys should read the case law. The phone call, by itself, is not enough to defend a warrantless entry.

The police don't need a warrant if they can claim exigency.

The police will not enter my home without repercussion. Unfortunately, qualified immunity is incredibly easy to obtain.

[DaveTN]

In other words, if the police receive a call that somebody has seen "a man with a gun", with no indication of a problem (brandishing, belligerent, prohibited location, etc.), why wouldn't the dispatcher just say, "Yeah, so what?"

Because the dispatcher would be fired. Carrying a gun in Tennessee is a crime.

Dispatchers aren’t cops and they don’t decided what is a legitimate call and what isn’t. At least they didn’t where I was from but I hear Metro is having some problems with that.

[mdlave]

Because the dispatcher would be fired. Carrying a gun in Tennessee is a crime.

Dispatchers aren’t cops and they don’t decided what is a legitimate call and what isn’t. At least they didn’t where I was from but I hear Metro is having some problems with that.

Well, technically, driving a car (without a license), fishing (without a license) and filling prescriptions (without a license) are all crimes too, just like carrying a firearm (without a license).

The difference between the first three and the fourth seems to be public opinion. Although drivers and drugs have caused many deaths (I guess fishing hasn't caused that many....), they aren't usually surrounded by public hysteria.

It is unfortunate that "Uh oh, we better check it out" is the standard response for so many, and that it includes the hassling of a law abiding citizen.

"Mind your own business and only call us if a problem occurs or seems imminent" is the response that should have been given somewhere along the line.

[Guest canynracer]

The thing I'm wondering is why there is such a thing as a "man with a gun call" in the first place. Do you also get called out for "man driving a car", "man with a fishing pole" or "man filling prescriptions at the pharmacy" situations, since all of those require some kind of license or certification?

In other words, if the police receive a call that somebody has seen "a man with a gun", with no indication of a problem (brandishing, belligerent, prohibited location, etc.), why wouldn't the dispatcher just say, "Yeah, so what?"

To a dispatcher, it will ALL end up being a "man with a gun"

If I called them cause somebody was waiving an AK around while walking through my neighborhood= Man with a gun

Me in my yard mowing with a gun in the holster = man with a gun

point is, the caller is expecting officers, the dispatcher is not going to get on the air and tell your entire story, they summarize it, then let the officers determine the crimes.

[Guest jackdog]

good point canyracer

[Guest HexHead]

Well, at least the police will already be there and already have your info in case the owner decides to press charges.

As far as I'm concerned he'd already have thrown me out out of his establishment and I owe him nothing (especially since my food would now be stone cold while the cop wasted my time.).

As for using an experience like this to educate others, well I'm more of a "carry a grudge" kind of guy.

[Guest jcramin]

A legitimate Domestic Violence call is the kiss of death for a firearms owner.

Conviction means that your carry permit and gun rights are gone.

I smacked my wife around all the time until she got her carry permit too

JUST KIDDING......

[Fallguy]

Well, technically, driving a car (without a license), fishing (without a license) and filling prescriptions (without a license) are all crimes too, just like carrying a firearm (without a license).

The difference between the first three and the fourth seems to be public opinion. Although drivers and drugs have caused many deaths (I guess fishing hasn't caused that many....), they aren't usually surrounded by public hysteria.

Actually the biggest difference between the first 3, well really just the first 2 and the last one is...that there is no laws against fishing or driving in and of itself, there is simply a law that says you must have license to do so. There is a law against the carry of handgun 39-17-1307. It is simply a defense against that law if you have a HCP 39-17-1308.

So if you are fishing or driving you are not breaking the law automatically because you are doing so, only if you don't have license. If you are carrying a handgun, as far as anyone knows you are breaking the law, until you prove that you aren't by presenting your HCP. If you are in a state where carry or a type of carry is legal without a permit I'd agree they would have no reason to interfer in your business.

All of that said...I agree that I wish people/sheep weren't so alarmed at the sight of a handgun on a normal individual....but what is normal and how do they know?

[Guest superslacker]

You should have thrown a large rock at his head, that way he would have been conditioned to fear large rocks instead of firearms.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

wow... some of you guys are picking this domestic thing apart.

Truth is you never know what a call is really about until you get there. One time I had call for a simple vandalism report when I arrived it turn into an armed home invasion in progress. A domestic call might be another home invasion, kidnapping, or rape... who knows?

If I show up on a call where the neighbor tells me, and the 911 dispatcher, that they heard yelling or screams coming from inside the home... I ask the neighbor whom/how many people lives there. See if we have had a call from that residence before... But again if the neighbor tells me they heard yelling or screams coming from inside the home that in itself gives me reason to believe that someones life is in danger, its an emergency that gives me cause to enter the residence.

Most people really dont want me to have to jump thru all those hoops when someone is killing you, but as a police officer I have to because I might get sued by some people if I make the slightest mistake. See the officer is in a damned if they do damned if they dont... so they have to cross every T and dot every I just to save lives.... and if they dont do all that in enough time.. well here we go again, lawsuit... "That officer waited 5 minutes talking to the neighbors while..."

Now If I knock on the door, when someone answers, I ask for ID, I will then ask to speak to whomever else is in the home separately. There actually should be another officer with me so usually the partys are separated and we try and find out what happened. If nothing happened we say sorry about the misunderstanding we were responding to a call from a neighbor. If something did happen, we call for EMS if needed, we determine what happened, then find out whom was the primary aggressor and go from there.

If I show up on a scene like that and ask to speak with your spouse and you refuse then wont cooperate and wont let them come outside or let me in... then I have no choice but to come inside and investigate the call. If you try and stop me.. well, the night wont end in your favor. Its really simple as that... there isnt a "I wont let them in"... What are you going to do to stop me from coming in???

[Fallguy]

GLOCKMEISTER, I know this is sort of nit picking again, but I think the big difference (to me) between the orginal domestic scenario and yours, is that in your you say "you" spoke to the neighbor and the neighbor directly told you they heard screaming. That is different that some anonymous call or even a neighbor using the shield of the phone to report something as opposed to directly telling a person of authority. Of course if you pull up and and hear screaming etc... I wouldn't think you'd need to talk to anyone.

I think the others are worried about the neighbor who they had an argument with that morning about taking their newspaper, calling in a false report and having the police respond just to hassel them because of the earlier argument.

[Guest slothful1]

If I show up on a scene like that and ask to speak with your spouse and you refuse then wont cooperate and wont let them come outside or let me in...

I don't think anybody was suggesting this.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

GLOCKMEISTER, I know this is sort of nit picking again, but I think the big difference (to me) between the orginal domestic scenario and yours, is that in your you say "you" spoke to the neighbor and the neighbor directly told you they heard screaming. That is different that some anonymous call or even a neighbor using the shield of the phone to report something as opposed to directly telling a person of authority. Of course if you pull up and and hear screaming etc... I wouldn't think you'd need to talk to anyone.

I think the others are worried about the neighbor who they had an argument with that morning about taking their newspaper, calling in a false report and having the police respond just to hassel them because of the earlier argument.

Its cool, I see your point. But any officer that shows up should speak with the complainant first, that would be the 911 caller. On the "revenge" against my neighbor because I cant stand his dog/cat.... honestly that sort of thing happens all the time. In those instances where its obvious... the officer should talk with the neighbor and explain what filing a false police report entails.

What gets on my nerves are the "I wouldnt let him in" crowd. Those are usually the same people that always whine .... "Why didnt you do something"... ya know?

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I don't think anybody was suggesting this.

Didnt say anyone was... just pointing out that as a possibility. In my experience when a person wont let you in their house on a domestic call... they usually are hiding something... they usually wont let the spouse(usually the female) out to talk to you. Most of the time its because she's bleeding and busy in the bathroom trying to get fixed up before she comes out.

Just an FYI..

[Fallguy]

Its cool, I see your point. But any officer that shows up should speak with the complainant first, that would be the 911 caller. On the "revenge" against my neighbor because I cant stand his dog/cat.... honestly that sort of thing happens all the time. In those instances where its obvious... the officer should talk with the neighbor and explain what filing a false police report entails.

What gets on my nerves are the "I wouldnt let him in" crowd. Those are usually the same people that always whine .... "Why didnt you do something"... ya know?

I agree the officer should speak with the complainant and maybe it can be resolved quickly. Of course I remember calls from when I was dispatching of where family would call that where miles from the location of the "problem".

There are definetly difficult and unusual calls out there.

...and Yes, many times the ones that are the most difficult to deal with are the first to complain.

[Guest HexHead]

Now If I knock on the door, when someone answers, I ask for ID, I will then ask to speak to whomever else is in the home separately. There actually should be another officer with me so usually the partys are separated and we try and find out what happened. If nothing happened we say sorry about the misunderstanding we were responding to a call from a neighbor. If something did happen, we call for EMS if needed, we determine what happened, then find out whom was the primary aggressor and go from there.

If I show up on a scene like that and ask to speak with your spouse and you refuse then wont cooperate and wont let them come outside or let me in... then I have no choice but to come inside and investigate the call. If you try and stop me.. well, the night wont end in your favor. Its really simple as that... there isnt a "I wont let them in"... What are you going to do to stop me from coming in???

I never said I wouldn't let the officer speak with my wife, I would just ask her to step outside too and the officers can interview us separately outside. That's still being cooperative, but there's not reason to enter the home without a warrant.

[Guest eyebedam]

I never said I wouldn't let the officer speak with my wife, I would just ask her to step outside too and the officers can interview us separately outside. That's still being cooperative, but there's not reason to enter the home without a warrant.

Sometimes the smell of the sweet Ganja will stir the officers sense of smell at the door. What ya gonna do then.

j/k

[DaveTN]

Well, technically, driving a car (without a license), fishing (without a license) and filling prescriptions (without a license) are all crimes too, just like carrying a firearm (without a license).

The difference between the first three and the fourth seems to be public opinion.

The difference in the first three is that one isn’t a crime, and one is a felony.

It is unfortunate that "Uh oh, we better check it out" is the standard response for so many, and that it includes the hassling of a law abiding citizen.

"Mind your own business and only call us if a problem occurs or seems imminent" is the response that should have been given somewhere along the line.

Ring, Ring, Ring…

Dispatcher: What’s your emergency?

Busy Body: There is a guy out here walking around in the restaurant parking lot carrying a gun.

Dispatcher: Is he doing anything wrong?

Busy Body: No, I just have never seen anyone openly carrying a gun in public before.

Dispatcher: Well if he has a carry permit it’s legal.

Busy Body: I don’t know if he has a carry permit or not; do you want me to go ask him?

Dispatcher: No, Mind your own business and only call us if a problem occurs or seems imminent.

Busy Body: Okay.

A couple of minutes pass….

Ring, Ring, Ring…

Dispatcher: What’s your emergency?

Busy Body: The guy I just called you about just walked into the restaurant and executed 10 people.

Dispatcher: Oh my God, we have Officers responding.

Busy Body: That’s fine but the need for Officers is over, could you please send ambulances?.... a bunch of them.

There isn’t enough band width on this forum for the resulting posts of disbelief that the cops were notified of this before it happened and did not respond. The attorneys would be lining up to get their piece of the city.

[mdlave]

The difference in the first three is that one isn’t a crime, and one is a felony.

Ring, Ring, Ring…

Dispatcher: What’s your emergency?

Busy Body: There is a guy out here walking around in the restaurant parking lot carrying a gun.

Dispatcher: Is he doing anything wrong?

Busy Body: No, I just have never seen anyone openly carrying a gun in public before.

Dispatcher: Well if he has a carry permit it’s legal.

Busy Body: I don’t know if he has a carry permit or not; do you want me to go ask him?

Dispatcher: No, Mind your own business and only call us if a problem occurs or seems imminent.

Busy Body: Okay.

A couple of minutes pass….

Ring, Ring, Ring…

Dispatcher: What’s your emergency?

Busy Body: The guy I just called you about just walked into the restaurant and executed 10 people.

Dispatcher: Oh my God, we have Officers responding.

Busy Body: That’s fine but the need for Officers is over, could you please send ambulances?.... a bunch of them.

There isn’t enough band width on this forum for the resulting posts of disbelief that the cops were notified of this before it happened and did not respond. The attorneys would be lining up to get their piece of the city.

Wait, is this the same restaurant we've been discussing? Too bad the management wasn't more open to having HCP holders patronize his establishment. It probably would've saved lives.

I mean, as long as we're discussing this in hypotheticals.........

[Luckyforward]

Well said

[Guest HexHead]

If the idiot restaurant owner is going to call the cops every time some soccer mom thinks "that guy in the corner minding his own business might have a gun", he needs to do us all a favor and just "post" his restaurant.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

If I show up on a scene like that and ask to speak with your spouse and you refuse then wont cooperate and wont let them come outside or let me in... then I have no choice but to come inside and investigate the call. If you try and stop me.. well, the night wont end in your favor. Its really simple as that... there isnt a "I wont let them in"... What are you going to do to stop me from coming in???

I never said that my wife "couldn't" go outside and talk with the police, I just said that weren't coming into my house without a search warrant.

What gets on my nerves are the "I wouldnt let him in" crowd. Those are usually the same people that always whine .... "Why didnt you do something"... ya know?

actually, I would be the last person to whine about LEO inaction. in a situation where I need a cop, I can rest assured that he'll be late in responding. that statement isn't meant to reflect negatively on the police, just a statement of facts. the police usualy arrive on the scene in time to put up the yellow tape and begin their investigation, but this is to be expected. if someone is in your home, they can normally kill you in what 1 minute? 2? while LEO response time is 4 minutes? 10? that's why I personally believe that all of these "why didn't the cops do anything" people should man up and take their own safety into their own hands. buy a home defense weapon and train with it until they are proficient in it's use. that way, god forbid, the day ever comes, it won't be their bodies getting thrown into the back of an ambulance.

In my experience when a person wont let you in their house on a domestic call... they usually are hiding something...

actually, my reluctance stems from the fact that I don't want someone rummaging through my house under cover of "investigation" even after they see that there is nothing wrong going on.

a few years ago, back when I was single. I let my brother stay with me for a couple of weeks. one day, I was woke up by three men rummaging around in my apartment. when I asked who they were, they only responded "police" turns out my brother had been writing bad checks, and when he was caught, they wanted to search his place of residence, and he brought them to my house. while I understand that, when I asked for a search warrant, they simply told me that they "didn't need one" ok, I could let that one slide, since technically, my brother had let them in. then they began taking my stuff. I explained to them that what they were taking were my belongings, and they simply responded with the old "probable cause" they told me that if the stuff wasn't stolen, I could pick it up at the precinct. they refused to give me names, or badge numbers as well.

when I called the precinct, you can imagine that I looked like an idiot asking about my stuff, without knowing the cops names, or badge numbers, or having any way to prove that the stuff was mine. I even gave them my brothers name and told them that they could find the info that way, but I was told that "that case is currently under investigation"

this is one of several stories that turned me against blindly trusting the police. they come through my door they WILL have a warrant, and no amount of "really bad night" threats, or macho "If we want in, were coming in" B.S. is going to change the fact that yes, they may come in, but they will be held accountable in a court of law for their actions.

[molonlabetn]

I'd have not believed their word that they were police without more substantial identification.