Several recent Opinion Line defenders of the concealed-carry law have scorned the value of calling 911, suggesting that everything would be over by the time police arrived.
But The Eagle this week had an article about two Wichita women who helped capture a burglary suspect by — yep — dialing 911. The women, who belong to a neighborhood watch group, saw a man snooping around a neighbor’s house and called the cops.
The suspect took off when police arrived and was captured shortly after.
“It was a perfect example of citizens working with police,” said an officer.
I have no problem with citizens defending their homes with guns, if necessary. But 911 can work pretty well, too.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
35 Comments
Now that all depends on where you live, and where the police happen to be at that particular time.
I’m fortunate to live in a small town with a good police force.
But I’ve had the not-so-pleasant exerience of dealing with the police from a neighboring town, and when I called for help for an accident, the dispatcher actually argued with me on the phone as to whether or not an ambulance was needed.
Yes, it definitely depends upon where you live.
But in the women’s case, the guy was just ’snooping.’ That’s a far cry from situations where violence is imminent.
But this story is more about 911 response, since homeowners have had the right to own guns to protect themselves before now.
Randy in the case you use to show how well it can work, there is a point of order. The Police were already in the area looking for these burglars. The area had been shown to be the favorite target of a serial burglar, to the point that the WPD had started to have plain clothes officer patrolling looking for the burglar. The Officers of the area were ALREADY on alert for the chance to try and catch these burglars.
If you wish to start a list of the times that 911 has faltered or failed, better have several pages ready to list them. I can start it off: When I lived in Wichita before moving to Oklahoma to take a job as a Patrol sergeant. One night my wife and I were awoke by the phone ringing at three A.M. it was the single parent from across the street. She had been awoken by someone trying to “rip” the back door off the hinges. It was her ex husband and his friend drunk and angry, yelling about how they were going to kill her and her daughter. She had only thought to call me after calling 911 three time in ten minutes asking for help.I put on my jeans, shirt, shoes and a side arm, told my wife to call 911 and tell them a plain clothes S.O. would be armed and on scene. And to describe to them in detail what I looked like and would be wearing.
There was little left of the door and had only held them out by the woman being so frightened that she managed to pull the washing machine over to keep the door from opening in. Even with all that had been reported, I stood there for another thirty minutes until the first officer arrived. The ex and his friend had left when she told them she had called her Sheriff officer friend and he lived across the street.
Randy, I am a former L.E.O. and I would be the first to defend the system in most cases. But in the above relating of how well 911 works, there is no defense. When I received a call about a prowler or break-in I could not get there fast enough for me. That was my job, I knew that in order for the system to work and order to be kept from turning to chaos. I knew I had to get there in time, but I also knew that in a good number of cases I would arrive only after the fact. In part, that is why I am in favor of private fire arm ownership. I would have rather worked the case where the woman had to shoot the Bad guy then work the case where there is a woman and child killed by the bad guy.
The best thing to do is to have a gun, make a citizens arrest and then call 911 and hold the suspect until the police arrive. I don’t carry a gun myself although it is legal here for any non felon to have one but I did come across a situation where another citizen with a gun and me held a combative shoplifter in a Walgreens store for the police after he assualted the store manager in his attempt to escape. It was good that the both of us just happened to be there.
I haven’t called the Wichita cops in years but where we live now, the police are pretty quick to show up if it is a real emergency.
I had a co-worker and good friend who was shot during shift change in West Wichita and had time to make a 911 call from his cell phone and run half a mile with a bullet in his back before eventually being shot multiple times. The police arrived in enough time to witness the perpetrator taking his own life. Shortly thereafter, WPD went to overlapping shifts, but not soon enough for him. By contrast, I witnessed an accident 1/4 mile from the place this happened at 3AM (a car struck the utility pole in the median at Central & Tyler, driver fell asleep at the wheel), and I had three marked cruisers on scene in less than one minute; I hadn’t even hung up with the dispatcher. 911 works… if there are officers available. WPD doesn’t like to pay their officers overtime, so they will hold calls to the next shift except in the direst of emergencies, and even then sometimes response is pitiful. This is not the fault of the officers, but the bureaucracy surrounding wages and hours. My friend is dead because someone didn’t want to pay time-and-a-half to the men and women of the WPD.
My advice: Avoid armed confrontation whenever possible, call 911 when practical, but be prepared for the possibility that you will be unable to do either of the above.
Yeah, people like CapnAmerica was going to go to the meetup packing his pistol. You know, to protect himself from all those hardened criminals at the Eagle and people he just can’t trust. I guess 911 never entered his mind for such situations.
And JM RepubliKhan pipes up another shot about something he knows NOTHING about.
You haven’t even been to a meetup so shuddup about it.
Sure J R, isn’t that like WSClark saying things about that Dave guy being Homer Arafat and WSClark didn’t go to the blog?
J R, are you going to tell WSClark to shut up?
What I posted is in the Meetup thread for all to read. Printed, stored and there for all to see. It’s a fact.
WS’s description for “Dave” is based on MY observations. I have seen the guy. I stand by my comments.
That is the end of my comments to you on this thread on this matter JM RepubliKhan. I realize you have nothing better to do than turn every thread into a pissing match between yourself and other posters. I am sorry for your lack of anything better to do. I will NOT feed it.
911 vs. concealed carry? Interesting..not sure how it would apply to a situation I saw last summer.
On south Main/Lincoln, I saw a man walking along, yelling profanties and brandishing a hunting knife. He was close to a school and approaching it, yelling about killing some kids. I called 911 and several officers showed up in less than 2 minutes. They disarmed and arrested him after a brief struggle.
By comparison, had I been carrying concealedd, what should I have done with an irrational person who, according to the officers, was strung out on drugs? Shoot him? Wave my gun at him, and daring him to a fight? (yes, we have all heard the jokes about people who bring knives to gun fights).
I fail to see the advantage of concealed carry vs. calling 911 in this particular situation.
“I realize you have nothing better to do than turn every thread into a pissing match between yourself and other posters. I am sorry for your lack of anything better to do. I will NOT feed it.”
Posted by: J R | March 11, 2007 at 11:14 AM
Yeah you only piss on your friends like Political Mom.
Or you’re going to try to get the WE people to boot me for posting the word Heevie.
You don’t feed it…right…
You are the hyena of this Blog, run with those who like the same rotted meat and scavenge for bones .
You pretend to be a nice guy, but everyone who reads your rants knows better. You even fool yourself.
Republikhan has himself in a fine mess, JR.
He can’t post any factual information about himself because it will link him to about a half dozen old nics that he claims he has never used.
So what’s left?
Impotently sniping against our side.
Sad.
Capn it is sad.
JM had his little cartoons and the occassional thoughtful post. He was mildly interesting. Now he isn’t even ankle biter status. He’s shooting for infamy and achieving unintentional self deprecation. And he did it to himself. Too bad.
An interesting story you have there raptor. We have SOME who would have been quick on the trigger in that instance. They would regret it.
By comparison, had I been carrying concealedd, what should I have done with an irrational person who, according to the officers, was strung out on drugs? Shoot him? Wave my gun at him, and daring him to a fight? (yes, we have all heard the jokes about people who bring knives to gun fights).I fail to see the advantage of concealed carry vs. calling 911 in this particular situation.
The best thing to do is to have a gun, make a citizens arrest and then call 911 and hold the suspect until the police arrive.
Only in the defense of life is the use or the brandishing of a fire arm a right thing and then only as the last possible response. In the case you described Raptor it would have been right to stand in front of the doorway to the school blocking enter to the knife welding person and only if he came close and refused to stop should the gun be used. The danger of a deranged person with a knife is far greater to the children then not using deadly force and waiting for the Police.
Kev never would I say confronting a criminal with a gun is the best thing to do if someone enter your home first off. Lock yourself in a smaller room if you can not get out and call the Police. But if you are not able to get out, then lock your self in a room with only one way in or out and hold the gun on that door. If the person tries the door announce that you are armed and will shoot! You have just establish the ground rules,If they still come in…shoot to kill, no warning with out hesitation, fire until they go down and stop moving.Their death then is of their choice and not yours, no court could find you guilty, there would be no question as to whether you had to kill or not. And it would be highly more defensible in court then simply standing your ground at the front room and trying to hold the person for the Police and then shooting them.
As I have posted before, Dub-Dog, your best weapon in any situation is the one between your ears. Recognizing potentially dangerous situation and avoiding them is a better choice than wading in and hoping that you can protect your with a gun. That having been said, I would think that handing over the cash would be a better choice EVEN if you were packing.
(For reich wingers – notice that I have not challenged anyone to fight.)
PS – Is Mrs. Dub-Dog doing okay?
Randy,
This is a case where the women could afford to wait for the police to show up. Their home wasn’t being invaded.
Besides, how is this supposed to bolster the Eagle’s argument against CC? You don’t need a permit in your own home. Or did someone miss the court decision against the District of Columbia?
Today’s two-faced line: “I have no problem with citizens defending their homes with guns, if necessary.” Because you are only mostly-dead/raped/beaten/stabbed/etc. out in public. However at home you can actually be dead/raped/beaten/stabbed/etc. Either people are allowed to defend their person or not.
“Either people are allowed to defend their person or not.”
I think that some in the “gun camp” severely over estimate the opposition from the rest of the populous. As a confirmed left wing wacko, I have NO opposition to guns, to you owning guns, to you earning a permit to carry. I really do not care. I have owned guns in the past and probably will again in the future.
I only want REASONABLE regulation of firearms – nothing more than what would be expected of an automobile and driver.
I only ask that gun owners avoid shooting me. If you are determined to shoot someone, I can give you a list to start with.
You have some good points, Writerdog and WSClark.For those that make a decision to buy a gun for home protection, should not, whatever you do, believe that you have security.Gun ownership is not a privilege; it is a responsibility not to abuse the rights.You have to ask yourself “Are you really prepared to handle the consequences in the confrontation of a crime, can you live with taking away another person life?”The criminal has already made his decision of what his risk is and he is counting your fears to work for him.
A police officer told me a long time ago that if you are going to shoot someone breaking in at your house, make sure that they are in the house completely, not out in the yard or hanging halfway thru a window or halfway in the doorway, if you have to; pull the body inside.If your gun has six bullets, empty out the gun into them.If you fired one or two bullets, it can look like you have control of the situation and knew what you were doing instead of being in fear of your life.If he is wounded and still alive he can turn the situation against you, making you appear to be the bad guy.He also told me that it is better to kill then to wound, because a dead man speaks no tales.
This is the shitty facts of gun ownership; it is not to be taken lightly.
I have friends who work for PD and 911. I can tell you that not a single officer or 911 dispatcher would recommend anyone making a citizens arrest under any circumstances whatsoever. Let’s be honest, the average citizen is not trained to arrest and detain someone like PD is. One never knows what a person might be carrying with them or what they may be capable of. PD is trained to deal with those situations, the average person is not. You may think it’s just a shoplifter you’re pulling a gun on, but he may have a gun with him too. Is it worth losing your life to keep Wal-Mart from losing some merchandise?
Both Wise and AN are correct. There is an old saying that “discretion is the better part of valor.”
It would be far beter to give up the cash in your wallet than to die trying to protect yourself. You can never read a criminal’s mind. Their intial thought may be to rob you, but if the situation changes, they may choose to kill.
When a criminal is in the act, his or her mindset is to get the “job” done and get away. He will view anything in his path that prevents that as being a threat. If that threat is sufficient, there is no telling what he may do.
Posted by: political_mom | March 11, 2007 at 04:22 AM
“But I’ve had the not-so-pleasant exerience of dealing with the police from a neighboring town, and when I called for help for an accident, the dispatcher actually argued with me on the phone as to whether or not an ambulance was needed.”
Well Polymom, coming from a person who totally fabricates stuff just to try to win a debate, I take anything you say with a grain of salt.
Posted by: Wiseman | March 11, 2007 at 02:50 PM
“A police officer told me a long time ago that if you are going to shoot someone breaking in at your house, make sure that they are in the house completely, not out in the yard or hanging halfway thru a window or halfway in the doorway, if you have to; pull the body inside.”
Sir, that is urban legend. If you did that, there would be a blood trail leading from the point where the guy fell and the point where you stopped dragging him and you would find yourself in jail for tamporing with evidence and manslaughter.
Posted by: Wiseman | March 11, 2007 at 02:50 PM
“If your gun has six bullets, empty out the gun into them.If you fired one or two bullets, it can look like you have control of the situation and knew what you were doing instead of being in fear of your life.”
Uh huh, and if you do empty your gun the prosecutor will ask you why you had to fire all six rounds into him when one would have stopped him and the fact that you “lost control” while behind a revolver only proves negligence and blah blah blah.
“If he is wounded and still alive he can turn the situation against you, making you appear to be the bad guy.”
Oh he will every single time. However, if you see he is still alive and shoot him again and again while he’s against the ground the forensic evidence will show that and you’ll be facing manslaughter charges.
“He also told me that it is better to kill then to wound, because a dead man speaks no tales.”
That is true, but it is best to shoot him once and make it count. Just keep in mind that any decision you make you’ll have to defend in detail.
Come on Randy, don’t destroy what credibility you still have in the CCW discussion with your comments like posted in today’s ‘Blog’ concerning the two women who dialed 911 thereby helping the police capture a burglar. Those comments have absolutely nothing to do concealed carry and protecting one’s person or loved ones from eminent violence. As good and beneficial an act as those ladies involvement was they were not in immediate physical danger, and a phone call was fine.The decision to carry a concealed weapon should be a very personal commitment to accept the serious responsibility to protect oneself and others if all else fails. It is an ethical even moral decision to accept that responsibility, and one not to be taken lightly. Without question cell phones are great, I don’t leave home without one, just in case something happens, but when things are happening ‘right-now’ and I or my family is in serious physical danger I want to place my final defense in more than the response time of he police.
Bill G, read the paragraph again –
You have admitted that it made you think about what having a gun means to have, all the trouble that it can lead to.I am only telling you what a police officer told me about having and using a gun, I think that the police officer was making a point “For those that make a decision to buy a gun for home protection, should not, whatever you do, believe that you have security.Gun ownership is not a privilege; it is a responsibility not to abuse the rights.”
You have to ask yourself “Are you really prepared to handle the consequences in the confrontation of a crime, can you live with taking away another person life?”
Good points, Wise….
I have had friends that served in Vietnam that are haunted by the knowledge that they have killed other human beings.
And that was in a war.
Some of the hardliners think that killing is like taking out the garbage.
The folks that I know are not of the same point of view.
My father flew as a tail gunner in the Pacific Theater during WW II. He does not admit to having “killed” during the war. He describes situation where it is obvious that Japanese died, but he still will not say that his shots killed anyone.
It is a small point -war is what it is.
But killing someone that has invaded your home?
A very, very tough call.
Really Bill, did you get tired of the kansas.com forum psychos? Too bad, you fit in well there with your fascist beliefs. What exactly did I fabricate now? Please be specific.
Khan, please leave me out of your posts, I”m not on your side, don’t try to take mine.
There are a lot of factors that determines when the police respond, and it’s not something I’m willing to gamble on.
Last Friday morning, I called 911 because of some drug-dealer graffiti on my garage. I was placed on hold, able to go to the bathroom, change clothes and read the entire front section of the Eagle before anyone answered.
Bill, didn’t think so.
Shut up or put up.
The problem is necessarily 911, its WPD… Getting someone to respond in certain circumstances is hard because of the lack of police…
What i don’t understand is that statistically the majority of violent crimes occur after dusk and before dawn yet that is also when there are the fewest number of cops working.
Why is it we have this overabundance of cops working when the crime is low? Why not switch it around, have more cops on at night, fewer on day??? oh wait, than they would actually be earning the money they are getting paid…
Since calling 911 in this one case worked, they should come get all of our guns now. We don’t need them since we can call 911. How stupid.
Why would the author compare guns to calling 911 in this article? What else would the women do? Would they shoot the prowler for prowling around someone else’s property. Would that be self defense? No.
If the prowler saw the women at the time they were calling 911 and started shooting at them or came to attack them, would 911 have been the best method of protection? No. The women might be dead before the police arrive, even if it takes 5 minutes for them to come.
I figure that having both options for protection is the best. You then have the option to choose the appropriate one for the situation.
First Ws the wife is doing good and may get to go back to work in two weeks.
I agree that a weapon should be the last option, give the money, run, scream at the top of your lungs. Most criminals do not want to be murders. They see it as it is their money and you are just holding it till they need it.
Burglary carries a three to five, robbery a five to ten years. A death in the commission of a Felony carries life or if they ever actually do it the death penalty! A burglar that knowingly breaks into a home that someone is home. Is a special class of criminal, far more dangerous. That and as I said let them come to you, From a legal stand point you have all your T crossed and I doted, also if you do have to shoot. At least in your own mind it was not your choice, it was theirs. It is a problem, criminals will not have a problem with someone dieing … A good person will in spite of the circumstance.
A little different topic. The news in reporting that an 84 year old , former Miss America stopped some thieves.”Venus Ramey, 82, confronted a man on her farm in south-central Kentucky last week after she saw her dog run into a storage building where thieves had previously made off with old farm equipment.”The story goes on to tell how she blocked the thieves car with her own and shot out the tires on their truck.I salute her courage, BUT…Under Kansas law she committed a “gun crime” since you can’t legally use deadly force to defend your out-buildings.In point of fact, several years ago, Kansas passed a mandatory prison sentence for crimes committed with a gun. The very first person sent to jail for a year was a rancher who did just what Miss America [1944] did, he shot at a burglars car as they were leaving. Kansas immediately revised the sentencing law, it isn’t mandatory prison time if the crime sentence would be a “manifest injustice” which means it is still a crime to shoot without legal justification, but it would be unfair to send a home-owner to jail for a year for trying to do what they have been taught by TV and newspapers what was “right.”One big advantage of the Kansas concealede carry law [this applies to all the states as far as I know] is that you are instructed in the law. In particular KS laws on crime with firearms and the self-defense lawshttp://www.geocities.com/ks2ndamendmentsociety/curreentkansasfirearmlaws.html where I have collected these.Defebd your life and others, defend your dwelling [home] but just property in the barn.Get your gun to defend yourself, stay someplace safe if you can and call 911, lety the paid professionals do the confrontation when ever possible.21-3211Chapter 21.–CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART I.–GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 32.–PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
21-3211. Use of force in defense of a person; no duty to retreat. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent it appears to such person and such person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to defend such person or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force.
(b) A person is justified in the use of deadly force under circumstances described in subsection (a) if such person reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or a third person.
(c) Nothing in this section shall require a person to retreat if such person is using force to protect such person or a third person.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3211; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 3; May 25.
21-3212Chapter 21.–CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART I.–GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 32.–PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
21-3212. Use of force in defense of dwelling; no duty to retreat. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that it appears to such person and such person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s unlawful entry into or attack upon such person’s dwelling or occupied vehicle.
(b) A person is justified in the use of deadly force to prevent or terminate unlawful entry into or attack upon any dwelling or occupied vehicle if such person reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or another.
(c) Nothing in this section shall require a person to retreat if such person is using force to protect such person’s dwelling or occupied vehicle.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3212; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 4; May 25.
21-3213Chapter 21.–CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART I.–GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 32.–PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
21-3213. Use of force in defense of property other than a dwelling. A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling is justified in the threat or use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such property. Only such degree of force or threat thereof as a reasonable man would deem necessary to prevent or terminate the interference may intentionally be used.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3213; July 1, 1970.
“A police officer told me a long time ago that if you are going to shoot someone breaking in at your house, make sure that they are in the house completely, not out in the yard or hanging halfway thru a window or halfway in the doorway, if you have to; pull the body inside.If your gun has six bullets, empty out the gun into them.If you fired one or two bullets, it can look like you have control of the situation and knew what you were doing instead of being in fear of your life.If he is wounded and still alive he can turn the situation against you, making you appear to be the bad guy.He also told me that it is better to kill then to wound, because a dead man speaks no tales.” Frm a previous post.
This advice supposedly given by a police officer will get you 15 years in prison if you follow it.
NEVER, EVER alter a crime scene after you have used force to stop a criminal. When you move the body, or keep shooting a wounded man on the ground so he can’t talk, you have shown the elements of premeditated murder.Article 32.–PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
21-3211. Use of force in defense of a person; no duty to retreat. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent it appears to such person and such person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to defend such person or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force.
(b) A person is justified in the use of deadly force under circumstances described in subsection (a) if such person reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or a third person.
(c) Nothing in this section shall require a person to retreat if such person is using force to protect such person or a third person.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3211; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 3; May 25.
21-3212Chapter 21.–CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
PART I.–GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 32.–PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
21-3212. Use of force in defense of dwelling; no duty to retreat. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that it appears to such person and such person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s unlawful entry into or attack upon such person’s dwelling or occupied vehicle.
(b) A person is justified in the use of deadly force to prevent or terminate unlawful entry into or attack upon any dwelling or occupied vehicle if such person reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or another.
(c) Nothing in this section shall require a person to retreat if such person is using force to protect such person’s dwelling or occupied vehicle.