Dallas: Store owner uses gun to stop four robbers, police don't arrive for 75 minutes after 911 call

The 911 call was somewhat difficult to understand, but that isn't the issue.  Whatever the reason, the point is that it took 75 minutes after the 911 call for the police to arrive.  My point isn't to blame the police dispatcher or an immigrant who may not be able to speak without an accent, but to note the benefit of letting people own guns for self protection.  The 911 call was made after the attack and shooting had already occurred so the police response time at that point was irrelevant.  

On Sunday night, four men tried to rob Pepe's Grocery on Bernal Drive in West Dallas. One of them was carrying an assault rifle, but the manager of the closed store drew first, hitting his target with two shots from his .38. The would-be robbers fled, leaving a trail of blood behind.The manager, Joe Cho, called police and waited. And waited. And waited. And finally, 20 minutes after shooting an intruder, he locked up and went home. Officers arrived at the store some 75 minutes later.
"I'm at home safe, everything, I relax right now," Cho told the Morning News' Scott Goldstein. "Then you call me about an hour something later, you want me to come back over here." . . .

Who was to blame for the delay?

The Dallas Police Department was quick to shift the blame over to Cho. A spokesman said,  “The caller had a very heavy accent and was speaking very quickly…The call taker had a very difficult time understanding the information and did not hear the caller say ‘shot’ or ‘shoot.’” . . . 

I could understand much of the call, and what I couldn't understand the first time through I figured out after listening to it a couple more times.  If the dispatcher couldn't understand whether the caller was saying "shot" or "shoot," she should have asked him to stay on the phone longer.  In any case, these calls are recorded, and the dispatcher could have presumably listened to it again if necessary.

Read More

Progress on what people should do during mass shootings

Well, at least they are now encouraging active resistance by victims and faster responses by police.  It would be even better if they left people defend themselves with guns, but this is a small start.  From The New York Times:

The speed and deadliness of recent high-profile shootings have prompted police departments to recommend fleeing, hiding or fighting in the event of a mass attack, instead of remaining passive and waiting for help. 

The shift represents a "sea change," said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, which recently held a meeting in Washington to discuss shootings like those in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo. 

The traditional advice to the public has been: "Don't get involved, call 911," Wexler said, adding that "there's a recognition in these 'active shooter' situations that there may be a need for citizens to act in a way that perhaps they haven't been trained for or equipped to deal with." 

Wexler and others noted that the change echoes a transformation in police procedures that began after the shootings at Columbine High School in 1999, when some departments began telling officers who arrived first on a scene to act immediately rather than waiting for backup. . . . . 

"We used to sit outside and set up a perimeter and wait for the SWAT team to get there," said Michael Dirden, an executive assistant chief of the Houston Police Department. "Now it's a recognition that time is of the essence, and those initial responders have to go in," he said, adding that since the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007, the department has been training first responders to move in on their own when they encounter active gunfire. 

Research on mass shootings over the past decade has bolstered the idea that people at the scene of an attack have a better chance of survival if they take an active stance rather than waiting to be rescued by the police, who in many cases cannot get there fast enough to prevent the loss of life. . . . .

Read More

New PoliceOne's Gun Policy & Law Enforcement Survey: Police and their views on gun control

The new PoliceOne.com survey of police and their views on gun control is available here (article is here).  PoliceOne has about 450,000 members when the survey was done.  Here is information on previous surveys as well as a piece that I wrote for the WSJ.com.

A full 86 percent feel that casualties would have been reduced or avoided in recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora if a legally-armed citizen was present (casualties reduced: 80 percent; avoided altogether: 60 percent). . . .
In addition, the survey asked, “On a scale of one to five — one being low and five being high — how important do you think legally-armed citizens are to reducing crime rates overall?”
Three quarters of you (75 percent) answered either four or five, with more than 50 percent answering five. . . .

I find myself in virtually complete agreement with the police in answering this survey.  I am not a big fan of open carry, but I am of concealed handguns.  I agree with them on the efficacy of gun buybacks, bans on ammunition magazines that hold more 10 rounds, national databases on gun ownership, and background checks.  

The answers to question #20 are extremely important: 77 percent of officers think that private gun ownership is either extremely or very important in reducing crime.  

Question #19 shows 91 percent support right-to-carry concealed carry with a background check.

Read More

Privatizing police and personal security

With police officers being cut in cities, people are turning to themselves to keep safe.  For example, there has been a massive increase in people carrying permitted concealed handguns (going from about 4.6 to 9.3 million between 1997 and 2012).  Because of budget cutbacks, some police are recommending that people move to protect themselves.  Yet, some have also gone in a different direction and are hiring security guards to help protect them.  

Oakland, California:  

On the streets of Oakland, budget cuts have made the beat cop a rare breed, and some of the city’s wealthy neighborhoods have turned to unarmed security guards to take their place.
After people in Oakland’s wealthy enclaves like Oakmore or Piedmont Pines head to work, security companies take over, cruising the quiet streets to ward off burglars looking to take advantage of unattended homes.
“With less law enforcement on the streets and more home crime or perception of home crime, people are wanting something to replace that need,” says Chris de Guzman, chief operating officer of First Alarm, a company that provides security to about 100 homes in Oakland. “That’s why they’re calling us and bringing companies like us aboard to provide that deterrent.” . . .

More on Oakland is provided here: 

. . . . A few weeks ago, it was reported that even Mayor Jean Quan's own Oakmore neighborhood had hired a private security firm to patrol streets after a rash of brazen daytime break-ins in the area.
However, the Oakmore neighborhood was far from the first neighborhood to hire private security. The number of Oakland communities relying on private companies to keep them safe has been snowballing in the past couple of years. . . .
"Private security is extra eyes and ears out on the street for us," said the Oakland police spokeswoman Johnna Watson. "We look at it as a partnership. Even with a couple of hundred more officers, we can't be on every block around the clock. Individuals investing private security to deter and reduce crime, that's helpful for everyone." . . . 

Here is a similar case in Houston, Texas:

A Houston-based company with offices in London and Dubai that helps protect cargo ships from pirates is now helping a southwest neighborhood protect itself against common thieves.
As Officer Leroy Bill patrols the streets for the Sharpstown Civic Association, he looks and sounds like a cop. . . .
He and his fellow officers are certainly armed like cops and even have their own K-9 units. In reality, they are security officers for Seal Security, and they’ve been contracted by the subdivision since November.
“We actually patrol districts and subdivisions like this one to give them a little more security for their money,” said James Alexander, Seal’s director of operations.
“The civic association used to contract with the constables office for a deputy to patrol the area, but now that it's gone with Seal security, it has three to four officers patrolling the streets at any given time, and at half the cost. Also cut in half: the number of monthly burglaries.
When a young mother in the neighborhood was recently stabbed multiple times in front of her children, a Seal security officer was the first to arrive on scene.
“Our guy was on duty making a routine patrol. He comes around the corner and was flagged down, sees the assault, draws his weapon and breaks it up,” said Jim Bigham, president of the Sharpstown Civic Association. . . . 

In Chicago, they will let private philanthropists pay extra money to hire additional police for parts of the city.  I would worry a lot about fungibility of money.  You add more money and the city could move then to reduce how much it is spending.

Under his plan, off-duty officers would work minimum six-hour shifts and make $30 an hour. The money would be paid by businesses, civic groups and churches at a time when city finances are stretched thin. The officers would be in full uniform and under the command of police supervisors. . . .

It will be interesting to see what happens to crime rates in these areas.

Read More

Pressure on Marines to change standards so that women can qualify for infantry?

The same thing happened with police.  First women were allowed to be patrol officers, but because so few made it through the training, the training standards for women were set differently than those for men.  The results were fairly troubling.  From the New York Times:

. . . Last fall, the first two female volunteers failed to complete the course. One, a distance runner, was dropped on the first day, known as the Combat Endurance Test. The second, a soccer player, endured for over a week before instructors pulled her out because of a stress fracture in her foot. Both are now training for non-infantry jobs. 

In Quantico, concerns run deep among some staff members that pressure to accommodate women will lead to a softening of the Marine Corps’ tough standards. Col. Todd S. Desgrosseilliers, commander of the Basic School, which includes the Infantry Officer School and the Basic Officer Course, said that would not happen. 

“They are gender-neutral now,” he said of the standards. “They aren’t hard to be hard. These are the things they need to be able to do to be infantry officers.” 

The 86-day Infantry Officer Course, which was started in 1977 by Vietnam combat veterans, is viewed with special reverence within the corps, the most infantry-centric of the armed services. Though its students tend to be top performers in basic officer training, more than one in five are dropped during the infantry course. Some are allowed to try again, but most find other jobs in the corps. . . .

UPDATE: A reader points out to me that the strength requirements for men and women in the Marines are already quite different.  The information for men is available here and for women here.
On the flexed-arm hang for women, the criteria is met as long as there is some bend in their elbows.  "Marines are authorized to drop down below the bar, however, some degree of elbow flexion must be maintained with both arms. Once a Marine's arms are fully extended or the Marine drops off the bar, the clock will stop."
Compare the requirement for men: "The intent is to execute a vertical 'dead hang' pull-up. A certain amount of inherent body movement will occur as the pull-up is executed. However, the intent is to avoid a pendulum-like motion that enhances the ability to execute the pull-up. Whipping, kicking, kipping of the body or legs, or any leg movement used to assist in the vertical progression of the pull-up is not authorized. If observed, the repetition will not count for score."
There was a time when I was in my teens and twenties that I was able to do 20 pull-ups.  Now I can do five (I suppose that I could do more if I actually worked at it regularly).  So right now at age 54, I can score a 25 for men, but I just tried it and I was able to hang for 90 seconds with bent elbows so I had no trouble scoring a 100 on the test for women.
Women can also take about 17 percent longer to run 3 miles.  Only sit ups have the same requirements for both men and women.

Read More

Police and crime in Chicago: The ups and downs in Chicago's crime rates

Remember Rahm Emanuel's campaign promise to put more police on the street?  The Huffington Post reminds us:

Rahm Emanuel campaigned for Chicago mayor on a promise of putting 1,000 more police officers on the city's streets. Now, the man Emanuel picked to be the top cop for the nation's third-largest city says the mayor has told him to slash $190 million from his budget – something people both inside and outside the department say can't be done without layoffs.
It would also likely be the largest cut for any police department in the U.S. during the nation's fiscal crisis.
"I don't see how you're going to (avoid layoffs)," said Robert Weisskopf, the president of the Chicago police lieutenants union. "They've already laid off civilian employees, laid off everybody they can and now we're to the point where watch secretaries (sworn officers) are going out to buy office supplies." . . . .

First Mayor Rahm Emanuel cuts the number of police officers.  Here is data from the FBI's UCR:

2008 13,359 

2009 13,088 

2010 12,515 

2011 12,092 

2012 11,944

The number of police detectives that solve crimes also fell from 1,100 in 2010, the year before Emanuel became mayor, to 924 in 2012 -- that is a 16 percent drop in just two years.

Even worse, under Emanuel police were moved to unfamiliar neighborhoods, losing years of knowledge in dealing with informants and other contacts.  As a great website entitled Second City Cop, which is run by a Chicago cop, explains:

The article explains in detail how Detective Areas were closed, manpower scattered across unfamiliar neighborhoods, and a complete lack of promoting detectives hamstrung the D-unit over the course of years. J-Fled is quoted along with Tommy Byrne (he loves the reorganization by the way) and numerous anonymous detectives. We haven't heard the clearance rate this year, but we're sure anything above 30% will be touted as brilliant planning by McConsolidation and his staff. . . .

Page 3 of the Chicago magazine article shows the meat of the problem, with the map and discussion clearly showing they moved where detectives are stationed further away from crime spots.

As you may recall, a few months after taking over in July 2011, he said that Emanuel had asked him to cut $190 million from the department’s $1.3 billion annual budget. So the first two years of McCarthy’s tenure have been all about doing more with less. 

The sweeping consolidation plan that he announced in March 2012 eliminated three of Chicago’s 25 police districts, closed two of its five detective headquarters (Area 4, which spanned the Near West Side and included downtown, and Area 5, which stretched from the Far Northwest Side to the Far Southwest Side), and transferred 300-plus detectives to other bureaus. The changes would save as much as $12 million, McCarthy said. 

Unfortunately, the consolidation heaped still more pressure on homicide detectives, who were already struggling to keep up with bigger caseloads. Except for those detectives working in Area South (the police territory that covers roughly the southern third of the city), the realignment (and subsequent renaming) nearly doubled the area that many of them have to cover (see “Going the Distance,” right). 

There are two big drawbacks here. One is that more detectives are working in neighborhoods they’re not yet familiar with. “All the expertise you once had is useless when you’re working on the other side of town,” says a detective from Area Central. “You might as well put me in a new city.” 

Another big drawback to consolidation is that detectives find themselves farther away from crime scenes, sometimes by a dozen or more miles. Getting to the scene fast is crucial in any homicide investigation: Witnesses may scatter or fall victim to gang intimidation. Evidence may get trampled, tampered with, or blown away. Distance continues to be a problem later, when detectives must conduct follow-up interviews or track new witnesses in other parts of town. Says a former police official: “For every hour the detective spends in the car, that’s all time lost to the investigation.” . . . .

Street officers have also informed me that reassignment of officers has paralleled these changes for detectives.  As with detectives, moving officers to less familiar areas loses valuable experience. 

Now note the incredibly low clearance rate in 2012 for these high crime areas.  The Chicago Magazine story makes it clear that while murder clearance rates fell city wide under Emanuel, the drops were particularly large in the most violent neighborhoods where the police were being moved out of.

Last year’s clearance rate free fall appears to support the detectives’ concerns: As they moved farther away from crime hot spots, the clearance rates there fell substantially. . . .

Then because of the resulting increase in crime he has to give the existing officers expensive over time.

Hundreds of Chicago police officers are hitting the streets on overtime every night in dangerous neighborhoods, the latest tactic by Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration to reduce killings in a city dogged by its homicide rate and heartbreaking stories about honor students and small children caught in the crossfire. . . .  

If it continues, the tactic would cost millions of dollars each month — putting the one initiate on pace to exceed the department's entire overtime budget by fall.

At least it isn't too surprising that more police officers mean less crime.  Emanuel kept promising to hire more police in 2012, but as shown above the opposite continued to occur.  From the Sun Times:

Under fire to reverse a surge in homicides that spiked 66 percent in March, Emanuel has promised to hire 450 officers by Dec. 31 [2012] and 500 officers next year to reach an authorized strength of 12,538 officers. 

But Shields said the city could be hard-pressed to keep pace with the number of officers walking out the door. . . .

To put it another way, with the cut in the number of police and moving them to lower crime areas and losing all that experience, the outcome was hardly surprising: "Only 132 of the 507 murder cases in the city last year were closed last year. That makes for a homicide clearance rate of 26 percent—the lowest in two decades, according to internal police records provided to Chicago."   Note that in 2010 the clearance rate was 39 percent and in 2011 it was 34 percent.

Here is the big money quote: "Last year’s department-wide consolidation and reorganization, initiated by Superintendent Garry McCarthy, has made a bad situation even worse. As one South Side detective put it: 'It’s a perfect storm of shit.'”

Additional Information:  After clearance rates plummeted and crime rates soared in 2012, Rahm Emanuel held a press conference talking about reassigning 200 officers to patrol.  The Chicago Tribune uncritically reports Emanuel's proposal on January 31, 2013:

Following a deadly start to the year that included the murder of 15-year-old band majorette Hadiya Pendleton, Mayor Rahm Emanuel and police Superintendent Garry McCarthy announced today that 200 police officers will be reassigned to patrol work. 

The officers, who had been performing administrative duties will be replaced by civilians, according to an announcement from the mayor’s office. The first officers will be reassigned this weekend and the changes are expected to be completed by the end of March, city officials said. . . .

According to Second City Cop, the Chicago FOP called this: “more smoke and mirrors” and “policing by press conference.”  Rather than actually adding 200 officers this was just going to be part of the 500 new officers that city had already promised to add to offset the 500+ retirees.  Amazingly neither the Chicago Tribune nor the Chicago Sun Times articles on Emanuel's announcement interview the FOP for their reaction. 

Read More

"Police Officers Refused Service at Buffalo Wild Wings Because of Guns"

You know that fear about guns has gone completely wacky when people are afraid of police officers carrying guns.

Eight police officers were refused service at Buffalo Wild Wings on Wednesday, apparently because they had their weapons displayed. 

The Prince William County Police officers were on duty, but were in plain clothes, said Daryl LaClair, a Prince William County resident who wrote a letter to the restaurant chain’s headquarters and started a public awareness campaign regarding the incident. . . .

Read More

Concealed carry permit holder saves Police Officer

Permit holder saves a police officer from what would certainly be serious injury if not worse.  From WAFB 9 News in Baton Rouge, Louisiana:

. . . East Baton Rouge Sheriff's spokesman Greg Phares says Officer Brian Harrision was escorting a funeral procession Friday when he pulled Temple over and wrote him a ticket for breaking into the procession.  According to Phares, that's when Temple attacked Harrison.  Police say Perry Stevens was walking outside of the Auto Zone on Greenwell Springs Road when he heard Harrison yelling for help.  Harrison was reportedly on his back with Temple on top of him.  That's when Stevens went to his car and grabbed his .45 caliber pistol.  

According to Col. Greg Phares, "[Mr. Stevens] orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer.  The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple." 

Perry Stevens fired four shots into Temple's torso.  Officer Harrison had already fired one shot into Temple's abdomen.  With Temple still struggling with the officer, Perry continued to advance toward the scuffle. 

"He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer.  Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head.  The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead." 

Police are calling the shooting death justified.  Perry Stevens has a permit to carry a concealed weapon. . . .

Read More

Here is a picture I had yesterday with Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke.

It was great to meet him (previous posts here and here). I really admire him.

Read More

Chicago police will no longer respond to 911 calls for robbery

Robbery is a serious violent crime (Fox News video is available here).  For police not to respond to reports of robberies will only lead to one prediction: there will be an increase in robberies.  In a city that makes it extremely difficult for people to use guns defensively, not having the police respond is dangerous.
There is also the James Q. Wilson notion of "broken windows."  As the city disintegrates, it may encourage other more serious crime to occur.
Note how different the response to crime here is compared to the sheriff in nearby Milwaukee after their budget cuts.   That sheriff cut this public service ad:

"I am Sheriff David Clarke, and I want to talk to you about something personal, your safety.  It is not longer a spectator sport.  I need you in the game.  But are you ready?  With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option.  You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back. But are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there.  You have a duty to protect yourself and your family.  We are partners now.  Can I count on you now?"

Read More

Attempt to get restraining order doesn't protect woman even within the court room

The link to the video is available here.

Read More

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke PSA for Milwaukee County

Here he "double downed" on CNN. Wisconsin

Read More

Wisconsin sheriff urges citizens to arm themselves

It is difficult for me to understand how recognizing that police won't immediately be there when a victim is facing a criminal is controversial.  Nor is it clear why advising that the most effective way to defend themselves when they face a criminal is with a gun is also controversial.  But surely there is a huge difference between self-defense a criminal who is attacking a person and vigilantism?  From Fox News:

A sheriff who released a radio ad urging Milwaukee-area residents to learn to handle firearms so they can defend themselves while waiting for police said Friday that law enforcement cutbacks have changed the way police can respond to crime. 

In the 30-second commercial, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke Jr. says personal safety is no longer a spectator sport. 

"I need you in the game," he says. 

"With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option," he adds. "You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back. ... Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there." 

The ad has generated sharp criticism from other area officials and anti-violence advocates. The president of the Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs' Association, Roy Felber, said it sounds like a call to vigilantism. . . .

A video of his appearance on Fox is available here.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has this discussion:

Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. set off alarm bells Friday with a radio spot some view as a call for citizens to arm themselves.
In the radio ad, Clarke tells residents personal safety isn't a spectator sport anymore, and that "I need you in the game."
"With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option," Clarke intones.
"You could beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back."
Clarke urges listeners to take a firearm safety course and handle a firearm "so you can defend yourself until we get there."
"You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We're partners now. Can I count on you?"
The spot aired at least once - during the last hour of the Mark Belling show on WISN-AM (1130) on Thursday. Clarke spokeswoman Fran McLaughlin posted it to the department website on Friday. She said she did not know where else or how often the spot would be broadcast, or how much the department spent to air it.
Clarke has served as lightning rod before, most recently when he called for schools to arm teachers after the Newtown, Conn., massacre of 20 children and six adults at an elementary school. News of the sheriff's gun ad quickly generated feedback. . . . .

Read More