Because you can't carry a cop 24/7

This is a discussion on Because you can't carry a cop 24/7 within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Police:* Home invasion suspects attack man after police leave | LOCAL NEWS | KHOU.com | News for Houston, Texas Police: Home invasion suspects attack man ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: Because you can't carry a cop 24/7

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Because you can't carry a cop 24/7

    Police:* Home invasion suspects attack man after police leave | LOCAL NEWS | KHOU.com | News for Houston, Texas

    Police: Home invasion suspects attack man after police leave

    07:21 PM CDT on Saturday, September 19, 2009

    khou.com staff reports

    HOUSTON—A homeowner was airlifted to the hospital after police said he was viciously attacked by two suspects that were hiding in his house on Saturday. The suspects went undetected to the officer who responded to the home invasion.

    It happened in the 7400 block of Winkleman in southwest Harris County.

    Police said a father and daughter returned home after running errands and noticed their home had been broken into.

    The two went inside and placed a call to the Harris County Deputy Sheriffs.

    Police said a deputy responded to the scene and filed a report, but the family said he did not search the home.

    The family said after the deputy left, the father and daughter went inside the home to their bedrooms.

    That is when police said the father heard a sound. He discovered that two suspects were still in the home.

    The father ran to warn his daughter, but the suspects followed.

    The landlord of the home said one of the suspects hit the father in the back of the head.

    The two men then got away. Witnesses said the two suspects fled in a blue Pontiac Grand Prix.

    The father was airlifted to the hospital. His condition is unknown at this time.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,157
    Moral of the story: when you find your home has been broken into, you likely have NO idea when it was broken into. Assume it was 5mins ago, and assume the criminals are still in the house. Assume it all, 'cause if it's true then you've got a serious problem about to strike you between the eyes.

    Go armed, always.

    Anytime. Anywhere. Even in your own home 5mins after police have left and supposedly "cleared" the home.

    Thank you for posting these things. If nothing else, they're good situational reminders of how risky the real world can be. Some can be quite good examples of how taking slightly different precautions can make all the difference.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array tiwee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    1,708
    Terrible, but thank goodness the daughter apparently escaped injury or worse. I can't imagine how the police officer must feel at this point.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    I would like to hear the 9-1-1 tape of the original call and see how it was sent to the officer. This looks to me like it could be the result of a lazy call taker.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  6. #5
    DM2
    DM2 is offline
    Member Array DM2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    259
    HOUSTON—A homeowner was airlifted to the hospital after police said he was viciously attacked by two suspects that were hiding in his house on Saturday. The suspects went undetected to the officer who responded to the home invasion.

    It happened in the 7400 block of Winkleman in southwest Harris County.

    Police said a father and daughter returned home after running errands and noticed their home had been broken into.

    The two went inside and placed a call to the Harris County Deputy Sheriffs.

    Police said a deputy responded to the scene and filed a report, but the family said he did not search the home.

    The family said after the deputy left, the father and daughter went inside the home to their bedrooms.

    That is when police said the father heard a sound. He discovered that two suspects were still in the home.

    The father ran to warn his daughter, but the suspects followed.

    The landlord of the home said one of the suspects hit the father in the back of the head.

    The two men then got away. Witnesses said the two suspects fled in a blue Pontiac Grand Prix.

    The father was airlifted to the hospital. His condition is unknown at this time.
    _____________________________________________

    Why would you go into a house when it is visibly noticeable that it has been broken into and why in the world would you allow the police to leave without searching it? Just doesn't make good sense to me especially if you are not armed. Based on the article, it doesn't appear that there was an alarm system nor did the victim notice an unfamiliar car when he arrived home.

    I hope he's okay, but this guy really needs an education on situational awareness and how to protect his family. The outcome could have been so much worse. I think he is very lucky he was only hit on the head.
    DM2
    "I did the thing I feared the most. Excuse me while I cheer. Now here I stand a stronger soul and all I lost was fear." ...Anonymous

  7. #6
    DM2
    DM2 is offline
    Member Array DM2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    I would like to hear the 9-1-1 tape of the original call and see how it was sent to the officer. This looks to me like it could be the result of a lazy call taker.
    I'd like to hear the 9-1-1 tape of the call for the police to return to the address they just left.

    Would the homeowner have any recourse against the police in this instance?
    DM2
    "I did the thing I feared the most. Excuse me while I cheer. Now here I stand a stronger soul and all I lost was fear." ...Anonymous

  8. #7
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    The Myth of Police Protection

    Quote Originally Posted by DM2 View Post
    Would the homeowner have any recourse against the police in this instance?
    See: ? Police, No Obligation To Protect Concealed

    “You have no right to expect the police to protect you from crime. Incredible as it may seem, the courts have ruled that the police are not obligated to even respond to your calls for help, even in life threatening situations!. To be fair to our men in blue, I think most officers really do want to save lives and stop dangerous situations before people get hurt. But the key point to remember is that they are under no legal obligation to do so.”

    Case Histories:
    Ruth Brunell called the police on 20 different occasions to plead for protection from her husband. He was arrested only one time. One evening Mr. Brunell telephoned his wife and told her he was coming over to kill her. When she called the police, they refused her request that they come to protect her. They told her to call back when he got there. Mr. Brunell stabbed his wife to death before she could call the police to tell them that he was there. The court held that the San Jose police were not liable for ignoring Mrs. Brunell’s pleas for help. Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App. 3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975).
    [Those of you in the Silicon Valley, please note what city this happened in!]

    Consider the case of Linda Riss, in which a young woman telephoned the police and begged for help because her ex-boyfriend had repeatedly threatened “If I can’t have you no one else will have you, and when I get through with you, no-one else will want you.” The day after she had pleaded for police protection, the ex-boyfriend threw lye in her face, blinding her in one eye, severely damaging the other, and permanently scarring her features. “What makes the City’s position particularly difficult to understand,” wrote a dissenting opinion in her tort suit against the City, “is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus, by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of New York which now denies all responsibility to her.” Riss v. New York, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. 1968). [Note: Linda Riss obeyed the law, yet the law prevented her from arming herself in self-defense.]

    Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases of this type. Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate’s screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: “For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers.” The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.’s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.” Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981).

    The seminal case establishing the general rule that police have no duty under federal law to protect citizens is DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (109 S.Ct. 998, 1989). Frequently these cases are based on an alleged “special relationship” between the injured party and the police. In DeShaney the injured party was a boy who was beaten and permanently injured by his father. He claimed a special relationship existed because local officials knew he was being abused, indeed they had “specifically proclaimed by word and deed [their] intention to protect him against that danger,” but failed to remove him from his father’s custody. (”Domestic Violence — When Do Police Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect?” Special Agent Daniel L. Schofield, S.J.D., FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, January, 1991.)

    The Court in DeShaney held that no duty arose because of a “special relationship,” concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. “The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State’s knowledge of the individual’s predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf.” (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 109 S.Ct. 998 (1989) at 1006.)

    About a year later, the United States Court of Appeals interpreted DeShaney in the California case of Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department. (901 F.2d 696 9th Cir. 1990) Ms. Balistreri, beaten and harassed by her estranged husband, alleged a “special relationship” existed between her and the Pacifica Police Department, to wit, they were duty-bound to protect her because there was a restraining order against her husband. The Court of Appeals, however, concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a “special relationship” to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable.

    A citizen injured because the police failed to protect her can only sue the State or local government in federal court if one of their officials violated a federal statutory or Constitutional right, and can only win such a suit if a “special relationship” can be shown to have existed, which DeShaney and its progeny make it very difficult to do. Moreover, Zinermon v. Burch (110 S.Ct. 975, 984 1990) very likely precludes Section 1983 liability for police agencies in these types of cases if there is a potential remedy via a State tort action.

    Many states, however, have specifically precluded such claims, barring lawsuits against State or local officials for failure to protect, by enacting statutes such as California’s Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: “Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals.”

    “In other words this means the only people the police are duty-bound to protect are criminals in custody, and other persons in custody for such things as mental disorders. YOU have no recourse if the police fail to respond or fail to protect you from injury!“
    For more of the same google "The Myth of Police Protection"
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    "Golly, it looks like my home has been broken into. I think I'll take my daughter inside."

    Fail.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array grady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Near St. Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    2,837
    Quote Originally Posted by DM2 View Post
    Why would you go into a house when it is visibly noticeable that it has been broken into
    Exactly.

    His mistake could easily have cost him and his daugher their lives.

    I wonder if he learned anything by this.

  11. #10
    DM2
    DM2 is offline
    Member Array DM2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveH View Post
    See: ? Police, No Obligation To Protect Concealed

    For more of the same google "The Myth of Police Protection"

    Dave,
    Thanks for all the good info and case citations. But it begs the question, that if the police are not obligated by law to protect, why in the world would anyone be anti-2A.
    DM2
    "I did the thing I feared the most. Excuse me while I cheer. Now here I stand a stronger soul and all I lost was fear." ...Anonymous

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by DM2 View Post
    Dave,
    Thanks for all the good info and case citations. But it begs the question, that if the police are not obligated by law to protect, why in the world would anyone be anti-2A.
    Ask the -- not me!

    dave
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  13. #12
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,558
    Quote Originally Posted by DM2 View Post
    Dave,
    Thanks for all the good info and case citations. But it begs the question, that if the police are not obligated by law to protect, why in the world would anyone be anti-2A.
    This is a trick question, right?
    There is only one person who is ultimately responsible for your safety and the safety of your loved ones...YOU!

    Stay armed...be prepared...stay safe!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  14. #13
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,942
    Quote Originally Posted by DM2 View Post
    Dave,
    Thanks for all the good info and case citations. But it begs the question, that if the police are not obligated by law to protect, why in the world would anyone be anti-2A.



    Answer: Because society as a whole has been duly brainwashed over the past 30 or so years into believing that fallicy, written on the side of the squad cars "TO PROTECT AND SERVE"


    WASHINGTON DID’NT USE HIS RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH TO DEFEAT THE BRITISH, HE SHOT THEM
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    LEOs [B]do[/B] "PROTECT AND SERVE."

    Quote Originally Posted by oneshot View Post

    Answer: Because society as a whole has been duly brainwashed over the past 30 or so years into believing that fallicy, written on the side of the squad cars "TO PROTECT AND SERVE"
    LEOs do "PROTECT AND SERVE."

    However, no one individual has any right to personal protection and they and the PD can't be sued because of any failure to protect.

    The brainwashing is that the PDs are all the protection one needs.

    There is an "unpublished" civil decision (which has no precedence value) where the judge lectured the person who sued for not taking any appropriate steps to protect himself. Wish it had been appealed and upheld, to get the point some status.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array Thumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,242
    Sad event with poor judgment all around.
    ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!

    "A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
    judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
    superior skills."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Funny concealed carry with an obviously OPEN carry holster I saw today...
    By targus in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 19th, 2010, 06:09 PM