Thursday, August 22, 2019

Intense 911 Call: Homeowner Defends Himself Against Invader

Via John


This video is intended for educational purposes ONLY. Few things highlight the importance of self-defense and preparedness more than listening to an actual event go down where the intended "victim" became the VICTOR through the effective use of a firearm. The predator (the home invader) quickly became the prey. Another eye-opening reality is how long the cops took to show up. This time-lag gave the intruder ample opportunity to do whatever he wanted to do. When seconds count...cops are minutes away. Additional, it is NEVER advisable to disarm yourself in a situation like this as the 911 operator instructed the homeowner to do.

12 comments:

  1. Very bad advice from dispatch. Not just disarm in a general sense but leave weapon unattended and inaccessible to homeowner, remove from concealment, walk in close proximity to wounded bad guy, and enter into area with possibility of other bad guys on the premises. I think dispatch did a bad job of communicating to the homeowner, she did not keep homeowner apprised of disposition of the police. Saying they are on their way is insufficient. Where are they, how many are they, is the exterior now lit up (this was at night). I am not going to walk into an unlit, unknown environment towards men with guns who have information of multiple bad guys, yet unknown whereabouts, and may react violently to homeowner with cell phone in hand. Notice the dispatcher said to put cell phone on speaker and she did say, 'stay with me', ie, do not put down the phone. That is the makings of a scenario where the good guy gets shot.

    Better would be the cops clear the house, then come find the homeowner in place of concealment. Dispatch already knew where the homeowner was in his home and she would - hopefully - accurately relay that to the cops.

    Therefore, it is incumbent upon the good guy to be authoritative in directing, word for word if need be, how that information is given to the police. The police, who already are twitchy for entering a shooting with many unknowns.

    The PD, on a department level, should use this as cause to review their policy, if it is agency-wide policy, to have the good guys leave cover to come to the police who are, very likely, in their own positions of cover. And, what can the homeowner expect once he does venture outside the home? We have seen in many other instances where cross commands are given in rapid fire which makes it difficult to comply when the police are demanding full compliance. The dispatcher was taken aback when she commanded the homeowner to exit out the west side but the homeowner said he'd leave out the front door. Is the west side also the front? Is it a different door? If it were a change, was it timely and accurately communicated to on-scene? '

    I continue to harp on accuracy in communications because I know how terribly easy it is for miscommunications to occur. Apparently, the homeowner was not prepared, 'up to speed', on what is about to go down when he opens that front door. The homeowner was trying to be as malleable to the 'authorities' as he could be. Consider the ways that could put him in danger. Homeowner held an improper attitude in that he did not see himself as a 'partner' in solving this incident. Better would have him directing steps to ensure safe resolution for at least himself. That reality is everyone wants to be safe and go home.
    That means few persons are thinking more about the team than about themselves. Direct, relatable comms are probably the best way to achieve that. To that end, all participants, homeowner included, takes their share of command and control.

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was taught when in MP training in the Army is to never give up your gun. And never break cover especially when in doubt. Unknown was right about accurate comms and telling the dispatcher to stuff it. He should have insisted that the dispatcher relay his 20 and make sure the outside cops acknowledge and clear the house.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yup, it's all about "officer safety." The general public? Not so much.

    Hey, at least if another perp had been in there and killed the innocent homeowner, now unarmed, the officers could have arrested him. Gives you and your loved ones some comfort to know that, right?

    Y'all have a nice day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. While telling the homeowner/victim to disarm himself may seem like a bad idea in the UGLY REALITY that is modern America it's an imperative. The amped up roided out badgemonkeys looking to put a notch in their gun handle will shoot THE FIRST PERSON THEY SEE WITH A GUN or without their hands in the air. MANY a homeowner has successfully defended their dwelling from a criminal only to fall victim to the badgemonkeys after the fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MANY a homeowner has successfully defended their dwelling from a criminal only to fall victim to the badgemonkeys after the fact.

      Sad to say.

      Delete
  5. Would the police disarm themselves against a criminal perp--or perps? We know the answer to that! The government and it's agents tell us to do what they don't do or won't do. I guess they haven't learned the old adage: "practice what you preach." Ah-huh. --Ron W

    ReplyDelete
  6. Follow the link:
    http://knuckledraggin.com/2019/08/houston-narcotics-cop-who-instigated-a-deadly-drug-raid-is-charged-with-murder/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. https://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2019/08/houston-narcotics-cop-who-instigated.html

      Delete