• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Recent Seattle shooting. "We need more police"

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
http://www.kirotv.com/video/25544594/index.html

The news broadcasters emphasize about citizen's safety while downtown Seattle. Two of those interviewed claimed that they don't feel safe in the area, and mention how there is not enough police protection.

My question is, whatever happened to people taking responsibility for their own safety and security, rather than completely relying on protection from others? There was not one mention in that video of citizens arming themselves - simply increasing police presence.

"Our children grow to expect from the government what we once did for ourselves."
 

Ruby

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
1,201
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
I agree with your post. Some people have given up their independence and self reliance because they have been taught that the government will do it for them and will do it better than they can do it for themselves. People have been brainwashed and they are not even aware that it's happened.

Good luck to them with the increased police prescence that they want. Seattle PD has a hiring freeze right now and probably will have for the forseeable future.
 

Tomas

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
702
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
I used to work right near there (at 2nd and Lenora) and always carried in the area.

It's even worse now.

Most of the condo folks there have never been in a position of having to fend for themselves, or protect themselves, and they really need to be educated on that.

They truly are frightened sheep, but they don't know better. :(
 

Ruby

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
1,201
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
I used to work right near there (at 2nd and Lenora) and always carried in the area.

It's even worse now.

Most of the condo folks there have never been in a position of having to fend for themselves, or protect themselves, and they really need to be educated on that.

They truly are frightened sheep, but they don't know better. :(

How in the world did we get to this state of affairs, Tomas? I remember as a little girl how independent everyone was. I may be wrong, but people then didn't depend on the government doing everything for them and holding their hand. I know it didn't happen overnight but gradually. In the event of an emergency those people won't have a clue what to do. Sometimes I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or scream!
 

Bob Warden

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
192
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
& police don't really provide "protection!"

Police enforce laws, they don't and can't preempt crime! The required ratio of cops to groups of one or more private citizens would need to be nearly 1 to 1 to actually provide "protection." Seattle would need at least a quarter of a million police officers, and I, for one, don't see that happening (understatement smirk on face!).

There are only 2 real options to best ensure personal safety: hire a full-time competent armed body guard, or arm yourself and make yourself competent.
 

Ruby

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
1,201
Location
Renton, Washington, USA
Police enforce laws, they don't and can't preempt crime! The required ratio of cops to groups of one or more private citizens would need to be nearly 1 to 1 to actually provide "protection." Seattle would need at least a quarter of a million police officers, and I, for one, don't see that happening (understatement smirk on face!).

There are only 2 real options to best ensure personal safety: hire a full-time competent armed body guard, or arm yourself and make yourself competent.


Bob, I may be wrong, but I believe that the people in Tomas's post want more police PRESCENCE . I don't believe they were asking for protection per se, just a visible prescence to deter crime.
 

Bob Warden

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
192
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
Bob, I may be wrong, but I believe that the people in Tomas's post want more police PRESCENCE . I don't believe they were asking for protection per se, just a visible prescence to deter crime.
You're right, I kind of overstated it a bit! But even real deterence would probably require doubling or tripling the police force, which will never happen.
 

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
Workman calls B.S. on that one

Yet another problem with a DOC-supervised felon
Every time one of these characters decides to attack or kill another citizen, and particularly if that person is a civilian law enforcement officer, the fallout inevitably encompasses the firearms community. Gun prohibitionists have concluded that the way to disarm criminals is to take guns away from their law-abiding would-be victims. That’s the kind of logic that comes straight off the stable floor, if you get my drift.

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/yet-another-problem-with-a-doc-supervised-felon

Or try this:

http://tinyurl.com/246hvqf
 

Seattleman

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
23
Location
Seattle, WA
Too many people here either don't know the laws concerning firearms or firmly believe ONLY the police are allowed to possess them. Ignorance is abound in such an educated populace.
A while back, I was having a conversation with one of my cashiers about OC/CC and handguns in general. A customer chimed in saying that police had 'special certificates' that allowed them to OC. Even the cashier thought it may be legal, but not a good idea to practice. Both thought I would get my ass beat (or worse) by the police if i ever actually OCed.

Such sheep are easily herded.
 

Seattleman

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
23
Location
Seattle, WA
"Perhaps the question that should be posed to the public is this: Would you feel safer drinking coffee in a Starbucks knowing there are legally-armed citizens at the next table, or walking down the street knowing that a DOC-supervised felon with nothing to lose may be walking up behind you with an illegally-carried gun and the worst of intentions?"

That is an awesome line Dave.
Unfortunately, hoplophobic Seattleites would put their own twist on it:
"I don't want YOU carrying a gun into a Starbucks because guns should only be in the hands of trained law enforcement officers and the military. Your fantasy scenario of felons running rampant on the street is typical NRA propaganda. This shooting downtown only proves that guns and drugs are the problem."

These people will continue to retreat to their 'safe zones' not realizing that eventually they will be unable to safely leave their own home. Then what will they do when the danger is at their front door? Pray? After Obama made it clear how he feels about people who 'cling to their guns and religion'?
 

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
"Perhaps the question that should be posed to the public is this: Would you feel safer drinking coffee in a Starbucks knowing there are legally-armed citizens at the next table, or walking down the street knowing that a DOC-supervised felon with nothing to lose may be walking up behind you with an illegally-carried gun and the worst of intentions?"

That is an awesome line Dave.
Unfortunately, hoplophobic Seattleites would put their own twist on it:
"I don't want YOU carrying a gun into a Starbucks because guns should only be in the hands of trained law enforcement officers and the military. Your fantasy scenario of felons running rampant on the street is typical NRA propaganda. This shooting downtown only proves that guns and drugs are the problem."

These people will continue to retreat to their 'safe zones' not realizing that eventually they will be unable to safely leave their own home. Then what will they do when the danger is at their front door? Pray? After Obama made it clear how he feels about people who 'cling to their guns and religion'?

Just take a look at whats going on in Mexico the last few days, the bad guys are shooting up law enforcement, law enforcement are all quiting and the people are unarmed for the most part. Today the bad guys started shooting up the unarmed folks on their way to work. If the gun control folks get their way thats what will happen to us.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Let me make sure I understand this.

An American misleadia outlet ran a story about how scared everyone was "one day after" a shooting. And, these voices of the community, whose opinion is sufficiently important to air, are people whose sense of personal responsibility is so low they won't aquire the means to protect themselves. And, their morals are so low, they are willing, even desiring, that other people (cops) risk their own lives to protect them, instead.

And, the misleadia outlet heaved in a suggestive question about parole/probation supervision breaking down.

And, this is somehow all credible, just a news outlet doing its level best to genuinely fulfill its role in society.

Do I got that straight?

PS: I loved the guy from Houston.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
just a visible prescence to deter crime.

How many here remember when, in the downtown city streets of city's like Seattle, Police Officers actually walked a beat? Often in pairs but sometimes singly. When I was a kid they carried a revolver, nightstick, and handcuffs. They had to use call boxes to summon help or report problems. Today, it seems like most are now in cars, with AC on and windows up, driving through the Downtown streets on their way somewhere else. Yes, I do see some on bicycles from time to time but rarely see an officer "walking a beat".

When I was a kid growing up in a city of 35,000 people, the police officers spent lots of time walking. They knew every businessman on their beat as well as those that were causing most of the problems. Some were taken care of with a firm "you need to find somewhere else" and others got a "lump or two" to encourage them to move on. When a problem started, usually in front of a local bar, they were close enough to stop it before things got out of hand.

Will we ever see that again? Probably not. Unless cities like Seattle return to the old "beat cop" days and have officers on the street, visible, at hours most likely to have problems, it will merely be a case of them showing up to write the report. That makes it even more important that people provide for their own safety and security.


BTW, we all see the "costs" of a police officer listed when budget crisis occurs. It naturally includes the necessary equipment and training to outfit and prepare them for the street. However, a large part of that "figure" always seems to include a car. If officers were put out on the "beat" without the need for a car and related equipment, there would be a savings. According to a report from 2007 a fully equipped (with special vehicle options, radio, camera, MDT, lights) Crown Victoria was just under $40,000. That's just about 1/3 of the annual costs often quoted
 

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
According to a report from 2007 a fully equipped (with special vehicle options, radio, camera, MDT, lights) Crown Victoria was just under $40,000. That's just about 1/3 of the annual costs often quoted

Correct. I have outfitted cruisers that cost over $50k with all equipment, although the avg is probably closer to $30k....

Seattle PD LEASES its cars, the 'company' outfits and maintains them..
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Correct. I have outfitted cruisers that cost over $50k with all equipment, although the avg is probably closer to $30k....

Seattle PD LEASES its cars, the 'company' outfits and maintains them..

Lease or purchase, the car is still a cost. More officers on foot, with radios, in the Downtown area where there are crowds might just control some of the problems.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Statistically more cops = more crime. Just another way at looking at the statistics.:lol:

Seriously, Like Warden pointed out, they can not deter crime.

Here is another fact, in bad (dare I say poorer) neighborhoods, cops don't patrol as much as they do in better (wealthier) neighborhoods, and the majority of crimes happen in the bad neighborhoods.

So they cry for and support an illusion of safety because the people who actually have a voice will see more and feel safer in neighborhoods that are already statistically safer.

When will people get it, cops are mostly for clean up and taking reports after, the crime has happened. Also the majority of "solved" crimes are because civilians "solved" them, yet the police get the credit, not the person who gave the LEA the information.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Statistically more cops = more crime. Just another way at looking at the statistics.:lol:


Your statement is somewhat like saying that "Flies cause Garbage".

I am of the position that Police Officers in the right place, at the right time, CAN deter. Our problem today is that too few are spread too thin and with the wrong focus.

Maybe it's time to reassign their priorities. Rather than trying to enforce simple traffic laws like speeding and failure to stop at intersections, replace the sworn officer that costs the department in the realm of $100k per year with the technology that works 24/7 and you don't have to pay it overtime?

Re-evaluate how many "Supervisors" are needed at desks to manage forces in the field. Decide as a Society what are crimes and what are inconveniences. Send the Police out to deter crime.

Ever wonder why it takes a Commissioned Police Officer to investigate a vehicle accident? In other countries a "technician" is used to fill out the reports, draw the diagrams, and take the pictures. No gun, no fancy patrol car capable of 150MPH pursuits, just someone that can do the job.
 
Last edited:

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
Your statement is somewhat like saying that "Flies cause Garbage".

I am of the position that Police Officers in the right place, at the right time, CAN deter. Our problem today is that too few are spread too thin and with the wrong focus.

Re-evaluate how many "Supervisors" are needed at desks to manage forces in the field. Decide as a Society what are crimes and what are inconveniences. Send the Police out to deter crime.

Historically, police are very effective at deterring crime in their immediate presence/line-of-sight. Not many folks get beat/shot/stabbed/robbed right in front of a cop. That means a cop every 50 or so yards to completely deter crime. Which is probably exactly what these lefties want.

Maybe it's time to reassign their priorities. Rather than trying to enforce simple traffic laws like speeding and failure to stop at intersections, replace the sworn officer that costs the department in the realm of $100k per year with the technology that works 24/7 and you don't have to pay it overtime?

Personally I love the idea... but people (specially around here :p) bitch enough about red light cameras & photoradar, can you imagine the collective whine if this were brought up? O for the advent of the computer-driven car :banana:

Ever wonder why it takes a Commissioned Police Officer to investigate a vehicle accident? In other countries a "technician" is used to fill out the reports, draw the diagrams, and take the pictures. No gun, no fancy patrol car capable of 150MPH pursuits, just someone that can do the job.

Interesting... didn't know that, can you cite? Sounds similar to those DOT "incident response" trucks I see. Although, in this society a dedicated "technician" would probably cost just as much, if not more than a LEO. New gov't bureaucracy, new czar, new union, yadda yadda yadda :banghead: Not saying it's a bad idea intrinsically tho :p
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
Historically, police are very effective at deterring crime in their immediate presence/line-of-sight. Not many folks get beat/shot/stabbed/robbed right in front of a cop. That means a cop every 50 or so yards to completely deter crime. Which is probably exactly what these lefties want.



Personally I love the idea... but people (specially around here :p) bitch enough about red light cameras & photoradar, can you imagine the collective whine if this were brought up? O for the advent of the computer-driven car :banana:


Interesting... didn't know that, can you cite? Sounds similar to those DOT "incident response" trucks I see. Although, in this society a dedicated "technician" would probably cost just as much, if not more than a LEO. New gov't bureaucracy, new czar, new union, yadda yadda yadda :banghead: Not saying it's a bad idea intrinsically tho :p

Here is a reason I disagree with using technology in the manner prescribed. It is also the underlying reason that a photo ticket is not a crime but a 'parking' ticket.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
 

Metalhead47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
2,800
Location
South Whidbey, Washington, USA
Here is a reason I disagree with using technology in the manner prescribed. It is also the underlying reason that a photo ticket is not a crime but a 'parking' ticket.

Amendment VI


So you don't consider a photo or video of the alleged offense to be "witness testimony" of a sort, that one is confronted with? \


(oy here we go again)
 
Top