Should 911 dispatchers have the authority to advise a potential victim to shoot at someone breaking into their home?

Yea i think if someone comes in your home un welcome then you should be able to defend your home and family. She has a baby. she cant just flee the sceene with the baby like that. He had a knife as well. thats just askin for it. The dispatcher did the right thing by telling her to do what she has to to protect her family. the real question… an 18 year old girl with a 53 year old man??? odd but ok

No. The dispatcher said all that they can and telling her to do whatever necessary to protect herself and child….a dispatcher should not go above and beyond that. The 911 dispatcher is not there to make a visual observation. The only thing they have access to and are privy to is the person speaking to them on the other end of the phone which does not give them a visual of what is actually going on, only someones rendition of it. There are case scenarios where what one hears from an excited caller, could be misleading as to the reality of what is. More then one instance of 911 callers have called as a result of mental issues and phobias describing their reality…but not what is….only their perception of it. A 911 dispatcher can only react to the perception given instruct accordingly in the callers best interest and protection but not have the authority to declare taking a life of someone based on only the callers perception.

Ok, I think everyone’s misunderstanding the question - I said my question was loosely based, it’s not about the actual case, it’s just a general question that I thought up when I read that article.

Ok then no the dispatcher should not advise anyone to shoot. Since they are not there they dont know what is actually goin on like Marisha said.

The laws DO differ. In areas of sparce population I could see the “Make My Day” ruling as it does take law enforcement much longer to arrive to a situation. However, dense areas have police forces within a few miles that can arrive almost as fast as the call was made. Here the laws go with the latter in use of deadly force. Here the question would arise if she was registered to carry a weapon and secondly if the weapon was registered in her name. If she shot the man too close to the threshold and the result of the force threw him back out the door she could be at that point charged with murder.

awesome.

No. because they are not there and do not know for sure what is going on. In the case of the 18 year old Oklahoma Girl, the dispatcher stated her advice correctly. Thank god we are allowed to protect ourselves in our own homes. :)

In Kentucky… a dispatcher can be held criminally liable for giving the ok to use lethal force… or even for giving an inaccurate ETA for respondents. Charges will hinge upon the circumstances of the case… so dispatchers are instructed not to give this advice to callers regardless of the situation.

Anyone who holds the belief that an urban police force can sufficiently intervene on attacks should try a simple test. Buy a police scanner and listen for 911 calls to go out and measure the time it takes for first respondents to check back in with dispatch upon arrival at the scene. You will find that the average response takes about three minutes… which is an eternity when every second matters. Add another minute for central dispatch to take the call… determine the specifics and relay the call to police… and we’re up to four minutes… this is assuming the person being assailed has access to a phone during the assault. A determined assailant will have acted and long since fled the scene given a four minute window in which to do so.

A police force is a deterrent against violent crime… but it was never intended to prevent such crime… because it can’t.

HMmm usually I’d say “It depends on the state” to shoot somebody but, if the danger is evident then I believe so.