New policy arms criminals with guns

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file...BAGMTB4OTM1.DTL

As the store's alarm rang, thieves made off with 32 rifles and handguns from a Fremont gun shop early Wednesday, less than two weeks after police announced they will soon ignore burglar alarms unless there was a confirmed crime.


My Commentary:

Yet one more example of the krazy kalifornia way of doing things that does not need to be exported to the rest of the nation. What good are police if they do not respond to burglar alarms when guns are being stolen by criminals?

Is stupidity infectious?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco\";p=\"67183)</div>

What good are they if they're constantly tied up responding to false alarms and are not available to prevent or address actual crimes.

I see and appreciate your point, but there is limited money and limited cops on the street and if the false alarm rate is taking them off the street they can't do their job.

I think it's a difficult dilema.
[/b][/quote]

Our local PD handles false alarms in the following manner:

You get the response to the first false alarm free.

After that, you get a bill.

It cut WAY back on false alarms.

Now, suppose that tried and true method still results in the cited rate of 90% false alarms? The PD is being reimbursed for the false calls, but they still declare that they won't respond. In the case of a gun store, they ought to respond anyway. Or any site where the goods stolen can arm criminals or terrorists.

The United States Army contracted to have quite a bit of chemical and biological weapons produced during and after WWII. For some years they have contracted to have this stuff burned in super hot furnaces. Fine well and good. Immediately after 9/11 though, the decommissioned base where all this stuff was, the army, in its great wisdom, decided that the WMD stored there needed to be guarded to prevent theft. And sent troops there to do just that. You would think that a PD would have at least that much sense too.

But, they don't.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco\";p=\"67218)</div>

I find it odd that the pay for false alarms system was not cited in the article at all. It leads me to believe that this no response system was implemented without surveying "best practices" in nationwide police department practices.

The mayor and the chief both need the ax over this boneheaded business.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman\";p=\"67260)</div>

As far as the Deseret Chemical Weapons Depot in Utah, that place has been heavily fortified for as long as I can remember. You try to climb the fence, you die. The sign on the fence says so:

Warning! Use of deadly force authorized!

However, I shudder to think of other areas where "surplus" equipment is stored and only a rusty padlock protects it.

I hate to say it, but terrorist groups have way more "common sense" than we do. There are a lot of very attractive and easy targets out there.
[/b][/quote]

I was referencing Anniston Alabama where the goods were left unguarded by the army on a closed base, known as Fort McClellan.

Post 9/11 there came to be a realization that the security of WMD"s awaiting destruction was something that needed to be attended to.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn\";p=\"67246)</div>

Thanks.

I do not understand the point of view that you have on this, do you think that the police should not respond when criminals are stealing guns to arm themselves with, or do you argree with me that this ill considered policy was pretty boneheaded?

I usually don't see personal attacks here. Pretty much everyone agrees to disagree in an agreeable manner.