Neighborhood watch story follow-up

M&P Freak · #1 10-05-2012, 08:19 PM

A little less than two months ago I started a thread here about the locals starting armed citizen patrols to reduce crime in the area. See it here: Neighborhood watch on steroids

My concern at the time was about someone getting in legal trouble if someone else developed a chronic case of lead poisoning. Knowing the mood of the local boys, I was sure it was going to happen.

I am happy to say I was wrong. In this week's local newspaper is a story indicating the idea of armed volunteers is catching on. According to the story "The amount of (criminal) activity in O'Brien the past two months has dropped tremendously - it's almost unbelievable. We haven't had very many confrontations because people are laying low. The word is out."

At least two other communities are organizing "community patrol groups" in the surrounding area. I cannot find anything about this on the interwebs, so I cannot provide a link. The local paper is very small and is not available online.

Chalk up another example of more guns equals less crime.

jlrhiner · #2 10-05-2012, 09:20 PM

A certain group of People always seem to think that when a gun is in the equation, folks become instantly stupid.

If you are an honest, law abiding citizen, you will usually stay that way when you carry a gun. I'm glad it's working out.

photoman · #3 10-05-2012, 10:20 PM

One word: Zimmerman

jaykellogg · #4 10-06-2012, 08:22 AM

Slightly more than thirty years ago I knew a man who lived on the east side of Pittsburgh, PA who joined a citizens watch group. The fellow was a ham radio operator (this was before cell phones). When they saw illegal activity they would alert base and base would call the police. They had good relations with the police and the police responded quickly. At first at the request of the police they did this unarmed, but after some success the police agreed that it would be OK for them to arm themselves. They never intended to confront any people engaged illegal activity.

jlrhiner · #5 10-06-2012, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Photoman44

One word: Zimmerman

Notice how that's all kinda died down?

tinkerunique · #6 10-06-2012, 11:28 AM

ONE FACT IS TRUE : An armed citizenry is a more polite one. Some people refuse to be unarmed victims.

Out West · #7 10-06-2012, 08:11 PM

I like the idea of armed citizens watching out for their families, homes and neighbors. I get a bit worried when I hear they are organizing and going out on patrols. I do not like the idea of vigilantes. Not saying that your example crosses that line, but I'd be a bit leery if were happening where I live. What do the police in your area say about this organization?

Out
West

M&P Freak · #8 10-06-2012, 08:30 PM

There are no police. The Sheriff is not wild about this situation but attends the meetings and supports the citizens. Logging used to pay for public safety, but eco-nuts shut that down. Voters rejected a property tax levy to fund public safety, so now we're pretty much on our own.

More info: Ore. county cutting law enforcement to bare bones

mc5aw · #9 10-06-2012, 08:48 PM

I'm not a fan of citizen patrols for the following reasons ...

1) Lack of continuity with respect to training. Unless I know that the armed citizen next to me has received quality training and sufficient practice time, I don't want him/her next me. Over the years, I've had too many muzzle sweeps by "qualified" people at ranges/shows/etc. for my liking. I'm confident in my own skills and knowledge, not so much for everyone else.

2) Napoleon Syndrome. Who's in charge of the Citizen Patrol? How did that person come to be in charge? Too many wannabes out there, who wannabe the boss. Look at some of nonsense that goes on with people who get a dose of power in the reenacting world. I'm not interested in being told what to do by Gecko45, James Yeager, or any other clown with a CCW permit.

3) Backlash from LEOs. I'm not looking to usurp LEOs, nor do their job for them. And I don't want to be viewed as such by my local LEOs or neighbors. I much prefer to protect my family and my modest homestead as I see fit, rather than being responsible for a neighborhood or quadrant.

Do neighborhood patrols have merit? Absolutely. But unless there's continuity in terms of training and chain of command, as well as positive support from local PD and the community, it seems to be a big problem waiting to happen. My 2c ...

photoman · #10 10-06-2012, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlrhiner

Notice how that's all kinda died down?

Ask Zimmerman if it has died down...

jaykellogg · #11 10-07-2012, 08:04 AM

Citizens have almost zero arrest power. I was told in my CCW class that if I was in a confrontation with a BG, I should not try to hold him for police for fear of a kidnapping charge.

What citizens can do though is provide eyes and ears to sworn police officers.

In my county we save thousands of dollars a year by utilizing unpaid reserve deputies. These are folks who have completed the BLET training and have been certified as law enforcement officers. This training and certification have a time limit. If the person does not work as an LEO, then they must go through it again. SO, they work unpaid for the Sheriff's department. In exchange for their time, they get to keep their certification. I believe they have to supply their own equipment.

Regarding the sad case in FL, there is almost zero information about what went on before the confrontation. It is pretty clear that during the confrontation Zimmerman had a man on top of him smashing his head into a concrete sidewalk. He pulled a 9mm pistol and shot the man once. I just hope that politics doesn't push justice aside. I have no firm opinion of the right/wrong of this case. Zimmerman showed poor judgement in lieing to the court about how much money he had. It appears he is going to sue the news for doctoring the 911 tape. I really don't see any good or bad guys in this episode.

Skeptic 9c · #12 10-07-2012, 09:46 AM

Zimmerman had lousy lawyers who eventually abandoned him. He has new representation. The money was largely speculative and hadn't been vetted via accountants, per one Radio Talk Show here in the NE FL area, the website soliciting was setup by a third party and the original lawyers, nobody knows how much money was really pulled in nor where it went and the IRS is all over poor Zimmerman and family.
Geoff
Who notes Zimmerman is broke now, lost everything and all for trying every way he could to keep his neighborhood from being pulled down into the third world by the usual suspects....no good deed ever goes unpunished.

TexasArmed · #13 10-07-2012, 10:05 AM

I have never participated in a neighborhood watch although I think it may deter crime. I prefer to deter anyone breaking into my residence.
If I observe illegal actiivty I will call the police. I have insurance that covers my property in the event of burglary,and if it is a home invasion they will not get beyond my front door, and I will call 911 after I stop them.

I just think there is too much possibility of legal problems from none law enforcement people patrolling the neighborhood. I felt that way before the Zimmerman case.

StatesRightist · #14 10-07-2012, 10:07 AM

I find some of the comments on this subject amusing. What do you think people in this country did for the first hundred plus years in this country? Armed neighbors patrolling their own neighborhoods is what was done. I've got news for you, you might as well get over your phobia, because this is going to become more common as society continues to get more violent and tax dollars are fewer and fewer. Where I live average response time is 30-45 minutes, do the math, that means they clean-up the aftermath, not intervene in the crime being committed.

One other thought, here is the definition of vigilante: some of you apparently need it.

A member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily.

Maybe I missed the part where they are hanging people as soon as the catch them, I thought they were turning them over to the police.

mc5aw · #15 10-07-2012, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StatesRightist

I find some of the comments on this subject amusing. What do you think people in this country did for the first hundred plus years in this country? Armed neighbors patrolling their own neighborhoods is what was done. I've got news for you, you might as well get over your phobia, because this is going to become more common as society continues to get more violent and tax dollars are fewer and fewer. Where I live average response time is 30-45 minutes, do the math, that means they clean-up the aftermath, not intervene in the crime being committed.

One other thought, here is the definition of vigilante: some of you apparently need it.

A member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily.

Maybe I missed the part where they are hanging people as soon as the catch them, I thought they were turning them over to the police.

The difference now is that we live in a hyper-litigious society, where every person's action and reaction can be twisted and adjudicated for potential legal and financial gain.

jaykellogg · #16 10-07-2012, 01:09 PM

There is a middle ground. If you feel a need for a citizen's patrol, it is possible for some citizens to take the BLET course and get certified. Of course, certification can be kept active by the law enforcement agency records of those folks patroling. That way you are both a vigalante and a sworn officer. The fly in the ointment is you would be under the orders of the Sheriff, but you would have arrest powers. Not everyone would have to be certified.

Regarding a comment by StatesRightist, the violent crime rate in the USA is lower today than it was in the 1950s.

An awful lot of crime today is driven by drugs. Selling drugs, buying drugs, the need for money to buy drugs, high on drugs, competition among drug gangs and dealers, etc. If the government could come up with a campaign to make taking drugs "not cool" it would take a lot of pressure off law enforcement if successful. I guarantee if you put out a story that you could get high from drinking Draino there would be several people hurt from trying it. Geeze, I just had hernia surgery. Very painful and I have a perscription for hydrocodone which I didn't even get filled at the pharmacy. I don't understand some people wanting to have some chemical alter their reality.

StatesRightist · #17 10-07-2012, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mc5aw

The difference now is that we live in a hyper-litigious society, where every person's action and reaction can be twisted and adjudicated for potential legal and financial gain.

I will not tell you that is not a valid point.

I however, refuse to let the PC freaks and the D.C. hooligans tell me what I can and can't do. If a thug comes to my neighborhood looking for trouble, he made a mistake, there are a lot of guys around here who are EX somethings and know what to do.

StatesRightist · #18 10-07-2012, 02:54 PM

"Regarding a comment by StatesRightist, the violent crime rate in the USA is lower today than it was in the 1950s."

See me in 5 years, it's obvious where society is headed, just look at our open borders, revolving door justice system, cartels invading etc. I'll guarantee you, you will be less safe then than now.

I'll also be thrilled to be wrong.

Vic303 · #19 10-10-2012, 09:16 AM

Shooting of an off-duty DPD officer yesterday--he was part of a security team hired to protect/patrol a housing area in a bad part of town...They confronted a suspicious male in a vehicle with a scanner and binos, who pulled a .40cal and shot the DPD officer (He will recover from injuries). Took the PD a day to catch the BG. Just goes to show that even being an off duty PD will not protect you from BGs.

tinkerunique · #20 10-11-2012, 11:53 PM

Seems like a good thing to have around -IF- the "watch" is cool-headed.
ALSO looks like Chicago has a need for such < "budget-cuts" have severely hurt the police force to where there is not enough PD Officers to do a lot to combat crime, thugs and such. Appaers the streets are being "ruled' by dopers and such. I have served as Small Arms Instructor and armed security in the past and make sure that whoever I'm with in a "security situation" have a good background in such or stay back in a stress situation and be the 'backup' if needed. Usually that is never been needed. My neighborhoods (past/present) have had a presence that dictated peace and reasonably quiet except for New Years and 4th of July.

GattlinGun · #21 10-12-2012, 12:28 AM

My first point is, I guess I don't get Photoman 44's point. Anyone shooting someone while on neighborhood patrol whether as part of a watch group or walking their dog, will come under scrutiny.

Just because citizen patrols may be CCW holders does not mean it is the wild west. If they report suspicious activities and happen to be armed, what is the problem? If they report suspicious activities and then are confronted and find their own life in danger, isn't that why anyone who goes through the CCW process carries?

You can always not carry. You can also always not participate. What is the problem? If you don't understand the risks involved in being an armed citizen in public, then don't be.

photoman · #22 10-12-2012, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GattlinGun

My first point is, I guess I don't get Photoman 44's point.

Any time you go armed "playing" cop, you're asking for legal trouble. I don't care how in the right you are or how right you do it, it is highly likely you will end up in a law suit at best and charged criminally at worst. And all to defend someone else's property? No thanks!

If you want to be a cop, join the force or become an armed security guard. Otherwise, leave the gun at home if you want to participate in a neighborhood patrol.

p.s. Armed neighborhood patrols are illegal in Texas.

GattlinGun · #23 10-12-2012, 01:37 AM

Who says a neighborhood patrol is "playing cop"? You have the ability to make the decision to be involved or not, and if being armed in Texas in a patrol is illegal, then don't be in it.

You have total control over your actions and if you can and want to be involved in an area where you can be a neighborhood watch person (again, not differentiating them from someone walking their dog on a lazy afternoon who happens to be armed) then you should understand the risks that come with that. They are no different if you pull a weapon regardless, either way. If you do not want to be exposed to those risks, then you are free to not participate, again in either case.

According to M&P's information that I can see, we don't know that he is in Texas.

photoman · #24 10-12-2012, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GattlinGun

Who says a neighborhood patrol is "playing cop"? You have the ability to make the decision to be involved or not...

Once you join the patrol, you have already made the decision to get involved. Add to that, all your neighbors know that you're armed and will expect you to use deadly force to defend their property. That is a recipe for legal disaster.

Are you, being armed, willing to stand by and let thieves clean out your neighbor's house while you wait on the cops to show up? If those thieves run away, are you going to chase them? If your neighbor goes hand to hand with one of the thieves, are you going to get involved?

mc5aw · #25 10-12-2012, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GattlinGun

Who says a neighborhood patrol is "playing cop"?

"Playing cop" has a negative connotation to it, but participation in a neighborhood patrol is, for the most part, a quasi-law enforcement activity. What one does with the responsibility of being part of a patrol (especially an armed one) is another matter. Are there some neighborhood patrol holster heroes who are LEO wannabes? Absolutely, and those are the people who sully the intent of honest and conscientious citizen patrols.

There's enough anti-gun sentiment in the country to cast a dim view over armed citizen patrols, and that view is too often one falling between self-annointed avenger and vigilante. As far as history goes, yes, armed citizen patrols have been around for some time, but the past is not the present, and there have never been more lawsuits waiting to happen than in the present. And anyone one uses a firearm in self defense is going to be in for a long legal hassle ... but that hassle will assuredly be magnified against the armed citizen patroller than the armed dog walker.

jaykellogg · #26 10-12-2012, 01:17 PM

I would say if you were on a citizens patrol and you saw a vehicle parked at a house where you were aware that the homeowners were away that the ONLY proper response would be to call law enforcement and give them the address and a description of the vehicle. If you try and confront the people involved you have stepped over the line and are not acting as a watchman (which means someone who watches), but as a vigalante. In that case you cannot expect any degree of appreciation from the police and legal action becomes a very real possibility.

You won't even have the castle doctrine to back you up. Those do not apply if you initiate a confrontation.

MaximumLawman · #27 10-14-2012, 09:54 AM

I would take a good hard look at the crime stats, assuming you can even get access to the real numbers, before you assume that the causation for the drop in crime is the neighborhood watch program. A typical tactic for local law enforcement is to piggyback a neighborhood watch program or other crime reduction effort onto an already existing downward crime trend in order to take "credit" for it.

Quote:

Citizens have almost zero arrest power.

Huh? The only arrest power the cops have that non-cops don't is the authority to arrest for misdemeanors. The local neighborhood patrol shouldn't even THINK about arresting someone for a misdemeanor. You absolutely have the right to arrest someone for a felony. But like the other poster said, that gets back to training. Do your typical neighborhood watch members even know the difference between a felony and a misdemeanor? Do they know the elements of burglary vs. entering without the owners permission?