TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:You folks have made good points and on reconsideration I agree with you.

I withdraw the rule suggestion.

I would still strongly encourage citing sources for statistics if the intent is to advance the discussion rather than to just stir the pot.

There you go.

Excaliber wrote:<SNIP>

Let's use this experience as an opportunity to improve our Forum submissions. My request to all would be to provide a link to the source of any statistic cited so the rest of us can easily do the homework to assess its value.

I'd even like to see it elevated to a Forum rule.

Mods? Charles?

...to a point. There are things cataloged in my Swiss cheese brain that though I am fairly certain of, have long lost any semblance of citations for. If this IS made a rule, the forum may fall very quiet unless there is a qualifier, such as "IIRC" or "I can't recall where...", etc. Oh wait, that happens already.

Rather than ask for another rule, why not just encourage posters to cite information where they can (as you did above) and otherwise everyone take it for what it's worth. We should not get our boxers twisted because someone stated something they may not have immediately vetted six ways to Sunday. We all have the ability to accept or ignore what one posts. We all have the ability to call out a poster for employing argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacies. We all have the ability to employ reason to correct errors.

If it's a waste of time, skip it.

Keith B wrote:The issue I have seen in the DFW area when I have called 911 is the 911 operators are usually not the dispatchers and may not be as quick on things as a dispatcher is.

The difference between Dallas fire (all firefighters/paramedics) and Dallas PD/911 (civilian) dispatchers is shocking. The anecdote you related is not that unusual.

Keith B wrote: Bottom line, the 911 operators may not be as good at sizing up the caller info and what they pass to the dispatcher or even out to an officer via their MDT may be incorrect or misleading in some cases.

Kinda dating yourself there, it's MDC now not MDT but I rmemebr when there was neither

speedsix wrote:...and if he was given the wrong address by HQ, time off for the person who put out the wrong address...the saddest part of this all, nothing will bring Cisco back...the best thing about this...the hysterical officer didn't shoot the homeowner...

In this day and age where cell phones are more commonly used than land lines the best information they can expect from the system is a general location within 500 yards of the caller. In a case of a cell phone call, the 911 dispatcher is completely dependent on what the caller tells them. I cannot begin to tell you how many people don't know their addresses, can't articulate the street names or even answer simple queries by the 911 folks. That doesn't begin to address the cursing and name calling that must be endured to even get basic information. I am willing to bet that the problems from 911 call to arrival at the wrong address rests with the caller(s).

The dash cam demonstrates what is, IMO, a tightly wound responding officer that overreacted to the man walking out and then fired on the dog all in a matter of seconds. Based on what I heard, the resident didn't have a chance to comply nor restrain the dog. Sad.