Officer C S

03/08/04 Random Gun Fire from a DPD Officer's View

Random gunfire is incredibly dangerous and the stupidity of such activity is self-evident. I am also really tired of it in Dallas. What can the DPD do about it? In reality, nothing.

Let me give you the procedural and legal breakdown.

Discharging a firearm within a municipality with a population greater than 300,000 is a misdemeanor. In order to arrest for a misdemeanor, officers must have either an eye-witness or actually observe the offending behavior. TX Code of Criminal Procedure limits an officers' ability to arrest for misdemeanors that do not occur within their presence. I have yet to be dispatched on a random gunfire call with an eye-witness or suspect. 99% of these calls are put on an "N-code," more specifically on the "N-3" which indicates no action taken due to no Complainant.

You would be amazed at the number of times I'm talking to a citizen on a call and hear several shots being fired in the area. The citizen usually looks at me with a frightened look and asks "What was that?" Sometimes the citizen will ask me what I'm going to do. Other times, they say it happens all the time.

Since I don't know who shoots a gun in the air any more than the citizen does, there isn't much I can do. Take cover?

Usually within a few minutes, there is a 911 call regarding the gunfire. My dispatcher assigns it to me. After checking for dead bodies in the street, I N-Code the call.

I'm going to get on my soap-box for a bit. NO ONE should be able to call 911 and summon Police or Fire without identifying themselves. Retaliation is a myth generated by media and Hollywood. It is so incredibly rare as to be non-existent. I mention that because every person who doesn't want to get involved seems to live under the impression that these slime ball criminals have the resources, will or desire to find them.

Criminals are stupid and lazy. If they were not stupid or lazy, they would have legitimate jobs.

Retaliation is most likely to occur between people who are related or have a history together. The visiting criminal doesn't have enough of an emotional investment to find you after he gets out of jail. Someone will probably e-mail you about their being retaliated against. They are the rare exception and not the rule.

The other aspect of this issue is that a Complainant on the call-sheet gives credibility to the entire case when it is prosecuted. "Officer, why were you there? Why did you single out my client for walking in the neighborhood? Do you live in the neighborhood? How do you know he was a suspicious person?" You can see where this might lead.

I'm probably preaching to the choir on this issue. The type of people who read and contribute to DallasArena.com are civic minded and want to be a part of the solution.

I answered a call the other night regarding 2 black males stealing a neighbor's car. The Complainant name on the call sheet was marked DNC (DO NOT CONTACT). Despite being incredibly short staffed, Officers found the suspects pushing the stolen vehicle with another stolen vehicle. Both men were taken into custody. I was sent to the call location to try to locate the owner of the vehicle. I knocked on the door of the house where the 911 call originated. A Hispanic male (about 35) came to the door and pointed to the house across the street. I asked him if he could describe the two men who stole the vehicle or even identify them if he saw them again.

He told me he didn't want to get involved. "I have a family, you know." I told him I hoped his vehicle or house never got broken into. His neighbors would definitely not get involved with someone who wouldn't help them. We found the owner of the stolen vehicle, who told me this was the third time in a year that one of his vehicles had been stolen.

Neighborhood involvement far outweighs any kind of police action. DallasArena.com is a major case in point.

I'm also a little tired of hearing various sources telling people to call 911 for graffiti, random gunfire or pan-handling. All are misdemeanors. All require an eye-witness in order to convict.

Some argue that more 911 calls will result in more police in an area. True, but to borrow an old clich? "you don't rob Peter to pay Paul". The other effect is a neighborhood or area gets the reputation for generating a large number of bogus calls. Remember the Boy-Who-Cried-Wolf?

A police officer cannot legally take action on a breach of peace violation without a Complainant. No action. Tex Code of Criminal Procedure specifically states a Peace Officer's peace cannot be breached.

The same concept that protects someone's right to say "F*** the Police!" also protects them from an officer saying their music is too loud. As the Government, I can't be offended. I can act on the righteous complainant of a citizen, who is offended by the deviation from what is acceptable for the neighborhood or community.

So on Friday night, I got dispatched to loud party in Oak Cliff. The call-sheet Complainant is "Mr. Chu" (short for Caller Hung Up), or my old friend "Ref" (REFUSED). I drove to the location because I was dispatched and the Police administration feels it's necessary to monitor my vehicle by GPS. I arrived and heard a loud party. Legally, I cannot approach the party and tell them to lower the music. Without a Complainant offended by the loud music, I cannot take action.

When they provide contact information, I will contact a citizen regarding a suspicious person, random gunfire or loud music call (usually with my patrol car's cell phone) to get more information. When you call 911, tell them your name and phone number. An officer will most likely call you back and get as much info as possible. It helps us catch the bad guys and helps us more easily identify suspicious behavior in a neighborhood.

Taking action without a Complainant will inevitably land me in trouble with IAD or Public Integrity. I can't be part of the solution for Dallas if I'm languishing at home on A-time.

Thanks for letting me vent and giving my voice a forum.