Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Panic button couldn’t protect woman

Discussion in 'Legal' started by dasmi, Jun 23, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dasmi

    dasmi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-limurd20,0,6915050,print.story


     
  2. Nazirite

    Nazirite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    349
    Location:
    From Tennessee to Ohio to Oklahoma
    Being near NYC I doubt she could get a CCW. :(
     
  3. dasmi

    dasmi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Yes, I'm sure. I personally feel that NY deserves some of the blame for this. Not to remove guilt from the killer, but NY makes it exceedingly difficult for average citizens to protect themselve. Of course, we don't know if she would've actually taken the time to take her safety into her own hands.
     
  4. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Well she could have gone and gotten a handgun illegally and shot the bastard. And then plea bargained and spent 3 days in Rikers like Ronald Dixon. Infringement? nah /sarcasm
     
  5. another okie

    another okie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Logical fallacy:

    "You have to understand that 99 percent of the time, orders of protection do work."

    Well, by that standard, doing nothing at all would work about 95% of the the time, since most people who make threats or are perceived as threats never do anything. In other words, if the person stays safe this bureaucrat gives the protective order credit.
     
  6. migoi

    migoi Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    560
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Big ole BS flag...

    on this statement..."That nearly every means of protecting Port-Louis was exhausted but insufficient is the frustration of police."

    I can think of lots of stuff that could have helped protect this woman that was not done. Seems to me she was still operating way in the white zone. She felt (justifiably it turns out) she was under serious enough threat to have a "panic" button but she still didn't feel the need to keep in actually on her person (To be safe as she left the house, she put the emergency button on her rear view mirror.) and left her car running while she returned to her house?

    With a more that a month between the call and the shooting it seems there was plenty of time to ratchet personal safety protocols way higher than they were. There was no mention of the "panic" buttons attached to OC spray canisters or stun gun types of devices much less those connected to the best "panic" system...a firearm.

    The other quote that reeks of stupidity is... "You have to understand that 99 percent of the time, orders of protection do work." Maybe this is because 99 percent of the time orders of protection are applied for to seek an advantage in a court case rather than because the subject of the order has actually made any threat against the person seeking it.

    In between the lines we can see that the "panic" button not only failed to protect the woman but didn't even manage to get the police on scene fast enough to catch the guy after he killed her.

    migoi
     
  7. Chipperman

    Chipperman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,572
    Location:
    Essex Co, MA
    Clearly this would have never happened if NYC had more gun control laws.
     
  8. buzz_knox

    buzz_knox Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,849
    There's a bald-faced lie. Orders of protection work ONLY when the person against whom it is brought is both rational enough and not enraged enough for the order to have any effect. Against those who are predisposed to commit violence, they have no effect, especially after they are violated once or twice and the police do nothing.

    The equivalent statement would be "99 percent of the time, life preservers worn properly prevent drowning of individuals crossing a desert."
     
  9. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    A panic button, eh? So you can be murdered to the accompaniment of loud noise?

    I can think of a better way to make loud noise.
     
  10. Father Knows Best

    Father Knows Best Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,503
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA
    I should point out that the hoplophobes all like to say that guns aren't useful for self-defense because we'd never have time to pull them out and use them if a bad guy was already pointing a gun at us. If this woman had a time to reach into her car and press a "panic button" (huh?) before getting shot, she had time to draw and fire a gun.

    What the heck is a "panic button," anyway?
     
  11. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    I have to ask. Does anyone actually pay attention to panic buttons anymore? I use mine to find my car. I don't even turn to lok when one goes off, they are so common place. They may have been great 15 years ago when almost no one had one, but I think it is time for something new.
     
  12. Nick1911

    Nick1911 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    Messages:
    797
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I suggest a Smith 340.
    :evil:

    Too bad NY removes the right effective to self-defense. :(
     
  13. GlenJ

    GlenJ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    399
    Location:
    Chesapeake VA
    I have a cousin who went through a bad breakup with her husband (lot's of physical abuse) who broke the restraining order. They had guns in the home and the sheriff stupidly told her to get them out of there!!!
     
  14. peacefuljeffrey

    peacefuljeffrey member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Messages:
    546
    Location:
    West Palm Beach, FL
    I wonder if the bleeding-heart leftist writer for Newsday saw the irony in leaving out the ONE THING that probably could have saved her life: a GUN.


    But we're talking about Long Island. If you live in NY and go through the 6 month wait to get a handgun license, like I did on L.I., you get a license that does not entitle you to carry a gun. Without it, you're not even allowed to own a handgun.



    I wonder if Port-Louis was holding that panic button up like a crucifix at her murderer, the moment he shot her to death. "The power of circuitry compels you... The power of circuitry compels you... The power of symbolism compels you... The power of symbolism compels you..."

    And no one up there has the intellectual honesty to admit that when someone is after you and he has a gun, NOTHING you do will help you survive as much as having a gun of your own.

    But on the plus side, if all the stupid people who don't realize that get killed off, the result will be that anyone still around does realize it.


    -Jeffrey
     
  15. Nightfall

    Nightfall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,817
    Location:
    WA
    Anything that can't cause immediate, substantial damage to a human central nervous system is a huge gamble for self-defense IMHO. Here we see what happens when you gamble with something as important as your life, and lose. Very sad. :(
     
  16. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    Something like this article should be a very obvious wakeup call for people across the board. The time between calling the police and waiting for them to arrive in a situation of great threat is practically infinite. In that given time span of minutes, the victim's life can end many times over. Instead people somehow primarily choose to depend on someone else rather than themselves in a life-or-death situation. I will never be able to understand this.

    The only impact these cases seem to have on the firearms community is a "I told you so" since we have seen these cases ad infinitum. It is painfully obvious to us that the police are not, and can never respond fast enough to such situations.

    For those who are against firearms or the idea of using deadly force to preserve one's own life, the response is "tighter laws would fix things". No amount of legislation can provide you with instant immunity to the threat at hand. People need to realize that there is a chance that, if you rely on people or the government, it can (and has) fail you. Once you depend on someone else to feed you, house you, and protect you...you're defenseless and helpless.
     
  17. griz

    griz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,371
    Location:
    Eastern Virginia
    What a sad story.

    I wonder if NY, having seen the obvious need for more appropriate measures, would agree to an "advanced panic button"? (imagine one of those TM logos here) What I'm thinking of is a little red button that would take the place of the safety lever on the trigger of a Glock.
     
  18. scubie02

    scubie02 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2003
    Messages:
    916
    Location:
    ny
    the sad thing is, this will just be used as an example of the need for even stricter gun control by the sorts that have foisted so much of it on us in NY already--you could tell the guy was itching to come right out and say it
     
  19. c_yeager

    c_yeager Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,479
    Location:
    Seattle
    I like how the oficial police position on this amounts to "hey sometimes people are just gonna kill you, nothing you can do about it".

    I love how the article emphasizes that EVERYTHING was done to protect her, when its PAINFULLY obviously that there was a hell of a lot more that could have been done.

    This part bothers me quite a bit:
    Hes "extremely dangerous" now that the police are the ones who have to deal with him. When it was an unnarmed defenseless woman he wasnt quite dangerous enough to warrent actually HELPING in any way.

    Does it strike anyone else as disturbing that the police never suggested or made a firearm available to this woman, but when they catch him they will CERTAINLY perform the arrest with their guns drawn in a full on felony-stop?
     
  20. LadySmith

    LadySmith Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    254
    It's usually a small remote that sends a signal for help to the police station or to an alarm company who then calls the police. It kind of works like an instant 911 call without having to talk to anyone. Panic buttons are usually silent so as not to alert the perp that the police are on the way.
     
  21. Crosshair

    Crosshair Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,985
    Location:
    Grand Forks, North Dakota
    Shouldn't the "panic button" be a "Bend over and kiss you're a** goodbye button." I don't wait until I am about to crash to put on my seatbelt, why should I wait for my protection to arive.
     
  22. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    Couldn't that work either way? A silent panic button might not scare away a particular perp while a loud blazing panic button might scare the same perp away.

    Either way, panic buttons aren't guaranteed to save lives. Its a guaranteed homing beacon for the police to find you but your condition may vary at that point.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page