Florida Woman gunned down in front of police station

Ocala (Florida) Star Banner ^ | July 6, 2004 | MABEL PEREZ AND RICK CUNDIFF

[Mulder]

According to the antis, here is a woman that did everything "right".

She didn't carry a gun for self defense, and instead went to the police station when she feared for her life. Only the station was "closed for business".

Now she is dead.

People need to learn that they, and they alone, are responsible for their safety.

Even the Ocala police chief was honest enough to admit that even if an officer had been on duty, they might not have been able to save her life.

[TNdandelion]

I agree.

You don't need a permit to carry a cell phone for 9-1-1.

[Mulder]

You don't need a permit to carry a cell phone for 9-1-1.

You misdialed.

The correct number to dial is 1-9-1-1

[henderson field]

Now I guess I must be confused. The people who want to eliminate guns say the police will protects us, we don't need guns. Yet here is a case where someone is killed in front of a police station. How many police would it have taken to protect the victim? Probably four: one in front, one in back and one on either side. However, in some cases, four may not be enough.

[teeman8r]

for those who cannot recognize sarcasm... the number on cell phones is still 9-1-1... not 1-9-1-1...

the 1-9-1-1 refers to the 1911 model handgun, the number to recall if you want instant access to life saving techniques...

plus in this case, instant divorce, instant ownership of coffee plant in puerto rico and instant availability for the democratic professor she's been probably seeing on the sly...


teeman

[Joe Brower]

When I was in California, when events like this occurred, we used to point out to anti-gun people how that the police are not legally required to protect anyone, as outlined in CALIFORNIA CODES, GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 844-846. People used to be utterly surprised to find this out, having bought the BS that "the police are there to protect you".

I am currently looking for a similar set of codes for the state of Florida. I know these must exist, since every state has protected itself in this fashion. Can anyone offer any pointers to this section of the Florida state code?

Thanks,

[mvpel]

I happened to know just where my copy of Dial 911 and Die! was... here's the details:

Fla. Stat § 768.28
Everton v. Willard, 468 So. 2d 936, 038 (Fla. 1985)
Wong v. City of Miami, 237 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1970)
Office of the State Attorney v. Parrotino, 628 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1993)
Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River County, 371 So. 2d 1010, 1018-1021 (Fla. 1979)
Bowden v. Henderson, 700 So. 2d 714, 717

[stainlessbanner]

Many thanks. For anyone else, the FLA Statutes are here: http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?Mode=View%20Statutes&Submenu=1&Tab=statutes

[Joe Brower]

That's it, good sirs. Many thanks!

[Drammach]

I profer the following:

Florida statutes:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Index&Title_Request=XLVII#TitleXLVII

Try Chapter 943 - department of Law Enforcement..

Look for something like cause for dismissal.. What you are looking for is a statute that states an officer can be dismissed for failure to perform his duties or obligations as a law enforcement officer..

That's about as close as I can come.. ( If the state can fire an LEO for not doing his job, a citizen should be able to file charges for same offense. [ IMHO ] )

Hope this helps..

[B4Ranch]

I reckon a call to the local PD would probably get you the exact code numbers.

[looscnnn]

They would not do that. Their job is to protect society as a whole and not individuals. That is why they don't provide bodyguards to people who have filed for restraining orders.

[HangFire]

Thanks Joe, this one goes on the LB site now!

[Blood of Tyrants]

I always find it interesting that people completely unwilling to defend themselves or their family think that a complete stranger should do it for them. They are usually the same people who wouldn't ask their families for money (usually because their families don't think that they will use it wisely) but are completely willing to ask complete strangers for assistance (i.e. you and me via the taxpayer funded government agencies).

[Joe Brower]

Well, most people nowadays are simply brainwashed; they buy the BS without a thought. Which is why they suffer brain-lock when presented with utter contradictions such as that seen here -- all her life, this poor woman has probably heard over and over again the canard of "the police will protect you", only to find that there is no such obligation. Kind of late to find that out now!

And the fact that such promises are made when disarmament is the agenda makes such hypocrisy more than mere demagoguery, but tantamount to tyranny.

And, as you point out, not lifting a finger in your own defense yet expecting total strangers to put their lives on the line for you is morally bankrupt at best, a concept covered in enlightening detail in Jeff Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards".

[ninenot]

In the particular case, I am truly sorry that the victim apparently did not think of self-defense as an option.

From the accounts in the thread-head article, it seems as though she and the perp "talked through" the problems--at least until recently.

She probably figured that "talking through" would continue to work, although she SHOULD have thought about other options as well.

FL is a CCW State. Wouldn't have been too hard for her...

[King Prout]

dunno 'bout FL state code, but the USSC has already made it quite clear that no police officer, anywhere in the US, is under any obligation to enter harm's way to save any citizen's life, health, or property.

[ChefKeith]

FYI

[Nebr FAL owner]

If you have an attorney just goto the lawyers office & ask . If they don't know it off the top their head they will be able to look it up in roughly 10 minutes time.