cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer) (10/07/90)
A local news story yesterday gave a disturbing example of how San
Francisco Police Department sets the priorities on 911 calls. A young
man leaving a night baseball game at Candlestick Park had car trouble,
and found himself stranded in Hunter's Point. (This is a high crime
part of San Francisco, for those of you at a safe distance from the
madness of S.F.) He arranged a tow to a gas station, and started
making arrangements to have someone come and get him. He was
unsuccessful.
At 1:30 AM, someone called 911 from the gas station payphone to report
that his car was being broken into. In the middle of the phone call,
the 911 operator heard a scuffle of some sort, and then the phone was
hung up. Deciding that this was just a car burglary, the report was
not considered an "A" priority call, and so it was one and a half
hours before the police responded to it -- by which time the man and
the car were gone.
The father of the young man found the remains of his son, and the
remains of the car, about four days later, while searching the area
himself.
Is there any sort of model for how 911 calls are to be prioritized?
Wouldn't a scuffle in the middle of a call be reason to suspect that
someone was being hurt? Or am I just dense?
Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
You must be kidding! No company would hold opinions like mine!john@karnak.cactus.org (John B. Meaders Jr.) (10/08/90)
In article <13070@accuvax.nwu.edu> optilink!cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer) writes: >Is there any sort of model for how 911 calls are to be prioritized? >Wouldn't a scuffle in the middle of a call be reason to suspect that >someone was being hurt? Or am I just dense? I watch Rescue 911 quite a bit and get the opinion that 911 service is great. This is very disturbing that these operators don't even take the time to found out what exactly is going on. If I were an operator, and the phone hung up on me, I would take this as an emergency and get someone there immediately. I hope I don't get in any kind of trouble in SF where I would need 911 (I don't have any plans to go to SF in the near future anyway, but just suppose I did :-) because I think I would be in serious trouble. I doubt SF has a model for prioritizing. Something out of the ordinary going on during a call (shots fired, scuffle, scream, etc.) should definitely clue a 911 operator that something isn't right. But, I guess SF probably goes on a FIFO (first in, first out) basis :-) (just joking :-)). SF should definitely change their 911 system so that they don't get any more of these instances. John B. Meaders, Jr. 510 Manchester Ct., Hopewell, VA 23806 Voice: 804-458-2983 Net: john@karnak.cactus.org or john@karnak [Moderator's Note: Given my 'druthers, with Chicago and its relatively efficient 911 system and San Fransisco, with the highly publicized mistake by 911 dispatchers, I think I'd still rather be in SFC. PAT]
mpay@pacbell.com (Mike Payer) (10/10/90)
In article <13070@accuvax.nwu.edu> optilink!cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 714, Message 7 of 12 >A local news story yesterday gave a disturbing example of how San >Francisco Police Department sets the priorities on 911 calls. A young Clayton, I do a lot of work interfacing with law enforcement on 911 type calls. And I can tell you for a fact that when a call comes in from a coin phone the response of the dispatch centers in many cases is "Oh a coin phone, oh well". As a result of this I have told my family and friends that if they are at pay phone they would be much better off dialing "0" and just screaming for help. The operator will have the number you called from and the law enforcement people seem to take these call more seriously. This may sound strange but it seems to be the way it works. I believe part of the problem is the high amount of prank called by teenagers to 911 on coin telephones. It's not unusual to see someone work their way from one end of town to the other dialing 911 on pay phones. Don't construe this as an excuse for the S.F.P.D. it's not. It's just the way the system works. Michael S Payer Jr Administrator FAX 415-867-0344 Emergency Control Center pacbell!pbecc!msp pacbell!pbhya!mpay
djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David Brightbill) (10/11/90)
One technology which has been experimented with to solve the pay phone false alarm problem is a fire alarm kiosk which a user has to enter and close the door. The door latches and stays locked until a fire or police person responds to the call and let's the citizen out. There are a ton of obvious disadvantages having to do with civil liberty, etc. One benefit is for folks being attacked by muggers. They can pop into a kiosk and hang out till help comes. If memory serves, the kiosks were tried in a large NE city about four or five years ago. Davie Brightbill
yarvin-norman@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) (10/13/90)
djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David Brightbill) writes: >The door latches and stays locked until a fire or >police person responds to the call and lets the citizen out. So if the call to the fire department is for real, the caller gets roasted while waiting, and if it's a false alarm, the vandal must destroy the booth on his way out. >One benefit is for folks being attacked by muggers. They can >pop into a kiosk and hang out till help comes. A very low percentage of muggings occur within a few feet of a phone booth. For those that do, a simple door latch would work as well.
cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer) (10/14/90)
In article <13278@accuvax.nwu.edu>, djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David Brightbill) writes: > One technology which has been experimented with to solve the pay phone > false alarm problem is a fire alarm kiosk which a user has to enter > and close the door. The door latches and stays locked until a fire or > police person responds to the call and let's the citizen out. There > are a ton of obvious disadvantages having to do with civil liberty, > etc. One benefit is for folks being attacked by muggers. They can > pop into a kiosk and hang out till help comes. If memory serves, the > kiosks were tried in a large NE city about four or five years ago. I'm told that Citibank Automated Teller Machines had such an arrangement at one time in NYC, for the obvious reason that ATMs attract thieves. However, telephone booths are not made of bulletproof glass -- and if I were calling the police to report a major felony in progress, I would want at least that minimal level of protection. Of course, there's always gasoline and a match, which may make even bulletproof glass rather irrelevant. Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer You must be kidding! No company would hold opinions like mine!
ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) (10/31/90)
djb@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (David Brightbill) writes: >The door latches and stays locked until a fire or >police person responds to the call and lets the citizen out. And what if the phone has been vandalized so the citizen can't call the emergency services? Is it just a totally stupid design or are there further safeguards (like it is constantly on line to the police who go out if the line is interrupted)? Charles Bryant (ch@dce.ie)