Critical error by 911 worker failed to note Poplawski owned guns

[RamboLiberal]

Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

When Richard Poplawski's mother called 911 to ask that her son be removed from their home in Stanton Heights, she acknowledged that he had weapons. But that crucial piece of information never was relayed to the three Pittsburgh police officers who responded Saturday and were fatally shot.

"It should have gone out," Allegheny County Chief of Emergency Services Robert A. Full said yesterday.

-----

"I'm requesting that he gets out," Ms. Poplawski said, speaking on her son's cell phone to the 911 operator. "He came in last night when I was gone. ... He stays, he comes and goes, but I want him out."

"Does he have any weapons or anything?" the call-taker asked.

"Yes," Ms. Poplawski answered. There was a long pause. "They're all legal."


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09097/961068-53.stm

---

Also the guns were legally obtained.

Federal agents yesterday sought records from a Wilkinsburg gun dealership where Richard Poplawski, the accused killer of three Pittsburgh police officers, is believed to have purchased guns.

A man who has described himself as the suspect's best friend told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette yesterday that Mr. Poplawski owned four guns and obtained them all legally at Braverman Arms Co., on Penn Avenue in Wilkinsburg, passing the required background checks.

He said Mr. Poplawski also had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which is issued by the Allegheny County sheriff's office and involves what the sheriff's office calls an "extensive background investigation."

-----

Mr. Perkovic said Mr. Poplawski ordered the AK-47 assault-style rifle that police believe was used in Saturday's shooting at GunBroker.com. By law, the Internet seller must deliver the weapon to a federally licensed dealer.

He said Mr. Poplawski had the rifle delivered to Braverman Arms and purchased it there. He also bought two pistols and a shotgun from the store's inventory, over a span Mr. Perkovic estimated at one year to 18 months.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09097/961071-53.stm

[rocktivity]

1. He's pushes his mother to her limits, and he shoots at cops to secure his gun rights

Talk about epic fail.

x(
rocktivity

[derby378]

2. 911 worker didn't warn Pittsburgh police of guns

Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Associated Press

The mother of a man charged with killing three Pittsburgh police officers told a 911 dispatcher he had weapons, but the dispatcher didn't relay that information to officers, the official in charge of county dispatchers says.

The dispatcher should have asked more questions about the weapons, but didn't, and certainly should have told officers so they could take necessary precautions, Allegheny County Chief of Emergency Services Robert Full told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

"There is no excuse. It could have been handled better, without a doubt," Full said in Tuesday's editions.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090407/ap_on_re_us/pittsburgh_shooting

[Wickerman]

3. So much blame to spread here

But the dispatcher really screwed the pooch.

And Mom, geeez. Wanted sonny out of her life, but still protected him. She must have known that a dishonorable discharge meant he couldn't have guns:

"Does he have any weapons or anything?" the dispatcher asked.

"Yes," the mother said. After a long pause, she added, "They're all legal."

[TorchTheWitch]

6. I don't think it would have made a difference

There's a more in depth article about this here...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09097/961068-53.stm

Though they approach the house differently, they still would have gone in and the shooter didn't fire until they were in the house. Just because the house they're going to has guns in it doesn't mean they storm the place with guns drawn... they're just more cautious. Under the circumstances, I still see it going down much the same way. No guns or any violence was involved in the dispute between mother and son... she called to have the police remove him from her house because they had had an arguement and wanted him to leave. She was calm on the phone with the 911 worker and wasn't being threatened by her son in any way. I still put most of the blame on the mother for not telling the 911 worker that not only did her son have guns but that he was a cop hating racist loony who slept in a bulletproof vest in his basement personal arsenal terrified someone was going to take his guns away.

[AlinPA]

19. re: "loony"-hope this does not mean mentally ill. I don't think the shooter was mentally ill.

He was educated in the issues of guns (but definitely wrong about his belief that Obama was going to take his guns)and knew exactly what he was doing. He was making a political point and probably sees himself as a hero of the right wing.

[TorchTheWitch]

22. I think he was

I think he was paranoid and had delusions and who knows what else. There's all kinds of mental illness. Technically I'm mentally ill because I have anxiety issues that require medication. I don't think he was so mentally ill that he didn't know what he was doing and what the consequences would be by any stretch of the imagination. But in order to have slept wearing a bulletproof vest in his personal arsenal every night because he was afraid someone was going to take his guns away isn't something that someone does who has no mental illness of any kind. People who mass murder others most definitely are suffering from some sort of mental illness.

[RamboLiberal]

25. Just as they reported incorrectly on the 911 call the media I think is wrong

on the dishonorable discharge. A lot of Marines in area have said he probably had something called a "less than honorable discharge" which would allow him to buy guns. All the guns were apparently purchased legally though I'm listening to the owner of Braverman Arms who said he bought handguns & a shotgun legally from them, but he has no record of the FFL transfer of the AK-47 though Post-Gazette says that's where he did the transfer.

Federal agents yesterday sought records from a Wilkinsburg gun dealership where Richard Poplawski, the accused killer of three Pittsburgh police officers, is believed to have purchased guns.

A man who has described himself as the suspect's best friend told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette yesterday that Mr. Poplawski owned four guns and obtained them all legally at Braverman Arms Co., on Penn Avenue in Wilkinsburg, passing the required background checks.

He said Mr. Poplawski also had a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which is issued by the Allegheny County sheriff's office and involves what the sheriff's office calls an "extensive background investigation."

------

Mr. Perkovic said Mr. Poplawski ordered the AK-47 assault-style rifle that police believe was used in Saturday's shooting at GunBroker.com. By law, the Internet seller must deliver the weapon to a federally licensed dealer.

He said Mr. Poplawski had the rifle delivered to Braverman Arms and purchased it there. He also bought two pistols and a shotgun from the store's inventory, over a span Mr. Perkovic estimated at one year to 18 months.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09097/961071-53.stm

[TorchTheWitch]

28. I wondered that myself

I know that punching a superior officer is an automatic dishonorable discharge at least for those who've passed through training. Down thread I mentioned a guy I used to know that started a fist fight with a superior officer in the Marines and he got a dishonorable discharge. In the Pitt case, the shooter threw a food tray at a superior officer which may not be considered quite the same thing (don't know if it hit the officer or if he was injured in any way because of it, etc.). I also think they're slightly more lenient on the newbies in boot camp, and this is where the shooter was when it happened. When the guy I knew punched his superior officer I'm sure that it was also considered more heinious because he'd already been a Marine for a couple years.

Still, as I had mentioned down thread about the guy I knew who was dishonorable discharged, he legally can and does own guns in PA. Being dishonorably discharged only triggers an automatic background check, it doesn't mean you can't legally own guns. Considering that the shooter only threw a tray at his superior officer even if he had gotten a dishonorable discharge for it, in PA he would still legally be allowed to own guns as what he did isn't sufficient to refuse gun ownership.

I am curious, however, if it was a dishonorable discharge or a less than honorable discharge though just because of the circumstances of what he did and the fact that he was a newbie in boot camp. The military doesn't like to hand out dishonorable discharges as it makes them look bad, so they do tend to save them for the more serious offenses. However, they do consider physical altercations with superior officers as a hugely bad thing... deference to rank is a giant big deal in the military.

[RamboLiberal]

33. It wasn't an officer - he threw the tray at a DI - Marine Sgt Drill Instructor

Wouldn't want a Marine non-comm be mad at being called an officer. And I think the Marines are very big on your not being a Marine with the honor of wearing the Globe and Anchor until you graduate from boot camp. That also makes me think it was not a dishonorable.

Ironic how the "patriotic" punk either couldn't hack the Marines or got himself deliberately kicked out. Patriot my butt!

[Irreverend IX]

34. He wasn't dishonorably discharged.

I think he got a "failure to adapt" discharge or something like that before he completed his training; the Marines don't like it when you throw a tray at a sergeant but it's not a felony-level crime.

[Barack_America]

4. In this day and age, should police just assume that everyone is armed?

And approach every home with guns drawn? (which will undoubtedly lead to more misunderstandings/accidents where citizens are shot)

*sigh*

Police officers shoulder the biggest burden of "the right to bare arms" and will continue to do so.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. I would tend to agree with your premise. Domestic violence is not

necessarily benign verbal abuse. And since the law demands that ALL weapons be confisgated with each investigation of domestic violence, the police can presume that the owner is not going to be cooperative between the DV and the confisgation.

[TorchTheWitch]

7. This wasn't domestic violence

It was a domestic dispute. The mother only wanted to have the police remove her son from her house because they had had an arguement and she didn't want him to live there anymore. The police knew nothing about him being violent and there was no violence between him and his mother at the time or that she had ever attested to. She was calm on the phone with the 911 worker, wasn't being threatened, wasn't scared, etc.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. Point taken. Big difference between the two.

[Barack_America]

9. Doesn't that prove my point even more?

The police didn't expect this situation to turn violent and yet the very worst happened.

Shouldn't police then expect guns to be in every home and every domestic dispute to become violent? Can they afford not to, even though this sort of incident is rare (though becoming notably LESS rare).

[derby378]

10. The man was dishonorably discharged - that meant any guns he owned were illegal

And that made the call a high-risk situation for which the police could have reasonably expected things to turn difficult if not violent. But the cops at the scene never got the information they needed, thanks to someone who had no business being at the 911 switchboard.

[Barack_America]

11. Did the mother report that he was dishonorably discharged?

Or should cops now assume that all persons have guns illegally and/or illegal guns?

Or should we just have "files" on everyone so this information is available to cops?

My larger question is, how do we protect our law enforcement officers against these people? We as a society have to come up with an answer to that question.

[TorchTheWitch]

14. Police can only do the best they can with the info they have

In this incident there was no indication the police had that this would have been likely to happen, and it's not something they're accustomed to having to deal with.

The mother, unfortunately, gave no information that her son was a violent person, a loony, a cop hater afraid his guns would be taken away, and a neo-Nazi who bought and sold guns and ammo and who slept in a bulletproof vest in his personal arsonal in her home... THAT could have been useful info.

Police have to walk a fine line between being too cautious and not cautious enough, and every situation is different no matter how much info you have and might pan out in an unexpected way. Suppose instead of going on a shooting rampage the kid had just been sitting on the couch reading a magazine? With the info they had THAT would have been the more expected situation. Does that mean they should have crashed through the door in riot gear with guns drawn afraid that he might be waiting to blow them away? In this incident, surely that would have been the better option, but what if they did that if the kid was just sitting on the couch with a magazine as was more expected? Do you think that would have been appropriate and the police wouldn't get a rash a shit from all over the nation for approaching the incident that way? Like they don't ALREADY get hit with a rash of shit all the time anyway???

The police already do the best they can with the info they have and sometimes it works out badly for them. Every officer knows that some day it may work out as badly as it could possibly be.

[derby378]

15. She shouldn't have to

That's the job of the police department. You don't think they already have a database of all the known felons in the city?

[Barack_America]

16. It's a felony to be dishonorably discharged?

I wasn't aware.

[derby378]

18. Dishonorable discharge is treated the same as a felony conviction

I think there are some variances from state to state concerning restrictions for the dishonorably discharged, but I do not know of any state that allows the dishonorably discharged to own firearms of any kind.

[Barack_America]

20. Thanks for the info.

I had no idea.

It will be interesting to learn how he got his weapons. I hope they come down hard on the responsible persons. Though I do favor stricter gun laws, I am a bigger proponent of enforcing the gun laws we already have.

[RamboLiberal]

27. He got the firearms legally

I think the media is wrong on the dishonorable discharge. Probably got a "less than honorable" discharge or "administrative discharge" since he was in basic training and not yet considered a Marine.

Poplawski bought guns through shop in Wilkinsburg

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09097/961071-53.stm

[TorchTheWitch]

21. PA does

The Brady law is what triggers instant background checks for the dishonorably discharged, but that doesn't mean that after that check they won't be permitted to own guns. People who are dishonorably discharged aren't all felons - it depends on why they were dishonorably discharged. The shooter in the Pitt incident was dishonorably discharged for throwing a food tray at a superior officer. He also had a permit to carry which triggered another manditory background check by the sheriff's office. I don't know what these checks consist of, but clearly in this case it wasn't good enough.

I live in PA. Years ago a guy I know was dishonorably discharged from the Marines for getting into a fist fight with a superior officer that he instigated himself. He owns guns and obtained them legally. He also wanted to join the Marines again years later, but during the hearing he was denied because of the circumstances of his dishonorable discharge. Not even the Marines wanted the nutter, but he was allowed to own guns.

[derby378]

23. Thanks for the heads-up

I can't stop shaking my head. Wow.

[TorchTheWitch]

24. I just know some day he'll blow away innocents too

That guy was a serious nutter who only kept getting worse. When I met him he seemed pretty normal except for an excessive violent streak directed only at men. I saw him get into a fight in a bar once and he was completely out of control. One second he was having a relaxed good time, the next second he launched himself at some guy for winking at his girlfriend. It took about 10 people including all the huge bouncers to contain him, and he was a pretty small skinny dude. That's when I realized he was seriously messed up. A few years later I ran into him again and he was 20 times worse. His violence had extended toward women (he openly talked about slapping his girlfriend around which is something he never did when I first knew him), he was a drunken completely incoherent slob and liberally did a lot of hard drugs and had become a dealer. That was the last time I saw him and I hope I never see him again. Some day that kook is going to do something horrible with his gun arsonal, and everyone I know that knows him believes the same (unless he already died in a gutter somewhere). Yet he still has his legally obtained guns and is probably legally obtaining more.

Sometimes I wish the Marines took him back. At that point he was trying to straighten out his life, and it was after he lost the hearing that he zoomed down hill alarmingly. Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference, but maybe it would have helped straighten him out, who knows. Could be the Marines knew somehow that he was already a lost cause and taking him back wouldn't have helped him and he'd only get worse anyway. I know for the hearing he had to go through some sort of psychological exam, so maybe they did know something wasn't wired right in his head.

[derby378]

26. That's a very disturbing story

Part of me wants to feel sorry for this guy, but in any case, I hope he finds the stability he needs in life before he spins completely out of control.

I think you and I agree, however, that this man has no business owning any guns. He simply fell through the cracks.

[TorchTheWitch]

30. You can say that again

I miss the bright, funny, polite guy he was when I first knew him, and knowing he really tried to straighten himself out at one point seems to just make what he became even worse. I think a lot had to do with his being tossed out of the Marines especially dishonorably... the Marines meant a lot to him.

Absolutely, though, this is not someone who should be anywhere near guns of any kind. I would not have thought anything of it if he was like how he was when I first knew him, but he became something horribly different, and there needs to be something in place with gun ownership that deals with that.

[RamboLiberal]

31. Gun store owner said dishonorable discharge means not allowed to own

guns. I know from buying firearms myself it is on the form as well. Which leads me to believe that he had another type of discharge and not a full dishonorable.

[TorchTheWitch]

38. It varies by state

In PA you can own guns legally if you were dishonorably discharged but there's a background check and I assume it must be decided through that check whether or not you get ok'd to own guns. I don't know who does the check or how extensive it is. I would imagine they would look into the reason for the dishonorable discharge seeing as that would be the reason for the automatic check. Maybe the laws have changed back and forth, I don't know, but in the case of the guy I knew that was dishonorably discharged from the Marines he's allowed to legally own guns and he does. That's been a bone of contention with those of us that knew the guy and what a nutter he became... that it's crazy that someone like him is allowed to own guns.

[TorchTheWitch]

12. Probably depends on the area

Clearly this is not at all what police would have expected since there had been no cop shooting in nearly 20 years. Apparently, this was not the sort of area where such incidents were at all likely. Part of the reason the police force there is having such difficulty emotionally coming to terms with this is that stuff like this just doesn't happen there.

In Philly, things would probably have been handled quite differently as for a long time they've had to deal with far more violent incidents, and the officers there are almost dropping like flies. I live just outside of Philly, and it seems like almost every day there's yet another news report of a cop being gunned down. Yet here in my boring little town where nothing happens the local police would never be prepared to deal with what the Philly cops do on a daily basis.

Does this mean ALL police everywhere start acting like storm troopers for every domestic violence call? I don't think so. They also have to be careful that they aren't vilified for using excessive force and having the citizenry feel like they're surrounded by jack booted thugs. I think that each incident where ever it is be treated with only that force that is surmised to be necessary, and the only way to do that is treat each case on an individual basis with what info you have. There was nothing to indicate in the Pitt incident that there was a loony bulletproof vest wearing cop hater waiting to blow the police away even if it was mentioned that there were guns in the house.

[Barack_America]

13. I pity police officers. They are quite literally "caught in the crossfire" between rights...

The right to privacy -AND- the right to bear arms.

[TorchTheWitch]

17. Yes they are

Yet every day even here there's a constant barrage of posts screaming about "pigs" and "jack booted thugs" and how "they only join the force because they want a license to indiscriminatly bash heads". I doubt you've missed it. I also notice that with the latest round of mass shootings the "cops suck" crowd has gone silent for once. Maybe they're finally getting the idea that being a cop is damn dangerous work that you get constantly vilified for.

[TXRAT2]

35. Thank You.

[crankmob]

29. LAPD does..

a friend of mine was pulled over for riding a bicycle w/o a headlight one night. he was immediately handcuffed and remained in cuffs until the ticket was written. there was absolutely no reason for this and it's not an isolated incident.

[LanternWaste]

39. Odd that...

Odd that. My ex-B-I-L is a cop, and the only time he's ever been shot was during a routine traffic stop. And, as you state, "there was absolutely no reason for this and it's not an isolated incident."

Six of one, half a dozen of the other-- which I think is the point of the sub-thread: cops are caught in a lose-lose situation in many instances.

[TXRAT2]

32. In this day and age, should police just assume that everyone is armed?

Always.

[RamboLiberal]

36. Slain Officer Mayhle Nearly Took Down Poplawski

-----

But in recreating the crime scene and in interviews with the suspect, police have learned that Stephen Mayhle reacted swiftly and decisively and single-handedly tried to bring the incident to an end.

Police say Mayhle immediately drew his service revolver and shot Poplawski in the leg and then fired again, hitting Poplawski in the chest. It was a round that probably would have killed him except for Poplawski's bulletproof vest.

Instead, Poplawski fell to the floor – his shotgun knocked from his hands. Police say Poplawski then scrambled into the bedroom where he grabbed his AK-47, as Mayhle followed into the bedroom doorway where they say Poplawksi fired, hitting Mayhle in the head.

When he was hit, Mayhle stumbled backward and collapsed in the front door. But rather than give aid, police say Poplawski stood over him and shot him several more times.

http://kdka.com/local/fallenheroes/Stanton.Heights.standoff.2.979013.html

[RamboLiberal]

37. More on Mommy Dearest

Warrant For Suspected Police-Killer's Mom After Confrontation

The mother of accused Pittsburgh police-killer Richard Poplawski has had an active bench warrant for nearly three years, stemming from a court case involving her son's ex-girlfriend.

Citing court documents, WTAE Channel 4's Marcie Cipriani reported that Margaret Poplawski, of Stanton Heights, was found guilty in 2006 of harassing a 19-year-old woman who accused her son, Richard, of violence.

According to the police report, Margaret Poplawski became angry and confrontational with Melissa Gladish and spat on the woman at a Sunoco gas station at 51st and Butler streets in Lawrenceville in July 2005.

Gladish had recently filed for a protection-from-abuse order against Richard Poplawski, claiming he grabbed her by her hair, dragged her to a set of stairs and said he would kill her if he found out she was dating any of his friends.

At the time, according to the report, Gladish told police that Richard Poplawski had a gun buried in the park near his house.

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/19120044/detail.html