My article does not contradict itself. It goes to highlight the importance of holding those who call 911 but do not adhere to the instructions accountable for their actions or lack thereof. So the girl learned her lesson… but why did she learn that lesson? Was it because someone told her she was wrong, or because she was held accountable for her actions? I tend to think it was the latter.

Allow me to assure you I am not “protecting some buddies”. Besides the fact that it should be noted that this occurred back in May, it also occurred in Michigan. Unlike the incident in Oklahoma which involved an OHP Trooper with a checkered past and still hasn’t been resolved, the officer in this story has a record of meritorious service, the Police Chief addressed the issue right away with a suspension and retraining, and there was an apology issued.

Finally, as for making assumptions about you, well let’s be honest… just by your signed in user name of YouSuck assumptions have been made by you about me. If I was devoid of empathy I would not have spent 15 years of my life helping those who were unable to help themselves. Just because I hold her accountable for her failure to be rational and do as instructed does not mean I’m not empathetic to her situation, but rather that I know the price that people who depend on others with the same irrationality and non-compliance to instructions pay.

Often it is with their lives and those are cases when you cannot so easily blame a person on the other end of a phone.

You can keep making assumptions about me as you please, but the simple fact is your article contradicts itself, something you don’t really address. You really do think he was in the right for at least part of the time, something you refute in your intro.

But the fact of the matter is whatever infraction this girl might have committed by swearing, it was nothing compared to the actions of the police officer. I’m not exactly sure why it is so hard for you to see, but I obviously have my theories.

I’m done here. You can have the last word, and you can keep being the apologist. At least in the comments people can see what you really are after, protecting some buddies.

Yes he did. He also did as he was trained and she continued to act irrationally and hung up on him. Obviously you have either not listened to the beginning of the call where he tells her she doesn’t “need to swear and to slow down“. How does swearing and talking too fast ensure her father to get an ambulance? Sure he could have just taken the address he thought he heard, but what if it was the wrong one? Then who is to blame? Still the officer? No, I think not.

Does this mean that the officer is without fault? Absolutely not. In fact I clearly state that the officer was absolutely wrong in his interactions during the second call. He was wrong for trying to arrest her at the police station, and in the entirety of the situation he is at fault.

However, her irrationality and failure to follow instructions is something that SHE needs to be held accountable for irregardless of her emotional state or the fact that someone was in the wrong in a greater capacity than she was.

But calling her emotional state intangible? No, I think from the calls and her going to the police station shows enough that we can get a pretty decent grasp. You need some empathy.

Allowing her actions to go uncriticized is exactly what has led us to the sub-par state we are in. We are too easily swayed to place the entire blame onto the side of authority whether it is deserving or not.

In this case, her irrationality and disregard for instruction is also to blame for the delay. While some, such as you may argue the intangible “What do you expect from someone witnessing their father have a seizure?”, I would answer I expect them to have enough common sense to call 911, listen to the instructions and do as they are told, or not dial 911 to begin with.

Stop with the groupthink for a minute and consider the situation. The trained police officer could have easily handled it. But you think that is somehow dismissed because of a 17 year old girl whose father is having a seizure in front of her eyes?
–
Also: “I’m not going to argue that McFarlan was right or justified in his behaviour in any way shape or form. ”

(a few lines later) “I don’t see anything wrong with what McFarlan has done or said up to this point.”

That would be a form. You are making an argument that he wasn’t wholly in the wrong. You’re no more honest than the officer here.