California might charge for 9-1-1 calls

[finite automaton]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: TallBill

Also if someone sees an accident with a total stranger on the road, they probably wouldn't fork over $350 for them.

<---grabs strangers cell phone, dials 911 and reports location, runs away.

:thumbsup::laugh:

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: TallBill

Also if someone sees an accident with a total stranger on the road, they probably wouldn't fork over $350 for them.

<---grabs strangers cell phone, dials 911 and reports location, runs away.

<................ Cant find the phone, hey dude where is your phone I aint paying $350 bucks to save your life.

 

[darkxshade]

I would have no problems if the calls were say $10 but are waived if the call is legitimate. Because a lot of people do call for stupid reasons.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I agree. Therefore the proper response is to charge for calls found to be frivolous. Otherwise you are basically de-incentivising people from legitimately calling in potentially emergency situations.

Exactly. Institute fines for stupid 911 calls.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I agree. Therefore the proper response is to charge for calls found to be frivolous. Otherwise you are basically de-incentivising people from legitimately calling in potentially emergency situations.

Exactly. Institute fines for stupid 911 calls.

That makes way too much sense. This is America, the innocent have to suffer because to lump all the blame on the guilty isn't fair.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

So would a 9mm to the back of their skull.

or a 22LR from 200 yards

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: deepred98

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
cost to call = more deaths = less population = less competition for jobs.

Everyone wins...except those who died.

They get to go to heaven 😉

Bahahah! Good one.

We do what we must
because we can.

For the good of all of us.
Except the ones who are dead.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: WaTaGuMp

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: TallBill

Also if someone sees an accident with a total stranger on the road, they probably wouldn't fork over $350 for them.

<---grabs strangers cell phone, dials 911 and reports location, runs away.

<................ Cant find the phone, hey dude where is your phone I aint paying $350 bucks to save your life.

Sure as hell don't want to make the call with your own phone and risk a lawsuit.

 

[Exterous]

Originally posted by: finite automaton

Originally posted by: Newbian
So how will they be able to complain when a fast food restuarant runs out of something?

I think a reasonable compromise is, you get charged xx if the call is deemed to be frivolous

I agree - otheriwse people are going to hesitate to dial 911 in an emergency.

*Car crash*
"Hey can you call 911?"
"Heck no, I just lost my job. You call"
"I ain't calling - my mortgage is due next week"
"Look, hes bleeding a lot so stop being a cheap asshole and call"
"If you're worried so much about he's bleeding then YOU call."
"Heck no - I don't even know the guy"
"Guys, guys - don't worry about it - hes dead now"
"Whew! I almost lost $350!"

 

[GeekDrew]

Like most people are saying, leverage fines for idiots that make calls that should never have made to 911. I can see court cases coming as a result of the judgment of frivolous cases, but I'd rather tie up a court than a 911 dispatcher.

 

[Phokus]

Maybe it'll cut back on the mom who calls 911 because burger king got her order wrong

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

So what exactly are you supposed to do when there is a car accident that needs reported to the police? Not everyone has every single non-emergency number for every police department in existence in their phone.

 

[amdhunter]

If that were happen, I'd just let people die and wouldn't think about calling 911 to help them. I wouldn't expect to survive if I needed 911 assistance either. 🙁

What a stupid idea.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I would rather fine those idiots then charge everyone a fee. I can just see someone on a fixed income not calling when they MIGHT be having a heart attack


edit: and as others mentioned people wouldnt call in a emergancy for a stranger.

 

[dudeman007]

Santa Rosa != all of California....

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I agree. Therefore the proper response is to charge for calls found to be frivolous. Otherwise you are basically de-incentivising people from legitimately calling in potentially emergency situations.

Exactly. Institute fines for stupid 911 calls.

That makes way too much sense. This is America, the innocent have to suffer because to lump all the blame on the guilty isn't fair.

If we blamed the guilty, they might feel bad, and we can't have that.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: dudeman007
Santa Rosa != all of California....

Exactly.

BTW, people in Santa Rosa would also have the option of paying $3/month for 911 service.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
You already pay for 911 calls. It's called "tax".

Exactly, so why pay more on top of that?

They should just charge for the prank/false alarm calls, but not the real ones. Even the false alarms they should take it on a case per case basis as someone may see something that really looks like something bad then turns out to be something else. Like smoke coming out of a window, but turns out to be the BBQ and it just looks like the smoke was coming out. People should not be discouraged to call 911 for possible emergencies, better safe then sorry.

 

[runzwithsizorz]

Pretty soon the fire department will be billing people for putting out their house fire.
er, oh wait,---

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

this

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

So would a 9mm to the back of their skull.

yeah, but think of all the lost revenue.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I agree. Therefore the proper response is to charge for calls found to be frivolous. Otherwise you are basically de-incentivising people from legitimately calling in potentially emergency situations.

Exactly. Institute fines for stupid 911 calls.

yes, yes. even better.

 

[RaistlinZ]

You have to remember California is currently like $50 billion in debt and facing a financial crisis. I bet this idea came up because they're desperate for any source of new money they can tap into.

BTW... does this mean you'll have to enter your CC info to call 9-1-1 from a pay phone on the street? 🙂

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I do see some merit to it. Right now if you have a scanner and listen to some of the calls, people are calling 911 for everything from a headache to a stubbed toe. It might cut back on those idiots.

I agree. Therefore the proper response is to charge for calls found to be frivolous. Otherwise you are basically de-incentivising people from legitimately calling in potentially emergency situations.

Exactly. Institute fines for stupid 911 calls.

yes, yes. even better.

I like this idea much better.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
You already pay for 911 calls. It's called "tax".

This...and the fact that many states/areas already charge extra on the phone bill for enhanced 9-1-1.

Notice: Added the extra states/areas for those states that might follow what California is doing. I have no idea if California already charges a monthly phone bill fee or not.