She held him at gunpoint for 26 minutes before police could respond to her home – protecting her young daughters!
Lauren Richards was forced to hold an intruder at gunpoint for over 26 minutes before police arrived.
She called 911 three separate times before police were able to come to her home.
Watch this powerful video to see how Lauren responded!
Grab Your “Load More T-Shirt” at 10% Off Using Coupon Code 26MINUTES10
Grab Your “Load More T-Shirt” at 10% Off Using Coupon Code 26MINUTES10
Seems like an even more urgent message needs to be sent out to these cops.
What the hell is the deal?? 26 minutes???
I have been in Law Enforcement since 1975 and people just don’t understand why it takes so long for Police to respond ,but a major accident on the Freeway in your area could tie up four or more Officers. That is why I have always carried a pocket gun when I am off duty, even around my house, or a quick trip to the store.
I understand that other situations tie up multiple officers, I believe everyone realizes this. Just understanding the reason why however does not make it acceptable. If someone is killed or raped in a home invasion and police did not respond because they were tied up in an accident does it make it ok for the family that just lost a loved one for the police dept to say “sorry, we were tied up elsewhere”, should the family or victim then say “it’s ok, I understand”.
An effective police dept must be able to respond to calls in a timely manner for the safety of all, even if this means hiring more officers. I know there is no easy answer and alot of communities have cut backs on their police dept and other areas. This is one reason why it is important to maintain our rights to bear arms.
Not trying to cast a bad light on cops, but I remember a situation I was in back in 1989, long before there was any of this ‘defund the police’ bullshit. I was by myself one night in a small bar in Lynchburg, Virginia. Went to hang out and see a band perform. I was minding my own business when I noticed these two guys were staring at me. They were drinking. I never saw them before in my life. I think they were just drunk and looking to start trouble. The bar was getting ready to close and these guys kept staring with angry looks on their faces. I had no protection on me that night, just my hands. I was going to walk out to my car and I remember thinking the guys might try to jump me as I was leaving. Sure enough, as I was going out the door, they came after me. One guy grabbed me by my shirt and ripped it. He knocked me down. I got back up, grabbed him by the hair and popped him one. Keep in mind, the police station was on the next block. Someone in the bar called them. Took them around 40 minutes to arrive. If those guys had weapons, it would’ve been too bad for me. As soon as they heard and saw the police coming, they hauled ass. 40 minutes and only a block away????
She could be Dead if she didn’t have a Gun !
Another video that will not load.
This is a powerful message that needs to be shown to those who want to, as they say, “get guns off the streets”. I just cannot understand why these people don’t get it. You can’t scream about defunding the police and then wonder why things, like this, happen. Defunding the police is NOT going to cut down on bad cops, it’s going to cut into the ability for officers to respond to situations, like this, and do what they are trained and hired to do: protect (and to serve. Some seem to forget this last part that almost every police dept. has in their slogan). Hell, yes, we’re keeping our guns! And getting more! Sleepy Joe “Where are we?” Biden and his cronies are the only ones who should be defunded!
REMEMBER THIS- THE SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THE POLICE HAVE ZERO, ZIP, NADA NO RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT ANYONE OR ANYTHING! YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS! — REMEMER THIS THE NEXT TIME YOU ARE TOLD YOU DON’T NEED A GUN BECAUSE THE POLICE WILL PROTECT YOU— SERVE AND PROTECT— AT THEIR CONVENIENCE!!
By Linda Greenhouse
June 28, 2005
WASHINGTON, June 27 – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.
The decision, with an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia and dissents from Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, overturned a ruling by a federal appeals court in Colorado. The appeals court had permitted a lawsuit to proceed against a Colorado town, Castle Rock, for the failure of the police to respond to a woman’s pleas for help after her estranged husband violated a protective order by kidnapping their three young daughters, whom he eventually killed.
For hours on the night of June 22, 1999, Jessica Gonzales tried to get the Castle Rock police to find and arrest her estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, who was under a court order to stay 100 yards away from the house. He had taken the children, ages 7, 9 and 10, as they played outside, and he later called his wife to tell her that he had the girls at an amusement park in Denver.
Ms. Gonzales conveyed the information to the police, but they failed to act before Mr. Gonzales arrived at the police station hours later, firing a gun, with the bodies of the girls in the back of his truck. The police killed him at the scene.