- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 45,177
- Reaction score
- 463,610
Not to stray to far off topic, but, IMO, it is not pointless. There are systems in place that handle certain scenario's that happen. One for instance, if you are on the phone with someone and you hear something happening that needs immediate emergency services. You can call 911, best to not hang up as they can retrieve the location of the third party wireless phone, if phone was manufactured in the last 4 to 5 years, but all they really need is the address to transfer to the correct PASP (public safety answering point).
If there is interest, this FCC document can maybe shed some light on how wireless geo tagged data has not progressed as much as you would think until very recently. Many wireless 911 calls still go through the nearest cell tower for the location, not based off the geo location data of the phone making the call. In other words, the PASP center closest to the tower gets the call and not the PASP center closest to the phone. This is all currently changing/upgrading right now.
Sadly 988 is yet to accept wireless geo location data.
There was much discussion about this issue early in the case.
What I know for a fact is when I was sitting in Alaska and talked to a friend residing in Pueblo West, CO, concerned about his blood sugar, I dialed 911 and the call center taking my call routed me within seconds to the appropriate dispatch in Colorado. The operator stayed on the line and announced my call to the operator that I was reporting an emergency for 719... I only made one call, period.
I'd bet my house that BM could have done the same with the same result.
BM could have called Sheriff Speeze directly if he wanted -- but there was no emergency.
The Ritters were victims of BM.
JMO