<p>Ok since our argument has gone way off topic, I’ll just point out some errors in your argument (not that changing it really helps the central topic that we totally strayed away from)
I actually think you got confused with the type of restraining orders here. First off the wiki quote you say was referring to is the most common type of restraining order which can be easily refereed to as a “person to person restraining order” (not formally called that) but what that is, is a type of restraining order in which an individual is not to make contact with another person or stay a certain distance away from the person. The one that we were actually referring to is sometimes called a “trespassing restraining order” or a restraining order placed to restrain an individual from entering a home<a href=“underlined%20so%20you%20know%20where%20the%20definition%20is”>/U</a>. That type of restraining order can be monitored (and I’ll explain that right below). But I think you were confused with the type of restraining order because your quote came from the article that talks about the kind of restraining order that is “a legal order issued by a state court which requires one person to stop harming another person.” The one we are talking about does not involve two people. But instead a home and a person.</p>
<p>
Actually you are wrong. In the case of a newly filed restraining order, they will monitor the area. Also if I’m not wrong, police are assigned areas to monitor, this is to prevent having 5 police in 1 block and no police in another. Each police are given an area to be in (I believe they can pick). However, the main reason why police are given an area to monitor is because they want to make sure that all the places are safe. Essentially, they won’t be wasting a police to monitor a trespassing restraining order because they can assign the police that is around the home to keep a watchful eye on the home. This doesn’t happen just with a restraining order. If a family has been receiving threats, there will be police monitoring around the area of the home (maybe not right in front of it but they will drive by every so often). When a robbery/kidnap occurs in a neighborhood, police will continue to monitor that area to prevent more robbery/kidnap to occur. So really this isn’t any different. When you place a trespassing restraining order, it is like receiving many threats (the home owner doesn’t feel safe about the person being in their home so they file it). Police are made to keep people safe. Their goal is to prevent any further crime. I mean a property restraining order is easier to protect and there is no real reason why they wouldn’t try to. Police are paid by the people to prevent crimes. If they can prevent it, then they should try. Most of the time it is easier to prevent a crime than try to find the person who performed the crime. Because who knows, what happens if the person who is restrained can set a home on fire and then run away and there isn’t a police close by to monitor the home. Then what? The home owner who filed it would be made. The police could have prevented it by stopping the restrained person from getting close but instead there was not police around to monitor it and when they get there, it could have been too late and it would have done hundreds to thousands of dollars in damage because fire spreads really fast in a home and it becomes really hard to contain after it has been fueled. If a police was monitoring the home, he/she could have seen the break in and prevented the fire and the break in. Also what happens if it was a restraining order on a person to protect the family? Lets say what you think, we don’t have a police around to monitor the home because it is a “waste”. The restrained person comes into the house with a gun, shoots a the family to death and runs aways. Ok so the police comes. Oh the people are dead. Dying from a gun shot can be faster than having a police come to a house from a couple of mile away. If a police have been near by the home (like in the neighborhood). The police could have seen the break in or a potential break in and then prevented the killing. </p>
<p>
Ok so if you have understood the reply I wrote on top then you might understand this. If a restraining order have been placed, there would be a police near by the monitor the home. Then in that case, when a 911 call is called, then the police nearby could reply and he/she would know if the suspect was restrained or not. So if you replace the suspect with Gates. If Gates was restricted, there would be a police by his house (seem really awkward). So when a 911 call is in, the police nearby can respond immediately and quickly. If he sees that it is Gates (usually by look but even if it requires ID). Then he would know that Gates is restricted. Again it is about the fact that there will be a police nearby.</p>
<p>Wow that actually took a while…</p>