I don't know which law enforcement agency YOU worked for, but in my department, when we were dispatched to a call, we were required to go. We couldn't just say "No. I don't feel like going to that one. I'll wait for the next call."
Have you ever heard of a LEO responding to a "suspicious person" call? Exactly what crime was being committed that required the police? We don't know until they respond and check it out. I've never seen a state or federal statute that makes "acting suspicious" a crime, yet they are still dispatched to those kind of calls. I equate MWAG calls the same way. LEO don't know that a crime is being committed until they check.
Scenario 1, 911 not obligated to respond to every complaint:
"911, what is your emergency?"
"There is a man with a gun at McDonalds!"
"Where is the gun?"
"In a thingy on his belt."
"You mean in a holster?"
"Yes, that's it, a holster."
"Is the man threatening anyone with the gun?"
"I feel threatened!"
"What exactly is the man doing? Is he having an argument with someone or handling the gun?"
"No, he's waiting in line."
"Well, you aren't describing anything that is illegal. If he actually threatens to use the gun, call us back and we can do something about it."
------------------------------------------------------
Scenario 2, officer can't detain without reasonable suspicion:
Officer gets a call that there is a man with a gun at McDonalds. Officer arrives to see a man exiting McDonalds wearing a gun in a holster on his belt.
Officer quickly exits vehicle, approaches man and says, "Can I talk to you for a minute?"
Man replies, "I would rather not, I am very busy."
Officer says, "OK. Sorry to bother you, have a nice day."
Officer watches man get in a vehicle and writes down license number.
Officer goes inside the McDonalds and sees nothing unusual, looks in the bathrooms...nothing.
Officer calls in license plate number he wrote down and nothing is returned on the registered owner.
Officer signs off the call.
--------------------------------------------------------
We, as Joe Citizens are expected to live our lives within the boundaries set forth by laws and regulations. Why is it so unreasonable to expect LEO agencies to do the same? Just like criminals will not obey laws so they must be caught breaking them and punished, some government agencies or employees will not obey the limits of their authority and must be caught violating the limits and the situation dealt with appropriately. It might be simple ignorance that can be fixed with training. It might be willful violation or negligence that deserves a civil award or criminal punishment.
I just don't think it is asking too much to expect government to stay within the boundaries of authority set forth in the Constitution. If we have to carry voice recorders or video cameras to do so....then so be it. The government sometimes records our movements on video.