Fear of gun threats
The conscientiousness of the Bloomingdale Police Department during the recent unrest has been immensely reassuring. However, we are left to question where that diligence was when, within just a few months of moving into the subdivision, a new neighbor twice heatedly threatened to keep a firearm by his door and gun down another neighbor's dog within nearly point blank range of our own front door.
Given that discharging a firearm in a residential area poses a grave danger to everyone within range, any reasonable person would have expected authorities to respond decisively. Alas, we now know that the police did respond but did nothing. Are gun threats so commonplace in Bloomingdale that police deem their indifference appropriate? Is it fitting a citizen can expect to pay a greater penalty for a moving violation in Bloomingdale than for threatening to endanger the safety of everyone within a bullet's range? Moreover, would the Bloomingdale Police Department have responded in the same accommodating manner if the threats in question had been made by, say, George Floyd?
The questions seem fair to ask as the danger is neither imaginary nor overstated. Far too many innocents are dead because a bullet that was not intended for them struck them regardless. These are the grim consequences of irresponsible gunplay.
Threats involving a deadly weapon must be dealt with aggressively. Because this matter was not, we find ourselves residing next door to an irresponsible and remorseless hothead. Bloomingdale deserves better protection from those sworn to "protect and serve." Police should release the incident report related to this matter and let Bloomingdale taxpayers determine for themselves if their interests were "protected and served."
Zero tolerance for gun threats in Bloomingdale, zero exceptions, zero excuses. Period. Or does an innocent bystander have to become a statistic first?
Lee & Maureen Klose