Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
New York Times ^ | June 28, 2005 | Linda Greenhouse

Posted on 06/28/2005 1:46:17 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
All the more reason to exersize your 2nd amendment rights.
1 posted on 06/28/2005 1:46:18 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Then does this mean we don't have to pay the taxes that pay their salaries. We pay for the service of protection etc. If the police have no duty to protect us, then just exactly what should we expect them to do? I think these Judges have suddenly dropped 40 points of their IQ


2 posted on 06/28/2005 1:51:21 AM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

This is nothing new.

(Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App. 3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975)).


3 posted on 06/28/2005 1:57:31 AM PDT by happinesswithoutpeace (You are receiving this broadcast as a dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marty60

No, you pay for law enforcement, not protection. It is every ones responsibility to protect themselves, their property and family.


4 posted on 06/28/2005 1:58:28 AM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marty60

I haven't a clue. You'd think that if you hire and pay them to provide a service, you should recieve that service.
I guess this will rebound thru the whole business world as well. City trash collectors; it has no end!


5 posted on 06/28/2005 1:58:49 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

Isn't a violation of a restraining order not breaking a law?


6 posted on 06/28/2005 2:01:19 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

I guess all the police will be removing the "To serve and protect" decals from their cars in the morning.


7 posted on 06/28/2005 2:05:00 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

I guess all the police will be removing the "To serve and protect" decals from their cars in the morning.

Yep from now on it's "To Coffee and Doughnut"


8 posted on 06/28/2005 2:08:54 AM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK (secus acutulus exspiro ab Acheron bipes actio absol ab Acheron supplico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Sure it is, just like armed robbery. Are you gonna holler for police while some guy has a gun pointed at you while he takes your money or are you going to do something about it. Police enforce laws after the crime is committed. The cops you see patrolling banks are usually off duty cops being paid by the banks to protect them.
9 posted on 06/28/2005 2:10:30 AM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Don't you just love it!
And for years the government has been doing just about everything possible to chip away at our 2nd Amendment rights. So, it is not only harder for we the people equip ourselves for our own defense, but we are now told that the police aren't responsible for defending us either.


10 posted on 06/28/2005 2:19:09 AM PDT by frankiep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

I am just surprised that there were two dissents in that case, even though both predictably came from the left side of the Court. Law enforcement agencies in the United States have never had an obligation to protect any individual.


11 posted on 06/28/2005 2:19:19 AM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
The police have apparently never had a Constitutional duty to protect anyone.

All they really have to do is show up and take good notes.
12 posted on 06/28/2005 2:27:07 AM PDT by SoIA-79 ("The plans differ; the planners are all alike." Bastiat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frankiep

What kind of nanny state do you want, one like UK where you do not have a right to self defense? The cops are not OBLIGATED to defend you, that is your responsibility.


13 posted on 06/28/2005 2:27:35 AM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

The police are there to preserve order and investigate crime, pretty much in that order. Protection is, and always has been, the individual's responsibility. The very existence of a restraining order is proof of that. If the cops had the job of protecting each of us, no one would need a restraining order.


14 posted on 06/28/2005 2:33:44 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopeckne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

I don't want any kind of nanny state and I completely agree that the police should not be under any obligation to protect you. I was just trying to point out that while rulings like this are made, rightfully so, that there are still some halfwits out there who want to place more and more restrictions on our 2A rights. It's ironic because one of the arguements these gun grabbers make is that the police will be there to protect you if you need them.


15 posted on 06/28/2005 2:33:48 AM PDT by frankiep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Abram; Alexander Rubin; AlexandriaDuke; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; Bernard; BJClinton; ...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

it seems to me the citizens of every city now have great grounds for a class action lawsuit for false advertising against the police forces of every city that have cop cars painted with to serve and protect on the side and great defenses to use in court if you get arrested for illegal possession of a hand gun in Chicago la or new york or any other stalinist dictatorship of a city that outlaws all firearms possession

16 posted on 06/28/2005 2:33:48 AM PDT by freepatriot32 (www.lp.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
so in light of this ruling do you now agree with me that even convicted felons should be allowed to conceal carry to protect their life and family from people that the police dont have to protect you from you cant have it both ways you cant say the police have no obligation to protect you then say if you area convicted felon or a gang banger or drug dealer you shouldn't be allow ed to own the only means to protect yourself everytime i post on here that all adults should be allowed guns wtih no restrictions i get flamed so bad i have third degree burns
17 posted on 06/28/2005 2:38:14 AM PDT by freepatriot32 (www.lp.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower; Travis McGee

ping


18 posted on 06/28/2005 2:39:35 AM PDT by freepatriot32 (www.lp.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32

I do not know why you posted that to me, you never heard me make that kind of statement.


19 posted on 06/28/2005 2:44:49 AM PDT by eastforker (Under Cover FReeper going dark(too much 24))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
This ruling affirms a tradition going back to the 19th century... the duty of the police is to protect society, not particular individuals. Self-defense therefore is an obligation that must be exercised by the concerned individual seeking protecting from danger.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
20 posted on 06/28/2005 2:47:25 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson