Posted on 09/05/2013 2:26:24 PM PDT by lowbridge
“HAHAHA... Wish I didn’t have so many skeletons, I’d run against Dave Young.”
Embrace the skeletons.
Have you essentially killed a young woman by leaving the scene of an accident -Ted Kennedy?
Have you taken bribes like A.C. Hastings?
Plagiarism perhaps like Joe Biden?
Do you “loath the military” like Bill Clinton?
Hey how about running a homosexual brothel like Barney Frank?
Maybe you have tax issues like Nancy Pelosi?
Embrace the skeletons and just don’t ruin on family values
I want to see that A$$hole explain THAT to a bunch of street thugs, The guy is a typical RAT.
guy = gal (I think)
We Have No Constitutional Right To Police Protection
But the Founding States made the 2nd Amendment so that citizens can be their own police.
Also note that the link above concerning no right to police protection concerns a Castle Rock, Colorado case.
The legislature can help protect us by not interfering in our ability to protect ourselves. If they can’t do that, they are willfully making us less safe and it’s time for them to go.
I like that. I'm going to ask my friend Brian DelGrosso about this.
Democrats lose a few more brain cells every time they open their mouths.
“the state Legislature keeps citizens safe from harm”
Really? How does that work?
Hell the police can’t keep citizens safe, they finally admitted it in court, that’s why you never ever see the motto “ To Serve and Protect” on police cars any more. Any citizen that gives up their right to self defense to any group is just a victim in waiting.
This critical thinker probably doesn’t KNOW that the POleece are NOT RESPONSIBLE for protecting her from BAD THINGS.
Most moonbats are in fact, just that stupid.
Colorado House Majority Leader Dickey Lee Hullinghorst
“Dickey”, how appropriately named is she.
It’s black letter law that the police have no obligation whatsoever to protect you in any way, shape, form, or fashion:
(Sources, including the latest one from Castle Rock, CO of all places!)
7/15/05 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278 TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO, PETITIONER v. JESSICA GONZALES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT BEST FRIEND OF HER DECEASED MINOR CHILDREN, REBECCA GONZALES, KATHERYN GONZALES, AND LESLIE GONZALES
On June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the Supreme Court found that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to individual police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs. Gonzales’ husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales to death, Mrs. Gonzales’ family could not get the Supreme Court to change their unanimous decision for one’s individual protection. YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS AND GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety Ordinance.
(1) Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die. Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
(2) Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
(3) Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982).
(4) DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
(5) Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
(6) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981).
“...a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen...” -Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981)
(7) “What makes the City’s position particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of NY which now denies all responsibility to her.”
Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
(8) “Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public.”
Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
New York Times, Washington DC
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone By LINDA GREENHOUSE Published: June 28, 2005
The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.
The police have two enumerated accountabilities:
1. To collect evidence to support the apprehension, trial, and conviction of a criminal.
2. Apprehension of suspects.
Which is why it IS legal to sue, criminally and civilly, for wrongful arrest, evidence tampering, destruction of evidence, etc.
You cannot sue for 911 slow-response, for example, and you won’t be able to find a lawyer to take the case. Failure to respond is a different animal, especially in capital crimes, and especially if evidence is destroyed as a result.
Who needs a gun or the police when you have democrat females from the Colorado Legislature guarding your home, walking your kids to school, keeping schools safe, patroling your neighborhood?
\s
Madam, I reject your adult status as completely absurd and your position as a legislator as absolutely frivolous.
She also has “The Look” of a leftist female politician...Google her image... I tell you THEY ALL LOOK ALIKE!!! ;)
Arm and defend yourself. When a crime is being committed, the state legislature is always months away.
Well, she’s right.
She does have the right to not carry a gun and still feel safe. Her feelings may not align with reality, but she does have that right.
Why is it that they always look like that?
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.