[MrEdd]

Then a whole lot of speed tra, err, revenue generation would be lost.

Win/win.

[Enterprise]

Every now and then when an incident occurs where people are injured or killed, someone throws out the comment that the Supremes have ruled that the police have no obligation to protect someone. Common sense should indicate that it is not possible for the police to protect everyone, and that includes cases wherein someone has a restraining order. Outpost and Puppage are correct.

To me, the post by exnavy was a form of snark, because we all know that the police can't protect everyone, and the Supremes understood, that because of civil lawsuits, it would collapse the system if officers owed a duty to protect someone or everyone. The reply was also snark because frogs can't fly, and it was an unnecessary snark.