One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Are you aware the police have no "duty or obligation" to protect you from a crime??
Apr 5, 2018 08:52:48   #
Bug58
 
"By becoming a police officer, an individual does not give up his right to the protection of these general principles. A police officer does not “assume any greater obligation to others individually. The only additional duty undertaken by accepting employment as a police officer is the duty owed to the public at large."

https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/4913117-Addressing-cops-confusion-over-the-public-duty-doctrine/



"Even if all 500,000 American police officers were assigned to patrol, they could not protect 240 million citizens from upwards of 10 million criminals who enjoy the luxury of deciding when and where to strike. But we have nothing like 500,000 patrol officers; to determine how many police are actually available for any one shift, we must divide the 500,000 by four (three shifts per day, plus officers who have days off, are on sick leave, etc.). The resulting number must be cut in half to account for officers assigned to investigations, juvenile, records, laboratory, traffic, etc., rather than patrol."

https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html




http://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/

Reply
Apr 5, 2018 09:51:56   #
bahmer
 
Bug58 wrote:
"By becoming a police officer, an individual does not give up his right to the protection of these general principles. A police officer does not “assume any greater obligation to others individually. The only additional duty undertaken by accepting employment as a police officer is the duty owed to the public at large."

https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/4913117-Addressing-cops-confusion-over-the-public-duty-doctrine/



"Even if all 500,000 American police officers were assigned to patrol, they could not protect 240 million citizens from upwards of 10 million criminals who enjoy the luxury of deciding when and where to strike. But we have nothing like 500,000 patrol officers; to determine how many police are actually available for any one shift, we must divide the 500,000 by four (three shifts per day, plus officers who have days off, are on sick leave, etc.). The resulting number must be cut in half to account for officers assigned to investigations, juvenile, records, laboratory, traffic, etc., rather than patrol."

https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html




http://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/
"By becoming a police officer, an individual ... (show quote)


But the liberals want to rely on that and take our guns away. So who is the ones that are nuts?

Reply
Apr 5, 2018 10:00:13   #
vettelover Loc: Richmond Va
 
Bug58 wrote:
"By becoming a police officer, an individual does not give up his right to the protection of these general principles. A police officer does not “assume any greater obligation to others individually. The only additional duty undertaken by accepting employment as a police officer is the duty owed to the public at large."

https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-and-careers/articles/4913117-Addressing-cops-confusion-over-the-public-duty-doctrine/



"Even if all 500,000 American police officers were assigned to patrol, they could not protect 240 million citizens from upwards of 10 million criminals who enjoy the luxury of deciding when and where to strike. But we have nothing like 500,000 patrol officers; to determine how many police are actually available for any one shift, we must divide the 500,000 by four (three shifts per day, plus officers who have days off, are on sick leave, etc.). The resulting number must be cut in half to account for officers assigned to investigations, juvenile, records, laboratory, traffic, etc., rather than patrol."

https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html




http://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/
"By becoming a police officer, an individual ... (show quote)



Great Post - Many Americans do not understand this.

See Warren v. District of Columbia

See Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales

Reply
 
 
Apr 5, 2018 11:21:42   #
Mike Easterday
 
Sad but true.

Reply
Apr 5, 2018 11:21:56   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
vettelover wrote:
Great Post - Many Americans do not understand this.

See Warren v. District of Columbia

See Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales


You beat me to it.

Reply
Apr 5, 2018 12:02:25   #
vettelover Loc: Richmond Va
 
PoppaGringo wrote:
You beat me to it.


Thanks Poppa

Reply
Apr 6, 2018 12:30:07   #
Bug58
 
vettelover wrote:
Great Post - Many Americans do not understand this.


I know most people do not understand this, I talk to them all the time.

I had an opportunity to talk to one of my neighbor's about this very topic recently. It was interesting as she was talking about how she doesn't think
anyone should be able to own a gun 'unless they are police or military'. I said, so you want a policed/criminal state??

She said "No"

I said, but that is what you just said, you only want the police or military to be able to own gun's
I asked her, do you honestly think criminal's would turn in their guns?
Do you think the drug dealer, or thief is going to turn in their guns?

She gave a puzzled look and admitted No, they wouldn't.

We live in a rural area, so I asked her, 'if someone breaks into her home, how long does she think it will take the police to get there?"
If they have another call how long do you think it's going to take?

She say's "If the person breaking in has a gun, we'd all be dead, by the time the police get here". (most likely, if that is there intent)

We discussed some of these articles and how the police do not have a duty to protect or even stop a crime even if they witness a crime happening..

We discussed the gun laws in England, and Australia and that while yes, they can get certain licenses to own gun's they can't use those guns
for self defense--she thinks that's crazy.

Needless to say, by the end of that part of the conversation, she was having a change of heart. While she may not purchase a gun, she has a better understanding of the issue.

Was talking to someone else recently, who happens to teach police officers, and he wasn't aware of these things either, and asked what court cases determined that, so I started listing some of them and let him look them up for himself. Needless to say, he was shocked.

Another friend's son was adamant I was lying when I brought this up, so I showed him the court rulings, he tried to say "I was misinterpreting what the court's ruled" I gave him a couple links to some books written BY lawyers who wrote on the topic, I suggested he purchase and read them and become informed citizen.

Reply
 
 
Apr 6, 2018 16:03:22   #
vettelover Loc: Richmond Va
 
Bug58 wrote:
I know most people do not understand this, I talk to them all the time.

I had an opportunity to talk to one of my neighbor's about this very topic recently. It was interesting as she was talking about how she doesn't think
anyone should be able to own a gun 'unless they are police or military'. I said, so you want a policed/criminal state??

She said "No"

I said, but that is what you just said, you only want the police or military to be able to own gun's
I asked her, do you honestly think criminal's would turn in their guns?
Do you think the drug dealer, or thief is going to turn in their guns?

She gave a puzzled look and admitted No, they wouldn't.

We live in a rural area, so I asked her, 'if someone breaks into her home, how long does she think it will take the police to get there?"
If they have another call how long do you think it's going to take?

She say's "If the person breaking in has a gun, we'd all be dead, by the time the police get here". (most likely, if that is there intent)

We discussed some of these articles and how the police do not have a duty to protect or even stop a crime even if they witness a crime happening..

We discussed the gun laws in England, and Australia and that while yes, they can get certain licenses to own gun's they can't use those guns
for self defense--she thinks that's crazy.

Needless to say, by the end of that part of the conversation, she was having a change of heart. While she may not purchase a gun, she has a better understanding of the issue.

Was talking to someone else recently, who happens to teach police officers, and he wasn't aware of these things either, and asked what court cases determined that, so I started listing some of them and let him look them up for himself. Needless to say, he was shocked.

Another friend's son was adamant I was lying when I brought this up, so I showed him the court rulings, he tried to say "I was misinterpreting what the court's ruled" I gave him a couple links to some books written BY lawyers who wrote on the topic, I suggested he purchase and read them and become informed citizen.
I know most people do not understand this, I talk ... (show quote)


Great job Bug trying to help others understand the world as it really is. There is a very specific reason the founding Fathers wrote the Constitution and our Bill of Rights the way they did. People cannot comprehend their own human rights. They are just use to being led around ny their noses completely oblivious to the threats around them.

Good and evil is very easily define!

Good = Teaching about individualism and empowerment to others

Evil = Those who desire control over others

Reply
Apr 8, 2018 14:40:16   #
promilitary
 
And they don't protect you from crime. Talking with our sheriff about guns and protection, he said it is advisable to own a gun
and know how to use it because he nor his deputies cannot provide that protection. In the time it takes to make the 911 call,
and then for law enforcement to arrive, the damage is already done. Better to have a gun in your hand than the police on the phone.

85% of law enforcement time is investigating crimes already committed and writing up reports.

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 12:29:45   #
Bug58
 
promilitary wrote:
And they don't protect you from crime. Talking with our sheriff about guns and protection, he said it is advisable to own a gun
and know how to use it because he nor his deputies cannot provide that protection. In the time it takes to make the 911 call,
and then for law enforcement to arrive, the damage is already done. Better to have a gun in your hand than the police on the phone.

85% of law enforcement time is investigating crimes already committed and writing up reports.


Exactly, and most people ignore this reality.

Our local sheriff's tell people the same thing.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.