Skip to comments.Subway Stabbing Victim Can't Sue NYPD For Failing To Save Him(feet away, no duty to protect0
Posted on 08/03/2013 6:54:14 AM PDT by marktwain
click here to read article
Does not compute.
They were chickensh!t cowards. Wonder if they'll find some excuse to file for "disability" when it comes time to collect their pension benefits.
If the constitution guarantees the right to life, and the people the society hires to protect you have no obligation to protect you then you should have the right to do so with any weapon you have.
The transit officers were not trained to do any differently. They may also have gotten their signals crossed.
If you think the homicide rate is high now, wait until Barry and the ‘RATS ban guns.
Perhaps the greatest value of this decision is to have something printed to stick up ... er, insert ... no, that's not it ... roll up and hit a liberal on the nose when they say you don't need a gun, just call a cop.
Cops are mostly cowards and tnis is news?
Yes, most people do not know that the police have no obligation to protect you. Once they understand that, it changes their view about owning weapons.
Actually, the homicide rate now is very nearly at an all-time low, essentially the same as it was in 1956, and poised to go even lower,.
Kansas passed a law that you can’t put those no gun signs on the building unless there is armed security in the building. I like that law.
If they have no duty to protect, then, WHAT EXACTLY is their duty?
Well he should have Stood His Ground.
Too bad he wasn’t attacked by a German Shepherd, he may have gotten some help that way.
We don't need the Constitution to have a right to life. It should acknowledge it, but it doesn't grant it or guarantee it.
Yep. Plus NYC basically bans law abiding citizens from owning a gun to defend themselves.
Yep. You are a slave.
“If they have no duty to protect, then, WHAT EXACTLY is their duty?
You hit the nail squarely on the head sir.
I couldn't find a shorter summary.
Effect of the Law New York's Good Samaritan law carves out specific circumstances when an individual shall not be held liable for ordinary negligence in attempting to render medical assistance. Instead, they will only be held liable in cases of gross negligence. Gross Negligence Simply put, negligence is a failure to exercise ordinary care. Gross negligence means a failure to use even slight care, or is conduct that is so careless as to show complete disregard for the rights and safety of others. When it Applies The law isn't found in one centralized part, but rather integrated into various provisions of the NY Public Health Law and the NY Education Law. Importantly, New York's Good Samaritan law is limited to medical treatment or assistance. The heart of the law is found in Pub. Health Law §3000-a, which provides in part: Any person who voluntarily and without expectation of monetary compensation renders first aid or emergency treatment at the scene of an accident or other emergency outside a hospital, doctor's office or any other place having proper and necessary medical equipment, to a person who is unconscious, ill, or injured, shall not be liable for damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by such person or for damages for the death of such person alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of such emergency treatment unless it is established that such injuries were or such death was caused by gross negligence on the part of such person.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1564360
But don’t protect yourself. That’s a felony.
Their duty is to ENFORCE the law. If in doing that they provide some sort of protection, that’s a bonus! The 1981 ‘Warren vs DC’ court decision established that police have a duty to provide ‘protection’ to the collective community but are under NO legal obligation to provide protection to individual ‘free’ citizens. I believe that is why there has been no successful legal action brought by a ‘free’ citizen against a policemen, a police department, a city, a county, a state, or any government agency on the basis of ‘Failure to Protect’.
The city, meanwhile, claimed that the NYPD had no "special duty" to intervene at the time, and that they were in the motorman's car because they believed Gelman had a gun.
And if Joseph Lozito had used a firearm instead, the coward cops would have been out of that motorman's car in a heartbeat to arrest him.
Oh, *THAT* makes it ALL better.
Yep. You are a slave.
Unless you are a member of the elite. A rock star or a Donald Trump or Howard Stern. Then You may protect yourself.
Heaven be thanked the citizen didn’t have a gun: the poor criminal could have been injured or even killed.
Well, they can draw chalk outlines around the victims' bodies.
He should sue Bloomberg for unconstitutionally infringing on his 2nd amendment right to defend himself.
When seconds count, the police are only minutes....errr..FEET...away.
In the Police States of America, cops exist to collect taxes from motorists and to crush your pets to death when they raid your home over unpaid jaywalking tickets.
He should screamed: "He's a fare dodger!!!"
22 NYPD Officers Show Up to Arrest a Single Fare Dodger on New York Subway!
If they had no evidence that the victim was in danger, why were they locked in the cab?
I recommend that New Yorkers print a copy of this ruling and carry it with them as their Concealed Carry Permit.
I used to recommend carry a copy of the Bill of Rights or the Second Amendment, but the cops and courts don’t seem to recognize those anymore.
Even in Chicago?
I am willing to donate to a fund for Lazio to advertise the cowardice of these officers.
Then how come if an LEO orders me to assist him and I don't I can be charged and prosecuted?
The modest Lozito told us the cops and the EMTs were the real heroes.
"I am alive because of the police," he said.
Yes, Gelman's from the the Ukraine, but local to me, there was a Russian that was a nuisance. Mental, alcoholic, and a two-fisted smoker, he'd be alternating cigarettes while drunkenly meandering his way across one of the main drags.
BTB, didn't Al Sharpton sue NYC (NYPD) for failing to protect him during one of his rabble-rousing/community-organizing marches? A resident of the targeted neighborhood stabbed Sharpton.
I remember a photo of an greasy, but alert Sharpton being loaded into an ambulance with a [forgetten] caption of how much he took the city for.
I was perplexed as to why he was able to do that.
No duty to protect? Then what are we paying them for?
“No duty to protect? Then what are we paying them for?”
Not duty to protect *you*. They have a duty to protect “society at large”, which translated means “follow orders and protect the government”.
Nowhere have I seen a court mention that they have a duty to protect the Constitution, which they take an oath to do.
This is why I laugh at those supposed "rugged individualists" on this site. The rationale for these cases rises from the individualism forming one of the premises of the Common Law.
The Civil Law imposes a duty to help one in peril or injured.
I happen to personally believe that an armed policeman should be required to come to the aid of a victim of a crime where possible
Just talking about national rate.
That some cities are going up but the national rate remains low, just means that other areas are even safer.
“This is why I laugh at those supposed “rugged individualists” on this site. The rationale for these cases rises from the individualism forming one of the premises of the Common Law.”
I think it is much simpler. If the court ruled that the police had a duty to protect individuals, they could be sued for every crime that occurs. It would rapidly bankrupt the State.
I do not know of any government anywhere that allows police to be sued because an individual was the victim of a crime, unless the police had a “special duty” such as being assigned to guard someone, and then egregiously failed in that “special duty”.
“...The city, meanwhile, claimed that the NYPD had no “special duty” to intervene at the time,...”
Let that sink in folks. It doesn’t matter to them if you’re attacked by some feral animal and die.
THE POLICE - you know, those “To Serve And Protect” heroes - have “No Special Duty To Intervene” - their words.
Demand your right to carry, and don’t stop pushing until they acquiesce. If the legislators don’t listen, remove them at every election cycle.
Law-abiding Gun owners put up with more infringement on our basic CIVIL, HUMAN, and CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS than ANY other group in this country.
How these people view your right to defend yourself is the litmus test for how they view ALL of your rights.
New York’s Sullivan Law must go.
If the libtards go after Stand Your Ground in other states, we need to go after the Sullivan Law in NYC, and other no-issue states, like New Jersey.
“...Not duty to protect *you*. They have a duty to protect society at large, which translated means follow orders and protect the government....”
But...the rationale we always hear the left whining about is that “you don’t need to carry a gun; that’s what the POLICE are for...”
Throw their own words back in their faces.
Their job is to draw the chalk line around your corpse and then fill out the necessary paperwork in triplicate.
The only person responsible for your safety is you. You are the First Responder.
I submit that if ANY one of those four people that this feral piece of sh*t “Maksim Gelman” murdered had had a gun, there wouldn’t be four dead and one stabbed. He’d be bleeding out on the subway floor and saving NY taxpayers a ton of money.
Bernard Goetz had it right back in the day.
To Protect and Serve ... myself!
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.