If they have no duty to protect, then, WHAT EXACTLY is their duty?
“If they have no duty to protect, then, WHAT EXACTLY is their duty?
You hit the nail squarely on the head sir.
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’.
Well, they can draw chalk outlines around the victims' bodies.
1. Issue Citations and Tickets to bring in revenue.
2. Arrest people and impound vehicles at arbitrary 'traffic stops' to levy fines and perhaps sell the vehicle to bring in even more revenue.
3. Shoot pet dogs. Note: They must, however, ignore any packs of feral dogs running about because they might get attacked and bitten.
4. Ventilate homeowners with sixty hits out of ninety shots fired because he dared to stand at the end of the hallway and "looked threatening" at 2:38 in the morning when a large group of totally black-clothed and bulletproof-vest wearing masked men blasted their way inside the house.
I could go on...