Posted on 03/05/2014 8:42:36 AM PST by Teotwawki
Cops protect themselves, along with their fellow union members. Everything else is revenue collection, selective enforcement, and partisan political reinforcement. “Protect and serve” doesn’t even enter the equation anymore. It’s all about the use of force to gain complete control under the color of “law”.
This is the dirty little secret of ALL PDs.Somehow, it is only lately coming to the fore.I wonder how many incidents like this will have to happen before it achieves critical mass,and a Tribunal of some kind happens.The police in this context,are a Protected Class, and in effect,so is the Perp.Normal citizens would come to this victim’s defense before the Police ever would,regardless of How those normal cotizens might be endangered by a raging lunatic.In cases like this, it’s as though safety of the Police themselves is the pre-eminent corcern,so they can live another day to write tickets and enjoy their own safety mission, which begins and ends with themselves.
If the NYPD is not obligated to protect then it should be eliminated, because it serve no purpose.
“Litigation”
Several years ago an off duty NYPD in plain cloths drew his weapon in an attempt to stop a robbery on a Metro-subway platform and was shot dead by a nearby Metro-Policeman. I’m betting the fall out from this incident was a directive to NYPD to stay out of subway crime prevention.
Government, from local to federal level, exists to take your money, freedom and privacy, not keep you safe.
Take responsibility for your own safety. No one else will.
Simple solution... LEAVE NY NOW!
I, Perchance, being of the ignorant peon class,
would proffer the following proposition:
A. for a legislature bill that in each state for local, state and federal agencies that all law enforcement personnel be restricted by LAW to a maximum of 5 years on a public police/peace officer/state trooper etc., taxpayer funded institution employed position. Said law would allow only a one-time 5-year hire for the entire life of the officer/LEO. Said law would not allow said ex-officer to be hired again by ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY or private security company ANYWHERE IN THE USA for employment in the USA. This would allow new citizens to be hired FROM THE PEOPLE who are uncontaminated by the “master-race syndrome” of present day LEO`s. This would prevent abuses by former bad cops going into private industry employment marketplace.
This would include ALL FEDERAL AGENCIES including EPA, DHS, BORDER PATROL, IRS Etc. [US MILITARY EXCLUDED]
B. No more than one member from each three generation family [grandfather-father-grandson/daughter etc.] would be allowed to be hired as a police office each 20 years.
This would obfuscate the hand-me-down illegal “me-master-family-you -peon attitude of present day police families.
C. Every year each police office would be required to take a required course on the U.S. Constitution and their respective state constitutions addressing the Second Amendment historical bases, precedents, principles and practices up to the year 1914.
No gun control classes would be allowed by any police officer as it would result in his/her/it immediate dismissal.
After said 5 years, no more duty would be available unless it is a national emergency call-up terrorist attack from a foreign-based country.
This would offset the -cop-for-life milieu that illicitly pervades America`s armed police.
Wow. Warm fuzzies to all the patriotic cops and soldiers who attend and contribute to this party.
Must be ladies night.
There are a number of court decisions to back up this position, most recently Castle Rock v. Gonzales, with Scalia giving the majority opinion.
I have not seen the “To protect and serve” slogan in quite aq while (I admit I have not been to LA in several years) More often I see some BS like “Honesty, Integrity, Fairness, Respect” or some other nonsense. Actually serving the public is no longer part of the police mission in most American cities of any size. A more accurate choice for the front fender of patrol cars in those places would be “Armed revenue collection and pet control”
Remember Bernhard Goetz who protected himself from 4 muggers when on a train and was prosecuted relentlessly by the city for doing so. Now we have police literately on the train saying “don’t bother me!” when seeing a crime and people asking for help!
It’s settled law of the land the case is Warren v District of Columbia . The Supreme Court has basically said that you are on your own . Make your plans & preparations accordingly.
Look all you want to for that oath. This is black letter law. They have no obligation to protect the public.
They do however, have the responsibility to apprehend suspects and collect evidence. This is their actual job.
As such, this is why the officer acted as he did, and took credit for the apprehension as he did.
This is also why defunding the police is generally the way to go here. It’s already a vigilante system of justice out there. If you do not arm yourself then you renege on the responsibility you have to yourself, others, and your family to protect yourself.
Crime is low in Israel because EVERYBODY IS PACKING. EVERYBODY.
Show me a country where gun ownership and open/concealed carry is legal and protected and I’ll show you a crime rate almost too small to measure.
Lawyers
Law suits
Internal affairs
A mayor who does not support them
The media
10 thousand NGOs looking exploit something for donations
Ambitious prosecutors who one day hope to run for office
AND a US Justice Department and president who wants to put a cop killing advocate in charge of the DOJ Civil Rights Division who will go on to prosecute them for doing their job.
That's what happened to the NYPD. I am surprised they even leave the station
I’d be the first to offer my heartfelt thanks to all the patriotic cops, just like I do, and as I’ve taught my children to do, for the men and women serving in our military. We are a law abiding, patriotic family that gives honor where honor is due. It’s just that police have changed during my lifetime such that I would now prefer not to have an encounter with a cop under any circumstances, even if I am the victim of a crime in progress.
Unless I've missed something...or unless Wikipedia is mistaken...this is not entirely true.Wikipedia states that the case you cite is a DC Court of Appeals decision,not a SCOTUS decision.Wikipedia,I believe,makes no mention of the case ever having reached the SCOTUS.If,by chance,I'm entirely correct here this cannot be called "settled law" until the SCOTUS either formally refuses to review the case on appeal or,having reviewed it,agrees with the decision in question.
And no,I'm not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holidy Inn last night. ;-)
The courts have ruled over and over again: The police have no duty to respond to calls for help and they have no duty to help if they do arrive.
Dial 911 And Die. Great book.
Would bet on Wikipedia being wrong on this case not the NRA.
Yes,it's distinctly possible that Wikipedia is giving inaccurate,or incomplete,info in its coverage of this case.It's also distinctly possible that I've missed,or misinterpreted,something in the piece in question.
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.