Posted on 07/06/2012 9:28:35 PM PDT by Altariel
New York courts have decided that police will not be protected against drunkenly shooting citizens, the NY Post reports. Suddenly, the NYPD will need to cancel all of its kegger-patrol parties.
Right now, a regulation requires all cops who open fire on a suspect to complete a breathalyzer tests. It’s sounds to us like a fairly reasonable requirement. If cops are going to be driving around town and pointing guns at American citizens, then they shouldn’t be under the influence.
The law was created after four police officers shot and killed Sean Bell in 2006. It’s been a hard six years of on-the-job sobriety for the NYPD, but police advocates were hoping to change all that.
Three separate police unions made arguments in court that the rule was unconstitutional, but Manhattan federal Judge George Daniels was having none of it. He made sure that police will have to get a dose of their own medicine, so to speak, by proving via breathalyzer that it was their own judgment and not a rum and coke that pulled the trigger.
Daniels wrote in his decision, “Armed police officers are given awesome power. The NYPD has a substantial interest in ensuring that its officers — especially its armed officers — are fit for duty.”
“The job of a Police Officer is “To Serve and Protect.”
Incorrect.
The courts have ruled, repeatedly, that no citizen has any legal right to police protection.
Police have no responsibility to protect individuals (reference)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts
You Have NO Right to Police Protection!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2631540/posts
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1432132/posts
One conserves one’s own life by defending one’s self.
Expecting another individual to protect one’s own life stems from the same expectation that another individual is responsible for providing you with food, clothing, shelter (welfare), healthcare, etc.
It is a liberal expectation.
Weapons are primarily for self defense; not for hunting.
Not according to SCOTUS.
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.