Posted on 08/03/2013 6:54:14 AM PDT by marktwain
A man who was brutally stabbed by Brooklyn subway slasher Maksim Gelman two years ago had his negligence case against the city dismissed in court yesterday, despite the fact that two transit officers had locked themselves in a motorman's car only a few feet from him at the time of the attack.
Gelman stabbed Joseph Lozito in the face, neck, hands and head on an uptown 3 train in February 2011, after fatally stabbing four people and injuring three others in a 28-hour period. Lozito, a father of two and an avid martial arts fan, was able to tackle Gelman and hold him down, and Gelman was eventually arrested by the transit officers. Lozito sued the city, arguing that the police officers had locked themselves in the conductor's car and failed to come to his aid in time.
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 Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Margaret Chan has sided with the city, noting that there was no evidence the cops were aware Lozito was in danger at the time.
(Excerpt) Read more at gothamist.com ...
“I hear you. But how many people are willing to take it to that logical and inevitable conclusion?”
Exactly. This is a thing for which there is a time and a place.
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...
You forgot Rosie O’Porker, protected 24/7 by her own private security teams.
No, they just roll their eyes and inform you that they are not going to allow any Constitutional arguments, merely establish guilt in the matter before them.
So the well paid police who see a person they suspect might have a gun lock themselves out of any confrontation leaving just ordinary no can carry guns people at the mercy of a deranged killer. Do I get this right? In this day and time I believe most cops of any sort go for the badge as a ticket to an early and well paid retirement. They can then take jobs that other needing persons might be able to get.
You should never go in those sandwich places unarmed.
Perhaps he didn’t know they had locked themselves away at first. All he knew was that they “showed up” in the nick of time as he was still wrestling with the guy on the floor. Then later finds out “What!? You were watching us the entire time!!???”
“No duty to protect” is how it works in Colorado as well. If this wasn’t the case, then EVERY action taken by every police officer in the state would wind up in court each and every time SOMEONE was displeased with the result.
I agree with that. I also agree that each and every one of us has an unalienable duty to protect ourselves with every means possible and whenever necessary in whatever circumstance. Because for one thing, no one else has such a duty.
And I’d presume his case would get tossed if he sues the city and State for deprivation of Rights (2nd) that would have allowed him to defend himself.
What, aside from raking in the $$, and TRYING to solve a crime after its commission, do the police do? When did the moto ‘the serve and protect’ get whittled down to ‘law enforcement officer’ (which seems to be moot in this case as well since they didn’t ENFORCE the NO GUN Laws on the books...they was ‘scared’).
Unfortunately your 1st statement nullifies the 2nd; if you have a ‘permit’ it’s not a RIGHT.
We should all be free to carry (per the 2nd), backed up by the reciprocity of the Constitutional carry States (AK, AZ, etc.); but I’d keep a copy of all the ‘no duty’ lawsuits in m pocket Constitution JUST in case.
Oh, almost forgot: MUST arrest any money they find since it is probably ‘drug’ money.
Thank you for that. I have been making that exact statement for more years than I care to think about, and believe that the more people understand that the better off we all are.
But they needed to go home safely to their families.
Yep. The police have no duty to protect you, even if they are standing right there.
SCOTUS has ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect you.
And the left, wickedly, works at chipping away at our Second Amendment right to bear arms.
Anyone who claims the police’s job is to “serve and protect” is either ignorant of these facts, or a liar.
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.