Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: zeebee

Wasn’t there a Supreme Court case decision that “first responders” — our heroes! — cannot be sued for failing to save someone. In other words, they’re under no obligation to assist you. “Serve and Protect” is just decoration on their squad cars.


14 posted on 06/06/2022 4:02:40 PM PDT by Blurb2350 (posted from my 1500-watt blow dryer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Blurb2350

Correct. In every state of the union they have no legal liability to protect you; except for some specific instances where you’re being detained/arrested, IIRC.


85 posted on 06/06/2022 6:07:49 PM PDT by curious7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: Blurb2350

“Wasn’t there a Supreme Court case decision that “first responders” — our heroes! — cannot be sued for failing to save someone.”

Responders not obligated to answer 911 calls, and the reason they’re not obligated is if they were and their response vehicle was somehow in an accident or they got the address wrong or they were late, held up because protesters were firebombing....they are not liable.

I think that’s actually been used as a case for self-defense since responders if not obligated to answer 911, places the victim in an odd circumstance if choosing to defend themselves or wait for a responder who is not obligated/unable to respond.

There might even be due diligence clauses attached to mistakenly perceived expectations.


119 posted on 06/06/2022 10:45:39 PM PDT by Clutch Martin ("The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson