Posted on 12/19/2018 9:50:09 AM PST by blueyon
A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.
U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom dismissed a suit filed by 15 students who claimed they were traumatized by the crisis in February. The suit named six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office, as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina.
Bloom ruled that the two agencies had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody.
“The claim arises from the actions of [shooter Nikolas] Cruz, a third party, and not a state actor,” she wrote in a ruling Dec. 12. “Thus, the critical question the Court analyzes is whether defendants had a constitutional duty to protect plaintiffs from the actions of Cruz
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
This is black letter law:
Warren vs District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department
You want your blood to boil, read the background on this case.
Cops responded, didn’t bother to walk up and actually talk to the person who called, who was being raped at the time. It’s a miracle she survived to file the lawsuit.
Believe me, if the police had no duty to protect in the Warren case, they don’t have a duty, ever. Not even kids at a school.
And yet, we debate about the 2nd Amendment when the courts are saying in unequivocal terms, “The duty to protecting an individual citizen falls to the individual citizen.”
No other case affirms the absolute requirement for the 2nd Amendment like Warren does.
How gun bans in cities stand up against cases like Warren is beyond me. Levin wrote a great book a while back about how screwed up SCOTUS was. The entire branch is rotten (Judicial, that is).
When the cops refuse to protect kids, what do we need them for, really? Traffic tickets?
“No duty to protect any one individual..”
Oh they will protect all right....up to the point their own ass might be in danger.
I'm ready to propose the following: because the police are not required or expected to defend the safety of the citizenry, they have no need of arms and should turn in their sidearms. Weapons will be restricted to a small cadre of specially trained and licensed officers who will only be permitted to arm themselves under strictly defined and regulated situations.
Then we will hear the cops wail and moan about how they aren't safe without guns. Welcome to our world, officers.
“A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.
U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom (appointed by Barak Obama)..............”
LOL! Very effective ...I wrote to the mayor in my town, Jacksonville, FL, after a notorious shooting near the football stadium. He replied that the city had allocated money for youth activities. I had told hm they needed cops and better, more aggressive policing.
I love the theory that adults (all of these people except one were over 21 and one was even in his 30s) who are armed, have been in prison, sell drugs and don’t know anybody who is not a criminal, will turn out for and be converted by midnight basketball.
It's long-settled law. Police departments exist to investigate crimes, apprehend suspects, and assist the prosecutors, not to protect individual citizens from a crime in progress.
Which, as several posters have pointed out, is why we need the 2nd A.
School is mandatory and students have been arrested for truancy.
We're talking about a high school, aren't we? Not mandatory and there's no legal penalty for dropping out altogether.
I can’t agree with you more.
I say use Warren like you would use garlic on a vampire. Gun stores can even market on this: Warren Self-Preservation Kits.
This tyrant in a robe is an a-hole.
This should come to no ones surprise. SCOTUS established this and made it clear well over 30 years ago.
To anyone who knows gun laws, its not anything new.
Are you truly serious?
Yup that is the pretzel hypocritical legal framework we are currently living under.
Justice would demand at least the laws be consistent one way or the other.
So why was a sheriff on duty, working at the school? And if police have no duty to shield students at any of those schools, how did Sheriff Israel have the right to protect problem students, and prevent them from being referred to the police for possible charges?
But we have a duty to pay taxes. And endure sanctuary cities and all the rest of their crap. But they have no responsibility.
There will be a reckoning and I hope I’m alive when critical mass is reached.
There are two words missing from that credo:
THE GOVERNMENT
“special relationship between the police and an individual”
We should unpack that thought...
So police to not have to defend us, schools to not have to protect our child while they are there
and the left wants to take our guns away.
Pull all security off the courts
Yes, but that was in state court. “ Broward Circuit Judge Patti Englander Henning found after a hearing Wednesday that ex-deputy Scot Peterson did have a duty to protect those inside the school”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3712454/posts
SCOTUS established this and made it clear well over 30 years ago.
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.