JESS1344 508 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 GUYS, "A Manhattan Supreme Court Justice ruled Thursday that the City of New York has no legal duty to protect citizens, even if armed police officers are nearby, see a violent crime in progress, and choose to hide in order to save their own skins instead of responding, The Gothamist reported late last week." THIS IS WHAT'S KNOWN AS YOYO. YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN......... JESS1344 Click here: Ruling on subway stabbing victim highlights ‘gun control’ Catch-22 - National gun rights | Examiner.com Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rhodes1968 1,638 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 Well hell we knew that already. Fuckin cowards. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
montec 164 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 I believe the US Supreme court previously ruled the same thing years ago. I can't remember the case but I will check with a friend that knows all about it and get the info for you all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
P2AB 9 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 The SCOTUS has ruled that way, as have several state supreme courts. Warren v District of Columbia Castle Rock v. Gonzales, No. 04-27 SCOTUS A quick search online will pull up several involving the police and several moer involving other government agencies. The government at all levels have removed themselves from responsibility for their actions or inaction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
magsite20 1,664 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 (edited) Might be a bit much to put on a car door: "To Serve and Protect"* *mostly ourselves and our union brothers and sisters but we might help you out if it's not too much trouble or as long as we won't get hurt. I know most cops are good people doing a dirty dangerous thankless job but some times in some events some of their fellow officers just seem kind of pathetic. Edited July 30, 2013 by the 4th Doctor Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JESS1344 508 Posted July 30, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 GUYS, AMONG OTHERS, ONE OF THE FIRST LESSONS TAUGHT IN THE POLICE ACADEMY, IS THAT THE POLICE HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO PROTECT ANY INDIVIDUAL, ONLY SOCIETY AT LARGE. PER SUPREME COURT RULING. JESS1344 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Remek 771 Posted July 30, 2013 Report Share Posted July 30, 2013 The good thing is that word is getting out. Police don't have to, and should never be counted on, protecting YOU. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 The SCOTUS has ruled that way, as have several state supreme courts. Warren v District of Columbia Castle Rock v. Gonzales, No. 04-27 SCOTUS A quick search online will pull up several involving the police and several moer involving other government agencies. The government at all levels have removed themselves from responsibility for their actions or inaction. Yep and from what I recall, pretty much every state has a similar case saying the same thing for state constitutions. The upshot is that we made a social contract a while back and it apparently works like a cell phone contract. You are locked in, but they get to change their side of the terms. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BK201 8 Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 idk about you, but I assert myself when a company decides to change its contract. I also think I should be able to do my customer service job with an ak on my back. lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gunfun 3,931 Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 idk about you, but I assert myself when a company decides to change its contract. I also think I should be able to do my customer service job with an ak on my back. lol Congratulations. You are the only person who does so. The rest of us realized a long time ago that similar contracts of adhesion are impossible to evade, because all of the rival companies do the same thing, and all of them change some terms with every single billing cycle, and this would require you to negotiate with them every month, and win. They have no incentive to let anyone win. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Big John! 2,062 Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 It's well known by the informed that police are not resonsible for protecting you. It's funny that this fact and court rulings are not a huge part of the gun rights fight. There are many cops out there that will take a bullet for you. But since I don't know if THAT cop will be around or if cops in general will even show up in time, I choose to carry. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.