Festus_Hagen
Regular Member
He's just trolling. I'm not biting. Ya'll have a great conversation.
Courts have already ruled they have no duty to protect the individual. Only society at large.
This
is trolling?
*sigh*
Officers have no obligation to protect anyone on a potential crime scene. Their first priority is to stay safe themselves. Many times a citizen will be protected or rescued by an LEO. However, no LEGAL requirement exists for them to do so.
HOWEVER, many police WILL risk their own lives to protect others. It is human nature to protect others. But fear will prevent some. Or a tactical decision. There are many factors.
But there is no legal onus compelling them.
Citation: Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)
So the supposed "troll" is correct.
*sigh*
Officers have no obligation to protect anyone on a potential crime scene. Their first priority is to stay safe themselves.
But there is no legal onus compelling them.
Citation: Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)
So the supposed "troll" is correct.
Exactly, and I'm not here to argue with people that just want to. Don't even try Rich.....lol.Edited for clarity only.
Festus response was taken out of context to elicit an argument.
Rich
Exactly, and I'm not here to argue with people that just want to. Don't even try Rich.....lol.
It is trolling because more often than not, those engaging in the debate rarely understand the concept or sovereignty and how that can only be negated through gross negligence.
Nonsense. I've been on this site for almost 2 years educating myself and getting information. I also belong to other sites related to the liberty movement and I understand plenty and people that actually know me would feel differently about me than you. Thank you. And on another note, I find it interesting that I commended you last week for keeping your cool and composure at Red Lobster last week and this week you refer to me as a troll. Food for thought.