LE Responsibility; SCOTUS case

This is a discussion on LE Responsibility; SCOTUS case within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; As I understand it there was a Supreme Court case where they 'decided' that it was 'not the responsibility of LE to protect the public'. ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: LE Responsibility; SCOTUS case

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588

    Cool LE Responsibility; SCOTUS case

    As I understand it there was a Supreme Court case where they 'decided' that it was 'not the responsibility of LE to protect the public'.
    Am I right on this and if so, what was the case?


    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,674
    Yes, that is true. Hang on a minute, I'll try and find a link to the case for you.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    The legal precedent for all of this actually dates back to 1856, in the South v Maryland case the court found that law enforcement officials had no duty to provide protection to individuals. In 1982, Bowers v DeVito decided in the US 7th circuit court affirmed the 1856 decision saying that ""...there is no Constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen." This decision was upheld in later appeals. In June of 2005, the Castle Rock V Gonzales case once again demonstrated the SCOTUS' opinion that the state or federal government is under no legal obligation whatsoever to protect you from harm. Mrs. Gonzales was a woman who had obtained a restraining order against her ex-husband who then proceeded to abduct their three daughters. Mrs. Gonzales called police, who did nothing (as usual) and let the matter lie. The next morning, the Ex-husband opened fire on the local police station and committed "suicide by cop". The three daughters were found in the back seat of his vehicle, murdered. Mrs. Gonzales filed suit against the police dept. seeking damages, which were never awarded because of the Courts' decision. Basically their view on this is: If the government won't protect you, then you have to take responsibility for your own self-defense and that of your family.

    Everybody understand?
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  5. #4
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,674
    Heres a good read with some links to case law.

    http://www.mcrkba.org/w19.html
    "Just blame Sixto"

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588

    Cool Thank you

    Thanks to both of you, SIXTO and edr9x23super. Appreciate it.


    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588

    Cool

    OMG. This is incredible. Some of these cases are unbelievable.
    Read case law for a few cases starting with South v. Maryland (1856)all the way to Castle Rock v. Gonzalez (2005) and you will see that the courts (all the way up to the SCOTUS) have ruled that LEO's and LE have absolutely NO responsibilty and are not liable to protect the individual citizen. This is even if the individual is in the custody of the LEO or LE.
    This is not an affront to LE or LEO's as I believe that a clear majority of LEO's are in LE because they want to serve the public and honestly want to help people and that is a noble cause. I also believe that it is unrealistic to believe that they are capable of protecting the individual simply because it is impossible to predict crime. That is why I have taken it upon myself to be able to protect myself and my family.
    What I am amazed by is the extreme that courts have gone in ruling that LE and LEO's are not liable for even negligence such as if a person in in there custody.
    If all of the public was aware of this I think that only the most le of all of the would buy in to the Brady Bunch line of "Call the police". I also believe the demand of the public would become much louder for the RTBA.

    Thanks for your help.


    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  8. #7
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,674
    No problem. A lot of people are shocked when I tell them this FTF in uniform standing on their front porch... I'm glad you seeked the answer yourself.
    I do this when they request me to camp out in front of their home for the night because someone called them a name at work or something silly like that.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  9. #8
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,849
    Read case law for a few cases starting with South v. Maryland (1856)all the way to Castle Rock v. Gonzalez (2005) and you will see that the courts (all the way up to the SCOTUS) have ruled that LEO's and LE have absolutely NO responsibilty and are not liable to protect the individual citizen

    Yeah... its funny how the Brady Group,and all of the other anti gun Politicians that call themselves Senators, Congressmen,Governors,Sheriffs,Police Chiefs or even Mayors that are anti gun never seem to mention that fact when they vote to restrict your ability to defend yourself.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,382
    Quote Originally Posted by P7fanatic View Post
    OMG. This is incredible. Some of these cases are unbelievable.
    Read case law for a few cases starting with South v. Maryland (1856)all the way to Castle Rock v. Gonzalez (2005) and you will see that the courts (all the way up to the SCOTUS) have ruled that LEO's and LE have absolutely NO responsibilty and are not liable to protect the individual citizen. :
    Guess this should cinch our case for the right to keep and bear arms.
    Would it not?

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array cphilip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,188
    I don't know a single officer that doesn't WANT to protect everyone...

    It's just impossible.

  12. #11
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,674
    Quote Originally Posted by cphilip View Post
    I don't know a single officer that doesn't WANT to protect everyone...

    It's just impossible.
    I dont. I dont even what to try too. In order to make an honest effort at it, the people woud become more like livestock rather than citizens.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  13. #12
    Senior Member Array Knuckledrager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    693
    Do the most good for the most people with the understanding that, for many reasons, you can't be all for all.
    "The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud

  14. #13
    VIP Member
    Array TX-JB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sugar Land, TX
    Posts
    5,738
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    I dont. I dont even what to try too. In order to make an honest effort at it, the people woud become more like livestock rather than citizens.
    +1 Sixto, but I think the politicians want us to be more like livestock.
    "Texas can make it without the United States, but the United States can't make it without Texas!".... Sam Houston

    Retired LEO
    Firearms Instructor
    NRA Life Member

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array bobcat35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    664
    Quote Originally Posted by P7fanatic View Post
    OMG. This is incredible. Some of these cases are unbelievable.
    Read case law for a few cases starting with South v. Maryland (1856)all the way to Castle Rock v. Gonzalez (2005) and you will see that the courts (all the way up to the SCOTUS) have ruled that LEO's and LE have absolutely NO responsibilty and are not liable to protect the individual citizen. This is even if the individual is in the custody of the LEO or LE.
    so let me see if i have this straight. if a LEO detains someone for commiting a crime and that person is killed not by the LEO the LEO isn't responsible legaly. yet if a soldier detains someone who's placing an IED and that person is killed not by the soldier that soldier will be raked over the coals for not protecting them???

    this makes absolutly no sense. if you detain someone you should responsible for their well being untill you transfer that responsability and that person to someone else soldier or LEO
    "Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result."
    -Winston Churchill
    Every well-bred petty crook knows: the small concealable weapons always go to the far left of the place setting.
    -Inara, firefly

  16. #15
    Senior Member Array Knuckledrager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    693
    'Cat,

    The SCOTUS decisions have affirmed that LEOs are not responsible for the protection of individuals but are responsible for the protection of society as a whole. This does not grant an LEO automatic immunity from liability in the event of an in custody death or injury.

    It does mean, among other things, that an individual, who is the target of a criminal, is responsible for their own defense until the LEOs arrive. As long as the LEOs are responding in a realistic, timely manner they will not be responsible for "failing to protect" the target of criminal activity from all manner of bad things that may have happened during the aforementioned response time.
    "The liberty of the individual is no gift of civilization. It was greatest before there was any civilization." Sigmund Freud

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. 2A SCOTUS case briefs?
    By Tom357 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: February 18th, 2010, 06:45 AM
  2. SCOTUS--Court Rules in Gun Case
    By falcon1 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 10th, 2007, 10:33 PM
  3. Woohoo!!! SCOTUS Take the Case.
    By CT-Mike in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 20th, 2007, 04:12 PM
  4. Another Case For The SCOTUS?
    By ronwill in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 16th, 2007, 08:44 PM
  5. SCOTUS Declines DC Case
    By ronwill in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: November 15th, 2007, 06:41 AM

Search tags for this page

le responsibility court case

,

scotus case responsibility to protect

Click on a term to search for related topics.