April 10th, 2007 10:30 AM
Supreme Court and Police Responsibility
Where / what is the reference to that I keep seeing around these boards about the Supreme Court saying something to the effect that police are not required to protect you from harm? I'd love to see the actual text of that but I have no idea how to find it and figured someone around here probably knew where I could find it. Thanks.
April 10th, 2007 10:39 AM
Here is a link to the "Castle Rock v Gonzales" case file from the Supreme Court:
I believe this was the latest case (from 2005) the Supremes ruled on that related to police protection. The case involved a husband under a restraining order who kidnapped and killed his 3 daughters, then committed "suicide by cop" in front of the Castle Rock (CO) police station. The mother filed suit to claim that the police should have been responsible for the families protection due to the restraining order...the court disagreed.
Last edited by Team American; April 10th, 2007 at 10:54 AM.
"I surrounded 'em"- Alvin York
"They're ain't many troubles that a man can't fix with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six"- Jeff Cooper
April 10th, 2007 10:47 AM
April 10th, 2007 11:35 AM
Warren vs. DC, 1981, see my sig.
Hertzler vs. City Of San Josa, another protection order case.
"fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [Warren v. District of Columbia,(D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)]
If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand
April 10th, 2007 04:49 PM
Wow... So much for "protect and serve" then huh?
April 11th, 2007 09:28 AM
Only if we get there in time.
Originally Posted by Paladin132
Protect your self at all times, be aware of your surroundings.
Don't hang out in hi crime areas.
Remember bad sh** happens to good people all the time.
I will do my very best to help you, but im not a time traveler
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill
April 11th, 2007 09:37 AM
Nobody is, even the one being attacked. And that's how simple it is. That is the crux of the argument of the true crime being perpetrated: the disarmament of citizens and criminalization of their self-defense.
Originally Posted by ron8903
I don't really have a problem with recognition of reality. I just hate recognition that is biased to see only half of reality but ignore the other half at my expense, whether for spite, for a power trip or for just plain stupidity. That is not equal protection under the law. That is an intrusive violation by the government on citizens. That is denial and criminalization of an inalienable right of citizens. It is Rand's world of Atlas Shrugged come to life.
Appalling how far we've come as a People, yet how far we have declined.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
By JoJoGunn in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: March 3rd, 2010, 01:13 AM
By Censored in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: September 8th, 2009, 04:37 PM
By Sig 210 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: March 28th, 2008, 08:56 PM
By Glock_19 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: November 20th, 2007, 03:57 PM
Search tags for this page
2007 supreme court about police responsibility
police responsibility in court
supreme court police protection
supreme court police responsibility
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors