Just another day in the gun paradise of the world.

Yes, i do trust my police department and govt to protect me.

It’s what they are paid to do. They work for me.

If they didn’t …they’d be replaced.

If they went rogue, the national police and/or armed forces would remove them.
 
Yes, i do trust my police department and govt to protect me.

It’s what they are paid to do. They work for me.

If they didn’t …they’d be replaced.

If they went rogue, the national police and/or armed forces would remove them.
Tell it to the people in Uvalde.
 
Tell it to the people in Uvalde.
That’s the thing, we don’t have guns here and the crazy people have minders and free mental health care.

You have lots of guns and no help for people who are struggling.

So from where i sit, your setup is negligent, and dictated by fear and violence.
 
That’s the thing, we don’t have guns here and the crazy people have minders and free mental health care.

You have lots of guns and no help for people who are struggling.

So from where i sit, your setup is negligent, and dictated by fear and violence.
The problem is that you're uninformed.

The Left sued to force the States to release the crazies, and won. Then the Left sued to prevent society from gathering the crazies up again, and won. Then the Left installed government leaders who agreed that allowing the crazies to run around unchecked and unsupervised was "good" for society. Finally, that government of leaders decided that giving the crazies everything they wanted, at taxpayer expense, was a good idea. Nevermind that it created more homelessness, drug addicts, crime, filth, insecurity, and everything else wrong with modern "progressive" society, it was a "good" idea. After that they defunded the police after refusing to let them do their jobs to protect people from rioting crazies. Then, to top it all off, they prosecute those who have to defend themselves from the crazies. It doesn't matter if they're police or civilians - anyone defending themselves from a crazy trying to kill them gets prosecuted.

What that did was create a society where normal everyday citizens are now at risk of being harmed by the very same people sworn to protect them. And yet you, while sitting in your nice protected "safe place", would dictate to them to be more like you while they live in a world which doesn't even remotely resemble yours.

Given all of that, "uninformed" is a very polite way of describing your opinion.
 
Yes, i do trust my police department and govt to protect me.

It’s what they are paid to do. They work for me.

If they didn’t …they’d be replaced.

If they went rogue, the national police and/or armed forces would remove them.
in the US, the police and the government have no legal requirement to protect anyone. There are multiple US Court cases, including over 30 SCOTUS cases, that have all stated that the police have no duty to protect. The PR marketing gimmick is very effective, "To Protect and Serve" as a motto, but thats all it is - propaganda.

the phrase “protect and serve” is a motto adopted by some police departments (the first being the LAPD in the mid-1950’s). It is not the only law enforcement motto. The Illinois State Police motto is “Integrity. Service. Pride.” The NYPD motto is “Courtesy. Professionalism. Respect.” The FBI’s motto is “Fidelity. Bravery. Integrity.” They’re all going for a similar ethic, but it’s not part of the oath.

More legal info: Google: "The Public Duty Doctrine."
Police protection must be recognized for what it is, "report takers" after a crime happens. The police arrive on the scene after a crime has been committed so they can collect the facts, write an unbiased report, and file it with headquarters, while the lawyers determine fault in the courtroom using the before mentioned police report. (at best police response times are 5 minutes, but more often it's at least 45 minutes if ever)
LEA's & LEO's have absolutely no duty to protect you or your family; there actual job is to just take a report and file it.
The police have no legal duty to respond too and/or prevent crime and/or protect anyone.

To repeat it’s official, cops serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever for the people....
https://mises.org/power-market/police-have-no-duty-protect-you-federal-court-affirms-yet-again

Start by reading Paxton Quigley's "Armed & Female", she cited numerous cases of police failures to protect, where one would assume the police had an actual duty to protect, but the police argued in court that they don't - guess who the courts sided with the victims or the police?

here's just a small snippet of courts decisions
  • Castle Rock v. Gonzales, which found police employees had “qualified immunity” (legal land language that purports to shield individuals from personal responsibility) and thus could not be sued, after three kids were killed by the husband of a woman who’d three weeks prior gotten a restraining order that stipulated that he be at least 100 yards from her and their three daughters except during specified visitation time. This, despite four calls made by the woman to police, after the kids were snatched-up, including one in which she informed them of the location of the husband and their children.
  • Warren v. District of Columbia, in which two women heard their roommate being attacked downstairs by intruders called the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After their roommate’s screams stopped 30 minutes later they assumed the police were present and went downstairs, only to themselves be held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers, for the next 14-hours. The “officials” in legal land claimed that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection. See related 3min video on this case
  • Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, in which legal land “authorities” stated that police had no constitutional duty to protect people from crime, after a woman, who’d filed numerous complaints and had gotten restraining order, was continually harassed and had her property vandalized by her ex-husband.
  • DeShaney v. Winnebago County, which found that those who purport the right to steal money from others in the area to protect kids were not culpable after releasing a boy, into his father’s custody despite repeated evidence of abuse, including one bout that left him “profoundly retarded” and likely to spend the rest of his life institutionalized.

One of the leading cases on this point dates way back into the 1950s. [11] A certain Ms. Riss was being harassed by a former boyfriend, in a familiar pattern of increasingly violent threats. She went to the police for help many times, but was always rebuffed. Desperate because she could not get police protection, she applied for a gun permit, but was refused that as well. On the eve of her engagement party she and her mother went to the police one last time pleading for protection against what they were certain was a serious and dangerous threat. And one last time the police refused. As she was leaving the party, her former boyfriend threw acid in her face, blinding and permanently disfiguring her.

Her case against the City of New York for failing to protect her was, not surprisingly, unsuccessful. The lone dissenting justice of New York's high court wrote in his opinion: "What makes the City's position [denying any obligation to protect the woman] particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law [she] did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus, by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of New York which now denies all responsibility to her."

Or just Google Lozito's story and his case against the NYPD trying to hold them accountable.

Let's not forget the fact that all the studies done have showed that armed officers in schools do nothing to prevent harm to students, but more often they are the cause of violence against students.

The man charged with security, the Broward Counry Sheriff who didn’t enter the building, and whose where abouts are still unknown...that allowed fatalities that could have been prevented.

The police have absolutely no duty to protect anyone but themselves and their suckling of the teat off of the taxpayer's and creating revenue with enforcement of unconstitutional laws generating fines and fees

The police aren't as trained as their public propaganda would have you believe. Read the RAND report commissioned by the NYPD to understand their gun training.
 
And yet, Heller was a 5-4 decision.
yes, because at least 4 of them made a decision based on their political "judicial activism" idealism, not the written text of the US Constitution or the 2nd Amendment.
 
yes, because at least 4 of them made a decision based on their political "judicial activism" idealism, not the written text of the US Constitution or the 2nd Amendment.
Sounds about right, but I’d say at least five of them.
 
Holy fuck, someone is long winded and copypasta crazy
 
yes, because at least 4 of them made a decision based on their political "judicial activism" idealism, not the written text of the US Constitution or the 2nd Amendment.
Here's an interesting look into the crazy mindset of the Left.

Heller was 5-4. Yet so was Roe v Wade.

The Left argues that Heller can be overturned even though the 2nd Amendment is clearly enumerating the Right to keep and bear arms. Roe, they argue on the other hand, should never have been overturned because somewhere in amorphous world, the Constitution, almost, sometimes, maybe, might be able to be "interpreted" as, holds abortion to be a "Right."

So 5-4 means that the decision can be overturned. Unless it's something the Left believes in. Then any decision supporting their belief is sacrosanct.

It's unabashed lunacy.
 
Those are a lot of long posts from people with a track record of authoritative inaccuracy.

I’ve spent lots of time all over the USA, albeit most always in upscale surroundings.

I felt a bit at risk once driving from cobo hall to the gros pointe yacht club via 8 mile in an allante, but for the most part never felt threatened in the USA before 9/11.

Since then, it’s always felt edgy.

And your police are a bit rough by canadian standards…but it’s still their job to keep the peace.

Right?
 
Alright, alright, I'll get off your lawn! Sheesh, touchy much?
If you want to walk across my lawn you have to drive down to my gate press the button in the security lock box, identify yourself, and respectfully state your business. If I find your visit to be of interest, I'll open the gate and you can drive on down to the house, park where designated, locate the two white stanchions that mark the stone path to the porch. Stay on the path and respect the lawn.
 
If you want to walk across my lawn you have to drive down to my gate press the button in the security lock box, identify yourself, and respectfully state your business. If I find your visit to be of interest, I'll open the gate and you can drive on down to the house, park where designated, locate the two white stanchions that mark the stone path to the porch. Stay on the path and respect the lawn.
None of "those" have a chance to ruin your America(n lawn)

Thank goodness
 
If you want to walk across my lawn you have to drive down to my gate press the button in the security lock box, identify yourself, and respectfully state your business. If I find your visit to be of interest, I'll open the gate and you can drive on down to the house, park where designated, locate the two white stanchions that mark the stone path to the porch. Stay on the path and respect the lawn.
That is one fancy trailer park.
 
Those are a lot of long posts from people with a track record of authoritative inaccuracy.

I’ve spent lots of time all over the USA, albeit most always in upscale surroundings.

I felt a bit at risk once driving from cobo hall to the gros pointe yacht club via 8 mile in an allante, but for the most part never felt threatened in the USA before 9/11.

Since then, it’s always felt edgy.

And your police are a bit rough by canadian standards…but it’s still their job to keep the peace.

Right?
Perhaps you could detail the inaccuracies in his post.

The problem with the police is they are reactive not so much proactive. One can truly be dead, mugged, robbed, or beaten to death, by the time they arrive. The "peace" is generally kept by the consequences dealt out by the courts, when they fail society with light or no sentences, "peace" becomes a thing of the past...as we see in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.
 
Here's an interesting look into the crazy mindset of the Left.

Heller was 5-4. Yet so was Roe v Wade.

The Left argues that Heller can be overturned even though the 2nd Amendment is clearly enumerating the Right to keep and bear arms. Roe, they argue on the other hand, should never have been overturned because somewhere in amorphous world, the Constitution, almost, sometimes, maybe, might be able to be "interpreted" as, holds abortion to be a "Right."

So 5-4 means that the decision can be overturned. Unless it's something the Left believes in. Then any decision supporting their belief is sacrosanct.

It's unabashed lunacy.
Actually, Harpy, here is the unabashed lunacy:

1) Thinking that the "well regulated militia" specified in the 2nd Amendment is a bunch of angry incels or white supremacist groups.

2) Thinking that women in America are going to put up with a right-wing form of Sharia Law with regard to their bodies.

The overturning of recent decisions by Trump justices will take a while, but it will happen, because those decisions are in fact "unabashed lunacy".

Now get back to your actual areas of expertise, chasing ambulances and worshipping right-wing media outlets.
 
If you want to walk across my lawn you have to drive down to my gate press the button in the security lock box, identify yourself, and respectfully state your business. If I find your visit to be of interest, I'll open the gate and you can drive on down to the house, park where designated, locate the two white stanchions that mark the stone path to the porch. Stay on the path and respect the lawn.
With all that, you don’t need guns.
 
With all that, you don’t need guns.
Wrong....with all that, he obviously needs a bunker and loads of body armor..


Maybe a tank and a few drones


"They" may be trying to invade

Build the wall
 
Those are a lot of long posts from people with a track record of authoritative inaccuracy.

I’ve spent lots of time all over the USA, albeit most always in upscale surroundings.

I felt a bit at risk once driving from cobo hall to the gros pointe yacht club via 8 mile in an allante, but for the most part never felt threatened in the USA before 9/11.

Since then, it’s always felt edgy.

And your police are a bit rough by canadian standards…but it’s still their job to keep the peace.

Right?
The American policeman's job in the US is to generate revenue and take reports. nothing else. If they happen to solve a crime, bonus points in the media. Want proof, 20-30% of police departments are admin staff, no actual police work, less then 20% are on major crimes, special task units and the remainder (60+%) are patrol officers directed to issue tickets (revenue) and take reports.
 
Back
Top