Cops have no constitutional duty to protect you

[Into the Night]

They do not have a duty to protect you. That's what SCOTUS said. Whatever oath they take when they become cops has nothing to do with anything.

SCOTUS has no authority to usurp the authority of cities, counties, or States. They are the ones hiring police. They hire them for the purpose to protect citizens. They are bound by that, regardless of what SCOTUS says.

If the police fail to protect citizens, their hiring authority can be held responsible.

In other words, since the cops in Uvalde failed in their duty to protect civilians, the City of Uvalde can be jointly held responsible for the deaths.

 

[Into the Night]

The first organized police force in America was in 1838. It was long after the Constitution was written.

1634. The year is 1634. That was when the first sheriff was hired. He served the Shire of Northampton, in the colony of Virginia, 144 years BEFORE the Constitution.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Nope. The 10th Amendment allows states to ban them.

only those states that do not have their own right to keep and bear arms in the state constitutions

 

[LV426]

Not particularly true. The rich--the really rich--simply live where crime is all but nonexistent so they really don't need a lot of police involvement.

Sure. Why not?

 

[LV426]

What an asinine and moronic claim. Then why bother having laws and police halfwit? Apparently you own nothing and on the Government welfare rolls to have to stupid opinions.

Cops don't solve crimes. They don't stop crimes. They very rarely prevent crimes. And a whole lot of them commit crimes themselves.

I'd wager that cops commit more crimes than they actually solve.

 

[LV426]

And they are liable for the result.

Soooo you just kinda proved your last point was stupid.

 

[LV426]

Not everywhere is Uvalde, Sock.

Ah, so the Uvalde cops were an outlier and every other police department and sheriff's department in the country are totally not incompetent and/or corrupt?

Is that what you want to say? If so, go for it.

 

[LV426]

You cannot blame YOUR problem on IBDaMann or anybody else, Sock.

You're the one blaming your problems on others.

Specifically the problem of coming up with one example of a Conservative policy, that didn't require liberals to do the devising or voting, that made the country an objectively better place.

I've posed that challenge and none of you could even come up with something passable. Everything either was voted by Democrats, or Democrats are the ones who came up with it!

You guys have nothing. Nothing to show for anything. There is nothing there for you to campaign on. That's why you lie about a stolen election...because you can't win elections on the merits of your shitty beliefs.

 

[LV426]

No, it doesn't. The 10th amendment does not overrule the 2nd amendment.

It does when it comes to state protections.

Unless you don't think states should have rights....which is what you seem to be arguing here.

That's funny because you argue the exact opposite position when it comes to banning abortion.

 

[LV426]

SCOTUS has no authority to usurp the authority of cities, counties, or States. They are the ones hiring police. They hire them for the purpose to protect citizens. They are bound by that, regardless of what SCOTUS says.

If the police fail to protect citizens, their hiring authority can be held responsible.

In other words, since the cops in Uvalde failed in their duty to protect civilians, the City of Uvalde can be jointly held responsible for the deaths.

SCOTUS ruled that cops have no duty to protect you.

But we already knew that, we didn't need SCOTUS to tell us that.

You don't seem to understand most things, so let me try to speak to you in your native tongue...but just know I haven't taken Conservaspeak since George Soros paid me to learn it in college: OINK OINK OINK. MOOO. OINK OINK OINK OINK. MOOO. BAAAAA. BAAAAA. OINK OINK OINK.

 

[LV426]

only those states that do not have their own right to keep and bear arms in the state constitutions

But they can do it though, which your Nazi pal said they couldn't. So your Nazi pal was wrong AGAIN.

Sensing a pattern there....

 

[Into the Night]

only those states that do not have their own right to keep and bear arms in the state constitutions

The 2nd amendment applies to all States as well as the federal government. They signed on to this when they joined. The 10th amendment does not overrule the 2nd amendment. Also, all remaining States echo the 2nd amendment in their own State constitutions.

 

[Into the Night]

Cops don't solve crimes. They don't stop crimes. They very rarely prevent crimes. And a whole lot of them commit crimes themselves.

I'd wager that cops commit more crimes than they actually solve.

You would lose.

 

[Into the Night]

Soooo you just kinda proved your last point was stupid.

What? That Uvalde cops were cowards and the town is liable for hiring them?

 

[Into the Night]

Ah, so the Uvalde cops were an outlier and every other police department and sheriff's department in the country are totally not incompetent and/or corrupt?

Is that what you want to say? If so, go for it.

False dichotomy fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

You're the one blaming your problems on others.

LIF. Grow up.

Specifically the problem of coming up with one example of a Conservative policy, that didn't require liberals to do the devising or voting, that made the country an objectively better place.

I've posed that challenge and none of you could even come up with something passable. Everything either was voted by Democrats, or Democrats are the ones who came up with it!

You guys have nothing. Nothing to show for anything. There is nothing there for you to campaign on. That's why you lie about a stolen election...because you can't win elections on the merits of your shitty beliefs.

RQAA. Argument of the Stone fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

It does when it comes to state protections.

The 10th amendment does not overrule the 2nd amendment.

Unless you don't think states should have rights....which is what you seem to be arguing here.

False dichotomy fallacy.

That's funny because you argue the exact opposite position when it comes to banning abortion.

The federal government has no authority to overrule States on abortions. See the 9th and 10th amendments.
Abortion for convenience is murder. It is so considered by some States now.

You are still trying to argue a false dichotomy fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

SCOTUS ruled that cops have no duty to protect you.

But we already knew that, we didn't need SCOTUS to tell us that.

You don't seem to understand most things, so let me try to speak to you in your native tongue...but just know I haven't taken Conservaspeak since George Soros paid me to learn it in college: OINK OINK OINK. MOOO. OINK OINK OINK OINK. MOOO. BAAAAA. BAAAAA. OINK OINK OINK.

SCOTUS has no say.

 

[Into the Night]

But they can do it though, which your Nazi pal said they couldn't. So your Nazi pal was wrong AGAIN.

Sensing a pattern there....

I have no Nazis for pals. You are hallucinating again, Sock.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

But they can do it though, which your Nazi pal said they couldn't. So your Nazi pal was wrong AGAIN.

Sensing a pattern there....

the pattern is that governments will absolutely ignore their prescribed limitations of power and nearly every time, the people will let them get away with it because it doesn't immediately affect them.