Serious question for Gun Advocates.

surely you could see how this legal duty to respond to every call could be used as a way to completely hobble law enforcement.
the 2nd biggest reason that the framers prohibited government infringement on the right to bear arms was that they knew that each man was responsible for their own safety and protection, not the government.
 
All you've done is repeat yourself with no links to valid sources for support. Give the post number if you have. Posts 11 and 45.
Warren v. District of Columbia (1981)

An earlier case holding police had no specific duty to protect individuals from harm, even after multiple calls.

DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989)

The Supreme Court ruled the state has no obligation to protect individuals from private violence unless the state creates the danger or takes custody, setting a precedent that police don't have to protect citizens from private harm.

Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005)

This case reinforced DeShaney, finding police had no constitutional duty to enforce a restraining order and protect a woman from her estranged husband, as she wasn't in custody.


In the spring of 2012, Joseph Lozito, who was brutally stabbed and "grievously wounded, deeply slashed around the head and neck", sued police for negligence in failing to render assistance to him as he was being attacked by Gelman.

On July 25, 2013, Judge Margaret Chan dismissed Lozito's suit, stating that while Lozito's account of the attack rang true and appeared "highly credible", Chan agreed that police had "no special duty" to protect Lozito.
 
the 2nd biggest reason that the framers prohibited government infringement on the right to bear arms was that they knew that each man was responsible for their own safety and protection, not the government.
so you're on defund the police then?

be honest.

fuck the defenseless, government should only serve the rich.

anarchy is fucking stupid, power abhors a vacuum.

the bankers and their fascist libertarian idiot slaves want anarchy so they can take over everything and regular folks are defenseless.
 
so you're on defund the police then?

be honest.

fuck the defenseless, government should only serve the rich.

anarchy is fucking stupid, power abhors a vacuum.

the bankers and their fascist libertarian idiot slaves want anarchy so they can take over everything and regular folks are defenseless.
what mental gymnastics did you employ to believe i'm for defunding police because I said the founders believed that YOU are solely responsible for your own safety and that of your family??????
 
The founding fathers were brilliant in their ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights due to their experiences of an oppressive government with a standing army. So HOW is the founders belief that government cannot be trusted a strained and idiotic position??????
The government protects our rights. that's what the Constitution does and its a government document.

Corporations aren't obligated to allow free speech; you libertarians loved saying it and were pro censorship.

You work for big. pharma.
 
the 2nd biggest reason that the framers prohibited government infringement on the right to bear arms was that they knew that each man was responsible for their own safety and protection, not the government.
Your belief that founders were anti law enforcement is the dumbest shit ever.

You're basically with blm.

You're for defunding police.
 
Back
Top