Experts and users discuss firearms, gun rights, guns, society: The Police Are Not There To Protect You
Email addresses will be used to email the information on your behalf and will not be collected, shared, sold, or used by Opposing Views for any other purpose. See our privacy policy.





The Police Are Not There To Protect You
- From Second Amendment Sisters
By Second Amendment Sisters - Self Defense is a Basic Human Right
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Minutes Away
The Police can not be everywhere at once. They are often outnumbered by 500 to 1 or more. They do the best they can but they are not your personal body guard. When seconds count, the Police are Minutes Away. For this reason it is your personal responsibility to have & train with the tools necessary to secure yourself & your household.
- DustinsGunBlog
September 5, 2008 1:25PM
Reply to this Recommend (3)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
"The Police Are Not There To Protect You"
This seems like an odd perspective, given the motto of the LAPD. Does the police department misunderstand their own role?
- Jordan Gray
February 28, 2009 9:44AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Mottos v. Constitution
If you take a look at Hartzler v. the City of San Jose you will discover that the government owes no duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. Seriously. And don't look to the constitution for help on this one, either. According to attorney Richard W. Stevens: "in its landmark decision of DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, the US Supreme Court declared that the Constitution does not impose a duty on the state and local governments to protect the citizens from criminal harm."
Police officers have, from time to time, failed in their "duty" to protect citizens because of sheer negligence. Under such circumstances, no citizen is allowed to sue a police officer (or police department) for the loss of a loved one due to an erroneous officer not doing his job, because as the supreme court mentioned, police officers are not constitutionally (or legally) responsible for protecting individual citizens. Sucks to pay their salary, doesn't it?
- Livvy
April 28, 2009 10:01AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
sucks to pay their salary
Your so right.Thats why we need to take the steps to protect our selfs with our guns .
- countryboy
July 3, 2009 9:42PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I carry a Gun because Cops are Too Heavy...
Darn Skippy! There is no such thing as a "Gun Free Zone" where armed criminals are concerned. To them, "Gun Free" Translates as "Ample Pickings".
Law-Abiding citizens need to have the option of LTC to protect themselves against the ever-growing population of armed-and-violent criminals that are running our streets.
- Mike S
March 24, 2009 9:57PM
Reply to this Recommend (2)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
amen brother
that's all. Amen brother
- blh11358
May 21, 2009 6:53PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
laws
laws were not created to protect people, they were created to punish people.
- larson014
June 1, 2009 12:13PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.