Law Enforcement Losing the Ability to Protect the Citizens?

[jsbhike]

Right on cue.

Those 3 words can be said every time an anti 2nd Amendment/self defense initiative comes up when the opposite (and demonstrably false) claim comes up as part of the justification for the initiative.

[jsbhike]

Hey, a county in red state Kentucky is out of money? They wanted "small government." They got it!

The area was destitute during what has to be considered largesse. While it is 4 to 5 hours away, the more recent incident begs the question of how many people can an area pay 120 hours of overtime too (in addition to 40 regular hours in a 168 hour week).

https://www.kentucky.com/news/specia...e44453802.html
....
.....
https://www.courier-journal.com/stor...vin/972833001/

[Sabre675]

It's not the role of Law Enforcement in a Constitutional Republic to Protect anyone. The term "Protect and Serve" is misguided axiom, and needs to go back to Public Servant/Public Office. The Citizen in a so called Free Society is responsible for their well being on all fronts. The problem is two fold: Weak Society that wants to be Governed and unaccountable for anything and that a lot of States and Cities have passed Unconstitutional Laws making this difficult or impossible. Even in more Conservative venues have Prosecuting/County Attorneys, including ours, that don't know shit about the DOJ's Judicious Use of Force guidelines, and are guilty of self legislating just like everyone else in Government,making them more likely to prosecute someone for using force. The real issue, is the same for all issues and that is getting back to the real playbook.

[Firefly]

I blame society

[flenna]

The Citizen in a so called Free Society is responsible for their well being on all fronts. The problem is two fold: Weak Society that wants to be Governed and unaccountable for anything and that a lot of States and Cities have passed Unconstitutional Laws making this difficult or impossible.

Very well put and is the crux of the problem today. 50% of Americans want a nanny state and thus vote that way. When it doesn't work they double down and the Communists they elect are more than happy to restrict our rights even further.

[Arik]

I learned at a young age not to rely on the police. Nothing against cops at all but when I need help NOW chances are there isn't going to be one around the corner. Just a fact of life.

Back in the early 90s my dad had a business in a bad part of the city. I would work for him in the summer. One day my mom came and picked me up and we walked a few blocks to the parking lot. As we got to the car my mom got mugged as the fat old security guard just sat there watching. I was about 14 at the time. My dad called the cops and an officer showed up 2 hours later. He did apologize and said they were extremely busy. Took the report and told my dad to buy a gun and get a carry permit. Said....if you dropped that guy here no one would bat an eye

[jsbhike]

Very well put and is the crux of the problem today. 50% of Americans want a nanny state and thus vote that way. When it doesn't work they double down and the Communists they elect are more than happy to restrict our rights even further.

I think it's more than 50% considering far more than 50% of political races feature 2 candidates advocating destroying the 2nd Amendment(just 1 nanny state issue) and combined getting 90%+

[sundance435]

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/p...o-protect.html

That shouldn't have been news in 2005, either. That's been the legal standard almost everywhere since the first police agencies in America were founded. Are you actually implying that they should be? What better argument for a nanny state than the police are primarily responsible for your protection. Not only that, it isn't even remotely practical from a financial, ethical, or any other perspective.

[jsbhike]

That shouldn't have been news in 2005, either. That's been the legal standard almost everywhere since the first police agencies in America were founded. Are you actually implying that they should be? What better argument for a nanny state than the police are primarily responsible for your protection. Not only that, it isn't even remotely practical from a financial, ethical, or any other perspective.

Yeah that needs to not be brought up ever again, starting with the moratorium on it about 30 seconds after the very last time the claim of "you don't need a gun, the police are here to protect you" gets made.

[glocktogo]

Yeah that needs to not be brought up ever again, starting with the moratorium on it about 30 seconds after the very last time the claim of "you don't need a gun, the police are here to protect you" gets made.

Every time someone says "you don't need a gun, the police are here to protect you", someone needs to immediately say "That is a lie."