You are correct, but the existence of the officer deters crime, there may not be an overt act of protection, but it isn't needed.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Timothy Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 1:06 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Knives 1 - Guns 0 > > Little known fact. The supreme court ruled (can't remember the exact > case, will google it later) that the police have no obligation to PROTECT > civilians. Their obligation is to investigate crimes AFTER they occur. > > So much for not needing a gun. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
