Jim Choate wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Wrong. The police are here to enforce laws and arrest people. They have > > no legal obligation to protect. It'd be nice if it really were that way, > > but it isn't. > > Wrong, police are here to serve and protect. They protect by enforcing > laws. They serve by following the tenets of a democratic government as > outlined in our Constitution. > No lesser than the Supreme Court says you are wrong. I don't have the decision details on me, but the Supreme decided (about 5 or so years ago) that police were not required by law to provide individual protection. Thus the need for custom individual protection. ;-) jim
- Not an unexpected verdict ... Peter Capelli
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Tim May
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Tim May
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... phelix
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Choate
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Burnes
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected ver... Jim Choate
- Re: Not an unexpected ver... Jim Burnes
- Re: Re: Not an unexpe... Jim Choate
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected ver... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected ver... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... lcs Mixmaster Remailer
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Choate
- RE: Not an unexpected verdict ... Peter Capelli