Tag Archives: police

“[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”

Seems folks from the Pulse nightclub shooting still haven’t gotten the memo:

31 Orlando police officers sued over their response to Pulse nightclub massacre that left 49 dead
A city police officer acting as a security guard didn’t do his job and more than two dozen of his colleagues failed in their duties or violated the civil rights of surviving victims after the 2016 Orlando, Florida, nightclub massacre, according to a new federal lawsuit.

The police do not exist to protect you. It isn’t their job. That “protect and serve”? That’s the state, society as a whole, the system.

Not individuals caught up in the system.

  • Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981): In a 4-3 decision, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial courts’ dismissal of the complaints against the District of Columbia and individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department based on the public duty doctrine ruling that “[t]he duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists”.
  • Bowers vs. DeVito, U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, 686F.2d 616 (1982) ruled that “there is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”
  • (Turner v. Thomas, Jr., et al (CASE NO. 3:17-CV-00064, 2018): “Plaintiff’s claims share a common question: whether there is constitutional duty under the Fourteenth Amendment for the police to intervene to protect a citizen from criminal conduct by third parties. Because I find this duty is not ‘clearly established,’ his claims are barred by qualified immunity.”

And that is why we remain adamant on the right to keep and bear arms.

The police do not protect you; they protect the state. An officer might choose to help, but are you willing to bet your life on that? Even assuming an officer happened to be there in your time of need.

There’s only one person always present where you are, who happens to have a vested interest in your life.

You.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Gun Culture Genocide

Or call it cultural terraforming. Either way, the intent is to indoctrinate children with the idea that guns are evil. John Dewey would be proud of them.

Police called to New Haven magnet school for child making toy Lego gun
School officials said a child built a toy gun out of Lego at the Jepsen Magnet School in New Haven Thursday.

School administrators called police to the school after the child made the gun and started pointing it at the other kids.

The school’s behavioral rules do forbid toy weapons, but somehow I don’t think that’s a criminal offense, even in Connecticut. So why were the police called to enforce a school rule?

To ensure that uppity kid understands that the authorities will stomp on his rights. To expect it. To accept it.

To ensure the culture of self responsibility — expressed through firearms ownership — becomes extinct, by terrifying a small child, young enough to be playing with Legos in school, with cops.

Now, I could accept some restrictions on toy guns in school. Popping off Nerf projectiles during lessons could certainly be disruptive. And you wouldn’t want a child to be beating other children with a plastic bludgeon. But neither was a case here. The child made an inert gun-shaped assembly of plastic blocks. He allegedly pointed it at other students.

Great Ghu, did they think the Legos were going to go off?

In a sane world, the teacher might have told the child, “Johnny, that’s very creative, but you should never point even toy guns at other people. And you’re disrupting class. Put that away until recess.” End of story. It would have been a good time to start the class on the basic rules of safe firearms handling.

Nope. Someone panicked. The police were called. The police responded… to a toy gun call. Even they though they had to know there was not a criminal violation.

Where’s the investigation of school personnel filing a false report with the police? That is a crime. Even in Connecticut.

Better yet…

“School leaders and local police partners were able to investigate and resolve the issue internally with use of restorative practices.

How did the police investigate the issue? Did the police question the child? Were his parents informed and present, or other adult counsel? There is a lot of court precedent for children knowing their Miranda rights and having proper representation during questioning. In a rational world, the New Haven Police Department could be in serious legal trouble for playing the school’s game.*

And then there’s the potential for a lawsuit against the teacher, and whomever else was involved in bringing in the police. If I were the parent, that would include the pricipal and school board.

Just maybe we could culturally terraform Connecticut back into respect for the Bill of Rights. And people. Even small children.


* I sent an email to the NHPD, asking for clarification on their role. I wanted to email the school, but they’ve scrubbed every active contact link for their web site (“contact us” buttons still appear, but link to nothing).


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

If the police are there to protect us

…which they are not, per court ruling

Then let’s give them some incentive to do the job they’re being paid by taxpayers to claim they do.

This can be done with federal law enforcement easily enough. Any Congress that can pass Obamacare can easily pass a law to

  • Make the pay rate for all personnel with law enforcement powers equal to the federal minimum wage. Across the board. Every single one. At any level, supervision or management.
  • Include a clause that any union contract specifying otherwise is null and void upon expiration, and must be renegotiated (you can keep your pay if you like your pay; heh) to meet US Code requirements. No contract extensions not compliant with the standards.
  • No minimum wage LEO may carry a firearm. Ever. Aren’t they citizens, people, just like the disarmed rest of us?
  • Those LEOs who wish to carry a firearm only on duty shall qualify on each and every type of firearm they might carry on duty, and requalify semiannually. Firearms-qualified and equipped LEOs will earn a 15% bonus.

Statistically, law enforcement doesn’t make the top ten list of most dangerous jobs. Some list, it doesn’t make the top twenty. Why should their base pay be higher than a roofer?

You think that’s tricky? You ain’t seen nothing yet.

  • As above, LEO pay is fixed at minimum wage, or minimum plus 15%, but…
  • Any unarmed LEO who goes into harm’s way (as anti-exemplified by the Broward County Sheriff’s Office) to protect a citizen(s) earns a cash bonus for that action. If needed, full medical coverage for any injuries, appropriate death benefits, and 100% college scholarships for any children.
  • Any armed LEO who goes into harm’s way earns a lesser cash bonus for that action. If needed, full medical coverage for any injuries and appropriate death benefits.
  • Any armed LEO who fails to go into harm’s way to protect a citizen(s) will lose all armed-officer pay and bonuses perpetually. This does not mean he must search out such incidents, but merely respond appropriately when one does occur in which he could have acted.
  • Disputes arising from whether a LEO’s behavior met the above standards or not will be settled by a board of arbitrators consisting of non-LEO civilians, but advised in a non-binding fashion by a person(s) will law enforcement experience but no conflict of interest in any particular case at hand. The board shall have the power to award additional bonuses (beyond those specified above) should they determine the LEO’s behavior was especially exemplary.

By judicial decree, cops don’t have any responsibility to protect individuals; they “protect” society simply being there. So do minimum wage unarmed security guards. This proposal does not attempt to change that lack of requirement; it incentivizes the behavior we expect of good cops. LEOs who can’t deal with this probably shouldn’t be LEOs. They hire on with Securitas (and arrange their own unofficial bonuses) or flip burgers.

Or roof houses.

Naturally, this federal law wouldn’t apply to state/local officers. It would be up to locals to decide if they want something similar for their tax dollars. But federal grants, equipment, and civil asset forfeiture (pessimistically, I don’t expect that to go away, even if this proposal passed) sharing would be dependent upon local compliance with these guidelines.

Let the folks doing mundane, boring, unexceptional work be paid as such.

Let the heroes be rewarded as such.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Can of Peas or a Gun?? Tough Choices!

I heard on the news today there had recently been a shooting attack at a big box store called Costco.  I have it on good authority that this is not possible!! Costco is a gun free zone! Admittedly they only came clean in 2014 that they were gun free. Before that they didn’t want to tick off gun owners by being proudly gun free.

But despite this gold standard of safety it seems an as yet unnamed man entered Costco today yelling and brandishing a gun. No word yet on what type of gun went crazy today and grabbed a nearby human and forced him to transport him to the gun free Costco. Even though the gun knew it was not welcome there, it forced the human to provide transportation. As the apparently distraught human entered Costco it was yelling. The employees tried to lower the security gates but were unable to lower it in time.

People fled for the exits as they realized what was happening and one little 82 year old lady struggled to keep up with the crowd as they stampeded towards safety.

But earthly angels need to shop too. And apparently one was shopping in the store when the out of control gun and the hapless shouting human made their entry. An off duty police officer. As panicked shoppers and employees fled out the store the officer pulled his gun and his badge and held them up so people could see. And as the defenseless fled towards safety a good guy with a gun went to confront evil. And he killed it. There were no other casualties. None. Apparently the good guy gun was better than the bad guy gun. Because after all, it’s all about an inanimate piece of metal right?

But I have lingering questions. Will the good guy with a gun be prosecuted by Costco? I mean, after all, he wasn’t on duty.  And he obviously was carrying a gun in a “gun free zone”! Did the off-duty police officer check to see how many blacks vs how many whites were in the store? Aren’t they all suppose to be racist according to BLM?  Are there any other types of Costco members that they have no concern for besides the 82 year old woman that struggled to keep up and escape? Perhaps they also have no regard for young children. They can’t run very fast either. Mothers carrying infants? They are sure to be slower. Questions for Costco to ponder, what is their “target” demographic?  Either way, if shopping in a store that has made it clear that you must be defenseless and vulnerable to be welcome is your thing, I wouldn’t be surprised if Costco doesn’t have a sale on memberships err long.

I was told by someone I respect enormously I should be able to kill someone with a can of peas, should the occasion call for it, or the need arise. But do battle with a can of peas (not that I’m not willing, should the occasion call for it) instead of a gun?  Inconceivable

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Well, bye!

Has anyone ever seen any problem at a gun show that required a mass police presence? Me neither. There have been a few accidents here and there, but nothing criminal that required an armed police response in recent memory.

That’s why a Pennsylvania Mayor’s hilariously impotent temper tantrum in response to an upcoming NRA-sponsored gun show’s refusal to fork over a 60 percent increase extortion in fees to hold the show in Harrisburg is so perplexing. Specifically, Mayor Eric Papenfuse is refusing to provide police security for the show.

Harrisburg police have provided security for the annual Great American Outdoors Show, scheduled this year for February 6-14, in the past. Mayor Eric Papenfuse said that the decision not to offer the department’s services this year was motivated in part by the NRA’s opposition to the city’s gun control policies.

“We have an epidemic of gun violence,” Papenfuse told WHTM. “It’s no secret that the NRA has worked against the city’s interests repeatedly over the past year causing us to spend tens of thousands of dollars to defend common sense gun ordinances. We don’t need to be doing them any favors.”

The NRA has already been paying Harrisburg $600,000, but Papenfuse wanted more ostensibly to provide police protection for the gun show. Police protection from what? Your guess is as good as mine. It’s probably Papenfuse’s passive/aggressive effort to close down the gun show by refusing to offer armed security. As if anyone really cares…

This is equally hysterical coming from a guy who in December 2012 pled guilty to exceeding the speed limit by 15 mph in a 25 mph zone – probably a residential one.

MDJCourtSummaryReport

Hey, Eric! Did you know that nearly 34,000 people died in motor vehicle accidents in 2014? That makes your speeding through what was probably a residential neighborhood much more dangerous than the gun shows with their handful of 2014 accidents! It also makes your histrionic claim about children’s safety just a bit disingenuous, don’t you think?

Ooops!

In any case, I doubt that police presence at the gun show in Harrisburg will be needed.

Nice try, dimwit.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail