Cops will not protect you…they aren’t psychic nor are they legally required to

The police have no legal responsibility to save you.  No, seriously.  You may have heard this before and have not known its origin.  Maybe you just think since cops aren’t psychic they won’t be there in time to stop a crime.  Well, they’re not, and they usually aren’t there to protect you when things go bump in the night

Many of us have heard the old saying,

“When seconds count the cops are only minutes away”

Or that cops investigate crimes that happened not stop crimes that are happening.

That is very true.  And a rational person can understand that.  Of course, Gun Control zealots aren’t rational so they believe that only cops and criminals should have guns.  Criminals, so they can kill you and then armed cops can more safely capture the criminals.  Little solace to your family that the bad guy was captured.

Because he wasn’t “stopped”.  The only person who can STOP crime are those who are armed and ready when crime is unfolding.  Such as a 76 year old employee at Everett Real Estate who shot a much younger man who was robbing him.  Or a San Antonio man who stopped Roberto Barron when he was stabbing his wife in front of a school.  The cops weren’t there to protect Mrs. Barron, but an armed citizen was.  He saved her life and held Roberto at gun point until the police eventually arrived.

But these are things we know.  Especially as gun owners who carry, we carry a firearm because a cop won’t fit in our holsters.  And despite what the media would like us to believe, true stories of self defense using a firearm are much more prevalent than is reported.

Back to what the police actually do.  They investigate crimes that have happened.  But what are they “required” by law to do?

In Warren v District of Columbia, the court found that police are only under a general duty to protect the public at large.  The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists.

What does that mean?  That means that they do not have to answer your calls for help, they do not have to stop and assist you when you are in trouble, they do not have to do anything to help or protect YOU, the individual.  All that the police are required to do to satisfy their duty is to protect the public at large.

The case that brought this ruling in brief: Three rape victims sued the District of Columbia for negligence on the part of the police. Two of three female roommates were upstairs when they heard men break in and attack the third. They phoned the police, reporting that their house was being burglarized, and waited on the roof. Their call was incorrectly dispatched as less important than it was three minutes after they made the call, and three police cars came to the scene, three minutes after the call was dispatched. One policeman drove by without stopping, and another officer walked up to the door and knocked. Upon receiving no answer, the officers left five minutes after they had arrived. Nine minutes later, the two women called the police again and were assured they would receive assistance. This call was never dispatched and the police never came. Believing that the police had arrived and were in the house, the two women called down to the third who was being attacked. This alerted the intruders to their presence, and they then took them captive at knife-point. They were then raped, robbed, beaten, and forced to submit to the attackers’ sexual demands for the next fourteen hours.

With this ruling from the courts, how can anyone honestly and with a straight face actually argue that only police should be allowed to have guns.  If those very same police have no duty to protect a citizen then their use of a gun is primarily used to protect themselves. What kind of double standard is that?

I have always found this ruling to be the most damning to the gun control argument of only police being allowed to carry guns.   They WILL NOT BE THERE when the average law abiding citizen is in need.   Not only won’t they be there, they AREN’T REQUIRED TO BE THERE.

Now, if these 3 women were armed then quite possibly they wouldn’t have been raped and beaten for 14 hours.  I can tell you for a fact that being unarmed and waiting on the police to save them offered them no such protection and the results speak for themselves.

The police will file a report, but only you can stop crime.

Carry on and be your own cavalry.

Send this to friend