Police discussion/debate thread

This is for topical issues effecting our fair world... you can quit snickering anytime. Note: It is the desire of the leadership of SFDebris Conglomerate that all posters maintain a civil and polite bearing in this forum, regardless of how you feel about any particular issue. Violators will be turned over to Captain Janeway for experimentation.
User avatar
Beelzquill
Officer
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Beelzquill »

On the subject of police, did you know the U.S. police are not constitutionally obligated to enforce restraining orders and protect the citizens of the U.S.
U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2005
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales
docket No. 04-278
So the whole "Protect and Serve" stuff is sort of bullshit to me.
User avatar
Yukaphile
Overlord
Posts: 8778
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Rabid Posting World
Contact:

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Yukaphile »

That was introduced from lawmakers, corrupt lawmakers during the height of the Bush era. Same year the assault weapons ban expired and they voted to immunize gunmakers from legal consequences. Police are still part of law enforcement, the middle ground between making the laws and passing sentence.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
User avatar
Beelzquill
Officer
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Beelzquill »

The Supreme Court aren't lawmakers, their law "interpreters" and it was a 7-2 decision so a couple of moderates like Kennedy and Liberals like Sandra Day O'Connor ruled for it.
User avatar
Yukaphile
Overlord
Posts: 8778
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Rabid Posting World
Contact:

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Yukaphile »

It's still part of the judicial branch, and I maintain law enforcement is still the middle ground between that and creating the laws.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
User avatar
Beelzquill
Officer
Posts: 453
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:55 am

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Beelzquill »

Well, yeah? I meant that federally, the supreme court said that Police were not obligated to protect, meaning there is no legal federal penalty for police officers to refuse to prevent an armed robbery, or a stalker breaking a restraining order. I didn't mean that police create laws.
User avatar
Admiral X
Captain
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:37 am

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Admiral X »

There was a recent ruling down in Florida over that school shooting there which found the same thing. Remember that resource officer who ran like a little bitch while the children he was there to protect were getting killed? Yeah, no legal consequences for that guy at all, because police aren't obligated to protect people. Another reason I support concealed carry. ;)
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough."
-TR
User avatar
Yukaphile
Overlord
Posts: 8778
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Rabid Posting World
Contact:

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Yukaphile »

I fear concealed carry given how easy guns are to buy here in the country. Though I much prefer that over open carry, people swaggering through the streets with machine guns strapped to their chests to make up for their small-penis complex. That's just pure intimidation. Plain and simple.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
User avatar
Admiral X
Captain
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:37 am

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Admiral X »

Open carry is just a huge sign saying "shoot me first!" Concealed carry keeps would-be criminals guessing.
"Black care rarely sits behind a rider whose pace is fast enough."
-TR
User avatar
Yukaphile
Overlord
Posts: 8778
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:14 am
Location: Rabid Posting World
Contact:

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Yukaphile »

At least you're more reasonable than my other Libertarian friend. He thinks you should have open carry in schools and hospitals.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
User avatar
Madner Kami
Captain
Posts: 4045
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: Police discussion/debate thread

Post by Madner Kami »

Yukaphile wrote: Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:16 am It's still part of the judicial branch, and I maintain law enforcement is still the middle ground between that and creating the laws.
Um, no. Law enforcement is, by it's very nature, part of the executive branch. They enforce the law. They don't make the law (legislative branch), they don't interpret the law (judicial branch), they execute the law. Sometimes literally.
"If you get shot up by an A6M Reisen and your plane splits into pieces - does that mean it's divided by Zero?
- xoxSAUERKRAUTxox
Post Reply