http://public.findlaw.com/civi...sconduct-rights.html

The statement under Overcoming Immunity, "Mere negligence, the failure to exercise due care, is not enough to create liability. Immunity therefore means that in the typical police-suspect interaction, the suspect cannot sue the police.", is what bothers me. So if LE decides to drive by your house and not get out to come check on you, you're on you own.

There are good cops and bad cops. You never know which one you gonna get. Protect yourself.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Griz,
I don't recall the case but there is no responsibility of law enforcement to protect you. They are there to "enforce" the law. The best you can expect is to be arrested along with your assailant. Remember, when seconds count the police are minutes away.

griz, you are completely correct. Law enforcement has almost no LEGAL obligations to do anything, whether it is respond (at all) or even protect. Law enforcement is not a deterrent, it is a REACTIONARY force to investigate and hopefully find the perp. The last "statistic" I read, I believe it was from the FBI, is that law enforcement PREVENTED about 1.5% of all crimes. The rest is up to you and you have no legal recourse against law enforcement for not doing their job.

yes i agree have friends that are cops in different branches they all say they are the clean up crew not the answer when you are in need

As an LEO for 36 years, here's my advice...

#1) Do what a reasonable and prudent man would do.

#2) Let common sense prevail

#3) Avoid being a victim (or in other words, be a 'hard target').

The statement that 'when seconds count the police are just minutes away' is very true.

I've been shot at and sued in Federal Court (unsucessfully). I did not like either experience and learned a lot from both instances. Away from the job I take care of me and mine and avoid trouble when I can. In particular I want to avoid having to push a pile of money across a desk to a lawyer.

I must admit that I subscribe to the T. Roosevelt doctrine of 'speak softly and carry a big stick'.

quote:

So if LE decides to drive by your house and not get out to come check on you, you're on you own.

That statement has absolutely nothing to do with the article you linked which related to police/suspect interaction and civil rights claims.

However, as has been pointed out above and was the conclusion of a Supreme Court case (I believe, from my failing memory) the police have no obligation to protect an individual, their job is to enforce societal rules.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:

quote:

So if LE decides to drive by your house and not get out to come check on you, you're on you own.

That statement has absolutely nothing to do with the article you linked which related to police/suspect interaction and civil rights claims.

However, as has been pointed out above and was the conclusion of a Supreme Court case (I believe, from my failing memory) the police have no obligation to protect an individual, their job is to enforce societal rules.

"Failure to exercise due care." doesn't cover the comment I made? It's not that difficult to understand.

Apparently it is for you.

quote:

Being stopped and questioned by police in connection with a crime is an unsettling experience for most anyone. As long as the officer is performing his job properly, however, there is no violation of a suspect's rights. In fact, police are immune from suit for the performance of their jobs unless willful, unreasonable conduct is demonstrated. Mere negligence, the failure to exercise due care, is not enough to create liability. Immunity therefore means that in the typical police-suspect interaction, the suspect cannot sue the police. Civil rights remedies come into play for willful police conduct that violates an individual's constitutional rights.

I'm not going to argue about it, it doesn't matter to me if you think an article about police-suspect interactions and civil and criminal liability relating to THAT topic has something to do with whether a policeman drives by and checks out your home or not. Geesh.

There may be some case law out there that supports this position. For the most part, it's just common sense. If has jack to do with good cop, bad cop. It's just numbers. You want 24 hour protection? Hire some.

However, depending on where you live, it may be a bit of a reach to say that there is not only no duty to protect but no duty to respond, at all, either. As a firefighter, once I acknowledge my dispatch, I am bound to respond to that call. I can't see the blue side not being under the same type of rule.

In the US, there is no good reason NOT to call 911 if you are in a self defense situation, if you have the chance and can do so without further endangering yourself. If you are worried about getting a response from a good cop or a bad cop, I'd put a lot of thought into moving.
Chet

quote:

If has jack to do with good cop, bad cop.

I heard a cop say that it's safer for him to take his time and hope the problem "takes care of itself".

I heard another say he let an obvious drunk driver go because it was at the end of his shift and too much paperwork.

One quit the force and worked under my supervision. From the stories he told and his work ethic, I know he was only there for a check.

Some have a heart of gold and I treat them like family, and some see you as a burden to them and someone they can push around when they're having a bad day.

How about we change it to say "To Serve and Protect....Results May Vary"

My point is simple. Protect yourself.

Well said griz. While we all know cops who do a wonderful job and being is cop is who they are, not what they do, we also all know that moron who barely graduated high school, and next thing you know, he has a gun and a badge. I think Griz's point is just that you can't always count on a cop responding at all, or appropriately, although they will mostly. Sometimes they are too late, or just don't give a damn, or want to exercise their authority and control on you when they shouldn't. Cops are just people too.