Comments by "filonin2" (@filonin2) on "Police in All But 4 US States Have Killed People in 2015" video.

  1. Brian b Link? Case name?
    1
  2. Brian b Actually, if you read the link you provided, the police are under no obligation to protect individual citizens, but the public as a whole and to maintain law and order. Your link actually undermines your point that the police's job is not to protect the public. Although I do find the case decisions abhorrent and I totally disagree with them, you appear to be incorrect regarding the thrust of the decisions. Please show me where if I am in error.
    1
  3. Brian b I read them, they do not support your point. The public being made up of individual citizens is also not a point as people are made of cells but are definitely different than people. The supreme court decided that individual citizens do not have a right to specific police protection, there is no mention of not protecting the public as a whole, in fact it says the exact opposite. I totally disagree with the decisions, but that is what they say. Why not try explaining your view instead of trying to insult me?
    1
  4. Brian b The very title of the article disagrees with your statement that the police are not obligated to serve and protect the public. If you were talking about individuals, this would be great evidence, but you aren't.
    1
  5. Brian b It is not splitting hairs to point out the difference between individuals and society as a whole, and your own argument defeats itself. You- "I presented an argument that SCOTUS has no constitutional duty to protect (here I eluded to the original post) the public." Then you say "I then cited case precedent where SCOTUS has decided, every time, that there is no duty for police to protect people, but rather to protect 'society' Society, 'the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community.'" as if it were supporting your argument. Society is not an individual. Society is the public. Further, your own link says that for decision 8, "Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public." I'm not trying to obfuscate the point of the conversation, I'm pointing out a rather obvious problem with your argument, one in which I share the side with you. If you do resort to ad hominem though, know that it would be ironically childish now that you have accused me of it, and it would only weaken your position through obvious fallacy.
    1
  6. Brian b ad hominem, I win.
    1