• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Employee shot gunman during Kalamazoo liquor store robbery, police say

Rich2018 said:
Which ruled that.......?
Click to expand...

It's right there in the article you linked.

"The students filed suit, naming six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office , as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina."
In another article this article linked to:
"A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School."

Here's two with the correct headlines:
Judge finds schools, sheriff's office had no constitutional duty to protect Parkland students - CBS News
Judge rules school, sheriff's office had ‘no legal duty’ to protect students in mass shooting
 
Definition of skepticism 1 : an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object 2 a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain 3 : doubt concerning basic religious principles (such as immortality, providence, and revelation)

Argument from Incredulity = Fail.

The argument from incredulity is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone decides that something did not happen, because they cannot personally understand how it could happen. The fallacy is an argument from ignorance and an informal fallacy.
 
AProudLefty said:
It's right there in the article you linked.

"The students filed suit, naming six defendants, including the Broward school district and the Broward Sheriff’s Office , as well as school deputy Scot Peterson and campus monitor Andrew Medina."
In another article this article linked to:
"A federal judge says Broward schools and the Sheriff’s Office had no legal duty to protect students during the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School."

Here's two with the correct headlines:
Judge finds schools, sheriff's office had no constitutional duty to protect Parkland students - CBS News
Judge rules school, sheriff's office had ‘no legal duty’ to protect students in mass shooting
Click to expand...



From the report:

"“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm..."


Police Have No Duty to Protect You, Federal Court Affirms Yet Again | Mises Institute


Hint: Read the title
 
Rich2018 said:
Jesus, read the link.

Start with the title.
Click to expand...

Jesus. You can't stand losing, can you? Headlines can be wrong. I'll help you.

Your claim? Ruling includes the policemen.

The reality? Ruling only include the Sheriff's office among others.

“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law.
Click to expand...

One more time, who said this?
 
AProudLefty said:
...one more time, who said this?
Click to expand...

At a guess I'd say it was Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law.


Police officers ave no legal obligation to defend you.

Clearly your laughter emote showed you were unaware of this ruling.
 
Bum said:
KALAMAZOO, MI -- An employee at Bronco Liquor shot a man attempting to rob the store at gunpoint Thursday, Dec. 5.
The suspected robber sustained non-life-threatening injuries from a gunshot wound to the arm, Kalamazoo County Sheriff Undersheriff Jim VanDyken said.

Employee shot gunman during Kalamazoo liquor store robbery, police say - mlive.com

Also in Michigan....

DETROIT (FOX 2) - A man walking on Detroit's west side was carrying his gun and his CPL when someone tried to rob him. He used his gun and the attempted robber in the street.
Police were called around 6:45 to the 18600 block of Grayfield to the shooting. A 25-year-old man was walking when an armed man tried to rob him.
The victim has a concealed pistol license and pulled his gun. Both men shot at each other and the robbery suspect was hit in the body.

CPL holder shoots man trying to rob in him Detroit | FOX 2 Detroit

In Texas...

SAN ANTONIO — A pair of bounty hunters shot and killed a man who was robbing a far West Side gas station Monday night, we're now learning the full details.

POLICE: Robbery suspect shot, tased by bounty hunters | WOAI


In Georgia....

COBB COUNTY, Ga. - A father protected his family from a pair of home intruders when he wrestled one of the men, took his gun and fired it, Smyrna police said.
Sgt. Louis Defense told Channel 2’s Chris Jose the department is still working to identify the second suspect.
The home invasion took place on Nov. 23 in the 2300 block of Cobb Parkway in Smyrna, an arrest warrant shows.
According to the warrant, he said if the parents did not meet his demands, “The child would be shot.”

Police: Dad defending family wrestled home intruders, grabbing and firing gun | WSB-TV

In Arkansas....

BY ERYN TAYLOR AND MIKE SURIANI
HELENA- WEST HELENA, Ark. — A suspect who allegedly tried to rob a local store manager and his son early Thursday morning wound up in the hospital after the victim fought back.
The store manager and his child were opening up Jordan’s Kwik Stop on Sebastian Street around 5:45 a.m. Thursday when a man with a gun forced them inside. The man reportedly said “let me get everything” and held them at gunpoint.
According to police, the store manager said, “OK, hold on, let me get it for you,” then grabbed a gun and shot the suspect twice during a shootout

Accused armed robber shot when Arkansas store manager pulls own gun; employee's 7-year-old son was present, police say

All in all, its been a pretty busy week for the Second Amendment.....I am only sorry to see that one of the criminals survived; when you threaten to shoot a child, you have overstayed your welcome in the human gene pool.
Click to expand...

I guess the robber in the first story must have heard the liquor store was giving out free shots.
 
Rich2018 said:
At a guess I'd say it was Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law.


Police officers ave no legal obligation to defend you.

Clearly your laughter emote showed you were unaware of this ruling.
Click to expand...

Correct. I was unaware of the ruling. What you are not aware of is that the ruling does not include the policemen.
 
Chillfolks said:
If police are under no obligation to protect you, then that seema like a good reason to have a gun so you can protect yourself.
Click to expand...

You can't protect yourself with a gun....at least not most of the time.

Actually the ruling is open to challenge. Remember the 6'4" Parkland school resources officer who refused to go in and confront the shooter...he's been charged with, amongst other thing, with dereliction of duty.
 
Rich2018 said:
You can't protect yourself with a gun....at least not most of the time.
Click to expand...
If you don’t have a gun you can’t protect yourself anytime. So I’ll continue to carry mine to at least give myself a chance at protecting myself.

Actually the ruling is open to challenge. Remember the 6'4" Parkland school resources officer who refused to go in and confront the shooter...he's been charged with, amongst other thing, with dereliction of duty.
Click to expand...
Well when and if the courts rule that LEO’s must protect me and my family at all times and provides us with our personal protection officer, I may consider my options on carrying a firearm. Until then I’ll keep one cleaned and ready just in case. It may not be the best option for everyone, but luckily we live in a country that allows law abiding citizens the right to weigh their options and choose whatever they feel is best for them.
 
Rich2018 said:
What's the title of the article again ?


Talk about selective reading !
Click to expand...

I can read the title. You made the claim that the RULING includes the policemen. Where is it?
 
Chillfolks said:
If you don’t have a gun you can’t protect yourself anytime. So I’ll continue to carry mine to at least give myself a chance at protecting myself.
Click to expand...

I think I can but if presented with a robbery at gun point, I'd comply with the robber's demands


Well when and if the courts rule that LEO’s must protect me and my family at all times and provides us with our personal protection officer, I may consider my options on carrying a firearm. Until then I’ll keep one cleaned and ready just in case. It may not be the best option for everyone, but luckily we live in a country that allows law abiding citizens the right to weigh their options and choose whatever they feel is best for them.
Click to expand...


And sadly the same gun supply means that criminals have the same range of options.
 
Rich2018 said:
In the title and the quote I copied for you ?


Remind everyone reading again what the title of the article is.
Click to expand...

The title is "Police Have No Duty to Protect You". Then the article says the ruling includes the Sheriff's office, not the police office.
 
Rich2018 said:
And sadly the same gun supply means that criminals have the same range of options.
Click to expand...

Of course. That's why no one in America has access to drugs. Prohibition solves problems!


Duh.
 
AProudLefty said:
The title is "Police Have No Duty to Protect You". Then the article says the ruling includes the Sheriff's office, not the police office.
Click to expand...

Police have no duty.


"Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur"....



Police Have No Duty to Protect You, Federal Court Affirms Yet Again | Mises Institute



Are you really this illiterate ?
 
ecofarm said:
Of course. That's why no one in America has access to drugs. Prohibition solves problems!Duh.
Click to expand...
Bad analogy.

Guns have successfully been kept at extremely limited levels in many western styled nations around the world, most with dramatically less gun violence than the U.S.
Entirely unlike alcohol prohibition.
-Alcohol, in contrast, is largely legal around the world
-Its primary purpose is self-medication (feeling good), as opposed to killing humans like most firearms we discuss.

The absurdly high rate of gun related deaths in the U.S., is due in some significant part, to the incredible access to firearms we have in the U.S., it's not some big mystery.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review)
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
 
ecofarm said:
Convicts in prison have access to drugs. Do you think everyone is an idiot?
Click to expand...

It's actually pretty easy to get anything in prison. Inmates even have phones and tablets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom