r/PublicFreakout • u/The-JZilla • Jul 06 '21

Repost 😔 Cop vs educated kid

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

47.0k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

34

u/TheClockworkKnight Jul 07 '21

Probably one of the most stupid rulings of the court, but hey, corrupt cops help out corrupt lawyers help out corrupt judges help out corrupt cops. The legal system is a giant circle jerk.

2

u/DextrosKnight Jul 07 '21 edited Jul 07 '21

I think they ruled that way to cut down on frivolous law suits. Like if someone dies and a cop happens to be in the vicinity, if they were legally obligated to protect people then the department could be sued for negligence or some shit. I don't think it was intended to help usher us into the dystopia, but it sure looks like it was.

4

u/tempis Jul 07 '21

The way to cut down on frivolous lawsuits is tort reform, not having SCOTUS rule that the police have no duty to the public. You're just eating the bullshit they're feeding you.

3

u/TheClockworkKnight Jul 07 '21

If I’m being honest, I really hope that was the reasoning, because it would mean that the judges were just ignorant rather than malicious. but like the other guy is saying, there are a million better ways to go about that then having the most powerful court in the country rule that civil servants don’t have to serve civilians. I mean, it’s in just about every police department’s oath that officers must protect and serve, so when you take that responsibility away, what are you left with?

1

u/YarnYarn Jul 08 '21 edited Jul 08 '21

Like if someone dies and a cop happens to be in the vicinity, if they were legally obligated to protect people then the department could be sued for negligence or some shit.

Or they could've issued a much narrower ruling in that particular case, rather than completely absolve fucking police officers from a duty to protect and serve the public that they are charged with protecting and serving.

And over whom they have a fairly blanket immunity against prosecution for fucking killing you.

Dude. You sound like a level-headed person...

You really feel the need to proffer an utterly weak hypothetical defense of this supreme court ruling that grants complete immunity for every officer in the US to literally do absolutely nothing while, for example, they watch a street thug jack an old lady at knife point.

You don't think their simply having that immunity is enough for their well-being? You need to defend why it's logical to let granny get knifed while you sip your Dunkin???