Saturday, March 20, 2010

The Public Duty Doctrine.86: Policing Ourselves

Given that law enforcement has no legal duty to protect the individual, only society as a whole (D+ for effort), and that they cannot be held legally liable for failing to protect the individual because there was no legal duty to protect the individual in the first place (The Public Duty Doctrine), American individuals should police themselves (presently, an F for effort).

In other words, individuals, like Boy Scouts, must be vigilant, must be prepared to act, be resolved to protect themselves and not rely totally on law enforcement.

Law enforcement cannot be everywhere, not outside your home at night, not escorting your child to school, not walking to your car in a dark parking lot. And if you call 9-1-1 for help, 99 percent of the time they will arrive. But how long will it take? And if they did not arrive, or did not arrive in a timely manner, you have no recourse. They cannot be held liable for failing to protect because there was no legal duty to protect in the first place.

When they arrive, your expectation is that the "calvary has arrived." Not so with law enforcement. When police show up on the scene, they have no idea who the good guys or bad guys are. They are there to simply maintain law and order ("Just the facts, ma'am").

Your obligation, in a crime, is to defend yourself, first, and, secondly, to call 9-1-1 and report what you saw or experienced. Because, you see, all you are to the State is a witness, alive or dead. Don't forget that.

I give American law enforcement a "D+" because they fail to disclose The Public Duty Doctrine to the public. Talking about an oxymoron!!!

I give American individuals an "F" for effort. Because when you get right down to it, when you focus on the reality of the situation, they have failed to take the necessary responsibility in defending themselves. In a way, if they did, it would be called "Good Citizenship" to do so.

No comments:

Post a Comment