Apparently, another coward.

[Truebeliever]

Yes, even off duty there is a duty to act in some cases, ie felony. But what is that response? That depends. It’s not a “duty” to die or get others killed as a reaction to a bad tactical position etc

In the Pulse nightclub, the off duty cop was the first to engage. He was a part of the group of cops that rushed in and shot it out again with gunman and pinned him down.

He more the did his job.

 

[spat]

That’s not what that decision says even though everyone says so. It’s also not a SCOTUS case...

I realize it doesn't absolve you of responsibilities due to state law or department policy, but my understanding was that between that ruling and qualified immunity that you guys basically can't be successfully sued for failing to protect anyone.

If you have any counter examples I would be very interested in hearing about them.

 

[Airborneguy]

Any one individual. All that ruling really says is that the police can fail at their jobs, because failure is a real possibility in our line of work.

It’s touted as, “cops can choose to do nothing,” when that cannot be further from the truth. You example is good enough, just it thoroughly.

 

[Truebeliever]

I thought the SCOTUS ruled a while ago that even on duty LEOs don't have to do anything ?

Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia

That case goes to specific duty to protect a specific person as opposed to general enforcement.

Did you read the actual facts of the case?

The police did respond and left when the caller didn’t answer the door or call out to them. It basically is not providing a “strict liability “ standard but reasonable response and it’s to the public at large. Again, read the fact patttern.

The a strict liability might apply because the cop took a job of basically being a security guard. But his actions were more than reasonable.

 

[ProgSpear]

That’s not what that decision says even though everyone says so. It’s also not a SCOTUS case...

Gonzalez v. Castle Rock was a SCOTUS case.
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia

 

[Marine Cpl]

I just don't understand. If you are a cop on duty you can't run away from your job because it gets dangerous. If you are a soldier on duty and get ambushed, you can't run away until the numbers are on your side. It should make no difference if you work security. You are paid to do a job. Do it or don't take the job.

 

[ECU Pirates]

Did they ever say if any killed were due to friendly fire? There were hundreds of shots quickly.

 

[Truebeliever]

Gonzalez v. Castle Rock was a SCOTUS case.
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia

Did you read the fact pattern in that case as well. She wanted the police to stop what ever else they were doing or not doing to go look for her husband for violating the restraining order. And they did get into a shootout with him when he showed up to the police station after killing his kids. They did take enforcement action when the person was in front of them.

And the person sued claiming their “property rights “ were violated by the police.


If the police had the person in front of them and refused to arrest them in violation of the law, it might be a different decision under a different area of law.

Again, it’s also a case that is under federal law. Many state law cases are different under the laws of that state.

 

[Truebeliever]

I just don't understand. If you are a cop on duty you can't run away from your job because it gets dangerous. If you are a soldier on duty and get ambushed, you can't run away until the numbers are on your side. It should make no difference if you work security. You are paid to do a job. Do it or don't take the job.

He didn’t run away. He engaged. Running from cover toward the threat without proper backup, notification to what they are facing etc, would be just stupid. The cop did a good job. He maintained , shot it out with the gun, as back up arrived, informed them what they faced and went in with them and shot it out with the gunman some more.

More would have died without him.

And soldiers do retreat and run. And that is often the right call. The US ran from the Japanese in WW2 , the British retreated at Dunkirk to fight another day. It was the right move and we don’t all speak German because of it.

 

[Truebeliever]

Did they ever say if any killed were due to friendly fire? There were hundreds of shots quickly.

So far, the answer was no. Or at least , I didn’t see any after action reports that said they did. None killed from friendly fire. Wounded? I don’t know and in the confusion , I don’t think the hospital did much on that front .