Cookie Thread Act 4: katze thread

8 Likes

yeah that sounds accurate

i told one of the office people
and she was like “yeah ill tell admin lmao”
… yeah that’s it

nothing actually happened, I think

both with the admins and with the guy

Warren v. District of Columbia [1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) is a District of Columbia Court of Appeals case that held that the police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to specific citizens based on the public duty doctrine.

Cops legally don’t have to protect you! Really makes you wonder what we give them billions of dollars for

4 Likes

omg this reminds me of my conversation with atlas about cops

There are a LOT more sketchy laws lmao

Qualified Immunity is one of them

1 Like

what

my god

There are at least 2 SCOTUS cases that affirm this, and more in other federal districts. An elementary school teacher and babysitter are more legally obligated to protect a minor than a cop is. I think they’re even criminally liable if they don’t attempt to intervene when a child (in their care) is in danger unless a court finds it was too dangerous for them to do so.

2 Likes

wtf

i knew the police were useless except as a concept but
cmon
cmon
cmon

They don’t even have to enforce a restraining order : )
(Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales)

1 Like

congress: we created the police to protect the people, probably maybe
police: does not protect the people
supreme court: they don’t have to guys :slightly_smiling_face:

whats the legal rationale there

I hate bursting bubbles here. Yet the cops usually arrive in time to investigate a redrum, not stop one.

i think these two statements have zero correlation

Its to prevent the cops from being sued for some stuff