>> > Wrong, police are here to serve and protect. They protect by enforcing >> > laws. They serve by following the tenets of a democratic government as >> > outlined in our Constitution. >> No lesser than the Supreme Court says you are wrong. I don't have the >> decision details on me, but the Supreme decided (about 5 or so years ago) >> that police were not required by law to provide individual protection. >> >> Thus the need for custom individual protection. ;-) > >Then, that begs the question of "why do we have police?" The police aren't here to create disorder, they're here to preserve disorder.
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Tim May
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... phelix
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Choate
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Burnes
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Choate
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict... Jim Burnes
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected... Jim Choate
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Bill Stewart
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... lcs Mixmaster Remailer
- Re: Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Sunder
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jim Choate
- RE: Not an unexpected verdict ... Peter Capelli
- RE: Not an unexpected verdict ... Peter Capelli
- RE: Not an unexpected verdict ... Jay Holovacs
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Petro
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Petro
- Re: Not an unexpected verdict ... Tim May
