The police have no obligation to save people

[Roxxsmom]

This is related to the recent thread on mass shootings, which include discussion of the police refusal to save the children and teachers who were calling 911 in Uvalde. It's "interesting" enough to warrant its own thread, imo. Courts have found that police have no more legal obligation to intervene to save someone's life than an ordinary citizen.

The article is from a local paper that is paywalled (not sure how many free articles it lets people read these days), so I will quote the relevant information directly.

Police aren’t required to protect you.

When shots ring out in a school, the law doesn’t demand police rush inside and confront the shooter, even if lives could be saved.

There’s an expectation that they will — as the motto “To Protect and to Serve” suggests — and departments train and prepare to do so. But as the courts have found, there is no law to hold officers accountable if they don’t.

The so-called “public duty doctrine” doesn’t apply to mass shootings only, but also a practically innumerable spectrum of possible scenarios, according to experts. The doctrine holds that “an individual has no duty to come to the aid of an individual,” and that principle extends to police officers. They have no more legal responsibility to save someone than an average citizen, in most circumstances.

“What duty do police have to protect individual members of the public? The short answer is not much,” Phillip Lyons, dean of the College of Criminal Justice at Sam Houston State University, told McClatchy News.

“The Supreme Court said that there’s generally no duty that exists to protect individual members of the public,” Lyons said, though there are exceptions, such as when an individual is taken into police custody.

But in the aftermath of the May 24 mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas — where 19 officers waited outside a classroom for 50 minutes with the 18-year-old gunman inside — the ethical duty of police to respond and protect is being debated far and wide.

Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/national/article262044822.html#storylink=cpy

I find it rather shocking that there is no legal requirement at all. I understand that there are always limits to what anyone can reasonably be expected to risk, and that line can be fuzzy. Even firefighters aren't expected to enter burning buildings where they are unlikely to come back out again. I don't think most of us expect a cop to charge a rain of bullets without appropriate protective gear and backup (it's already been noted in the shooting thread that the Uvalde police department was well funded and geared). But it sort of surprises me that there is no legal expectation of them intervening to save lives at all, since they are trained and paid to do so.

 

[SWest]

It's going to be more widely discussed, I think, *why* communities are spending so much money on training and equipment (armored cars with rocket launchers, forex, ffs) if paid peace officers are going to merely become part of the idle crowd of on-lookers.

They'll certainly need to step aside when other bystanders want to render aid.

 

[Brigid Barry]

It's going to be more widely discussed, I think, *why* communities are spending so much money on training and equipment (armored cars with rocket launchers, forex, ffs) if paid peace officers are going to merely become part of the idle crowd of on-lookers.

They'll certainly need to step aside when other bystanders want to render aid.

It's for the war on drugs. If you want to completely lose faith in the system and lose some sleep, check out The New Jim Crow, it talks ALL about the militarization of the police.

 

[Jazz Club]

So honestly, not facetiously, what is the main point of the police? Investigating crimes and taking criminals off the street after the act? I'm not even being sarcastic, I just want to know. I suppose they do step in to prevent plenty of crimes and protect people, but they would argue that they can't be expected to do it if it's just too dangerous.

Although... there was also a story where they didn't help a man who being stabbed in the subway. I would've thought they could manage to help with that since they have guns and all... (quite literally not bringing a gun to a knife fight there)

I always assumed if anyone attacked me in front of some cops, the cops would try to protect me. Their presence is probably a pretty good deterrent to an attacker, though maybe less so the more this 'lack of obligation to protect' is discussed. I also wonder if it's the same in the UK as the US. I googled UK cops' obligation to protect citizens but got little success. Just a lot of stuff about citizens' obligations to help prevent crime

 

[Brigid Barry]

Pseudo rant ahead.

Spoiler

A friend of mine called the police because her boyfriend was abusing her in front of her kids. His name was not on the lease to her apartment, she wanted the police to remove him. They showed up, didn't talk to her. Took him outside, chatted with him, LAUGHING with him, and then they told her that they aren't marriage counselors. The level of cloak and dagger bullshit that had to happen to get her out of the situation was ridiculous and worthy of a Lifetime original movie. The cops did nothing.

A couple of years ago, my ex (who is a whacko and likes his guns and isn't shy about pulling them on people) showed up at my house to come take my daughter, who didn't want to see him. I told him repeatedly to leave and when he didn't I called the Sheriff. They showed up after he'd finally left and the deputy tried to blow me off with "we don't get involved in custody matters." Good thing the reason why I called him was to report that my ex was on my property, terrorizing my family and refusing the leave. Sir, trespassing is a crime, you're law enforcement, do I need to draw a picture.

I think the police are supposed to collect evidence of crimes to provide to the DA for prosecution, not necessarily prevent said crimes.

 

[mccardey]

How much are police paid in America? Or is it a state-thing?

 

[Jazz Club]

Pseudo rant ahead.

Spoiler

A friend of mine called the police because her boyfriend was abusing her in front of her kids. His name was not on the lease to her apartment, she wanted the police to remove him. They showed up, didn't talk to her. Took him outside, chatted with him, LAUGHING with him, and then they told her that they aren't marriage counselors. The level of cloak and dagger bullshit that had to happen to get her out of the situation was ridiculous and worthy of a Lifetime original movie. The cops did nothing.

A couple of years ago, my ex (who is a whacko and likes his guns and isn't shy about pulling them on people) showed up at my house to come take my daughter, who didn't want to see him. I told him repeatedly to leave and when he didn't I called the Sheriff. They showed up after he'd finally left and the deputy tried to blow me off with "we don't get involved in custody matters." Good thing the reason why I called him was to report that my ex was on my property, terrorizing my family and refusing the leave. Sir, trespassing is a crime, you're law enforcement, do I need to draw a picture.

I think the police are supposed to collect evidence of crimes to provide to the DA for prosecution, not necessarily prevent said crimes.

Hmmph custody matters. That wasn't really the issue though was it. They definitely should've been more concerned about your ex, especially with the gun issue. That sounds terrifying. There still seems to be a reluctance to help women and a bro code going on unfortunately.

It's probably the same here. I've never even tried to report anything to cops because I never saw much point. The only interaction I have with cops is when they show up at my house every so often looking for some guy with a similar address. And no matter how many times they're told he's never lived here, they can't seem to update the database

ETA in the interests of fairness I need to add that they're always extremely polite and apologetic when they realise their mistake. People on reddit keep telling me that US cops wouldn't be as good like that (though I'm sure some would).

 

[Brigid Barry]

How much are police paid in America? Or is it a state-thing?

I don't think they're paid super well, but they have other benefits that might make up for it. According to Indeed (job search site) the average salary for police in the US is $54k a year.

 

[SWest]

So honestly, not facetiously, what is the main point of the police? ...

"Policing" communities for escaped slaves and slaves planning armed escapes began in the 1700s.

https://naacp.org/find-resources/history-explained/origins-modern-day-policing

 

[lorna_w]

How much are police paid in America? Or is it a state-thing?

with overtime, often six figures. And they abuse the overtime system all the time. No degree required most jurisdictions.

 

[lorna_w]

A book I read (years back) by Connie Fletcher that interviewed hundreds of police officers had a police officer explain what the job was: "It's protecting rich people from poor people." I was ever so happy that a cop thought that deeply.

I'm not sure if there's any data on if police have any deterrent effect, which would be the only conceivable reason to have them.

Anybody who has been robbed in the US knows that they take a report (so your insurance pays, if you can afford insurance) but if nobody was shot, they do no investigating on property crimes.

You'd have to take two similar cities with similar crime rates, eliminate police in one, and track what happened, I suppose. There's anecdotal evidence that crime is reduced with no police, but I'd prefer a more rigorous study.

I never see one in my relatively rural location (except at the speed traps. They're making money to pay the police. So police can sit at the speed trap. Hey, it's a good system! It works! ... for... something.)

It seems to me that some policing could now be done with tech, like traffic cameras, speed detectors (which citizens have voted out in this state because dammit, they want to be able to speed and obviously they know better than traffic engineers and public health experts!) and cameras. Process the info, send the ticket, all computerized.

If post-crime investigation for violent crime is their main use, why not transfer all that to the DA office?

In other words, I'm pretty convinced by this and police violence that defunding the police and spreading out their current jobs is the way to go. If deterrence is the primary effect, then put the remaing ones all out walking beats, eight hours per day, getting to know people, being able to refer to social workers and psych before the problems escalate.

I had a friend that lost a son two years ago. He'd killed his friend during an argument, and then the police spotted him a day or two later at a gas station in the same town, and a high speed pace ensued. He was shot to death at the end of it. (Yes, she's still devastated and confused and has questions she'll never now hear the answer to.) But I couldn't help think, what if they hadn't chased him at all? He wouldn't have run far. He was a lifelong member of the community. He'd have shot himself or turned himself in, probably within a week. But even if he had moved to another state, people need jobs and there are social security numbers. They'd have found him eventually, and probably within a month even then. So why the chase? Beyond testosterone and watching too much TV on the cops' part and wanting the thrill, is there any real purpose to it if a person isn't dangerous right then? At least no innocent family of six was rammed by an out of control cop car during the chase. Because that happens too.

I was at a party where a guy was raging about the ticket he'd just gotten. A cop came up close behind him, so he slowed down. Kept getting tailgaited. Slowed down more, wondering if he was doing something wrong, or if he should be pulling off the road, or what...? The way you or I or anyone would do. So cop's lights went on, he was pulled over and given a ticket for "driving too slow." lmao. Clever form of entrapment. Not unlike schoolyard bullying traps.

 

[lizmonster]

I was at a party where a guy was raging about the ticket he'd just gotten. A cop came up close behind him, so he slowed down. Kept getting tailgaited. Slowed down more, wondering if he was doing something wrong, or if he should be pulling off the road, or what...? The way you or I or anyone would do. So cop's lights went on, he was pulled over and given a ticket for "driving too slow." lmao. Clever form of entrapment. Not unlike schoolyard bullying traps.

A few decades back, I was working in an office in the suburbs, and we heard a woman from the town had been pulled over by someone masquerading as a cop and raped. The company brought a police officer in to talk to the staff, and to answer questions. My recollection is he repeated a lot of platitudes, but then someone asked what we could do.

Could we ignore the lights? No, of course not.

Could we drive to a police station with the car following, or at least get to a populated, well-lit area? No, we were legally obligated to pull over as soon as we saw the flashing lights.

In other words, absolutely zero solutions were offered beyond "hey it only happened once so chill out."

I've had a few good police interactions. Back when I was living with Some Jackass, I had to report him missing, and a cop came and took my report. He was professional and reassuring, and nice to me when I called a few hours later to report SJ had shown up safe.

I've always wondered how he would have treated me if I hadn't been a white woman in a nice apartment.

 

[Pyrephox]

The myth of the police likely does exert some sort of crime-repressing effect: one of the things that we know about behavior and punishment is that the severity of the punishment doesn't matter in repressing a behavior so much as the perceived likelihood of being caught. The 'average citizen' tends to have an inflated view of the competence and scope of police investigations, so they may be deterred from committing a crime they're casually contemplating.

However, a lot of violent crimes aren't pre-meditated. And the ones that are still aren't thought through all that WELL, for the most part. So I don't know that the existence of the police really deters those at all. And close rates for, say, homicides are only relatively high because most homicides are pretty easy to solve. A lot of what police actually police is very low-hanging fruit: violations of minor laws like speeding, or 'vice' like drugs and prostitution, where they can easily set up traps to catch people in the act (and, in prostitution stings, often exploit the sex workers involved for sex) and so don't have to do much actual investigation.

When I was younger, I had a desire to go into law enforcement. I took a class on criminal justice, and one of our assignments was to go on a ride-along with a cop. He was a nice guy, and one of the most useful things he said to me was: "The thing you gotta understand is that this is a job. You have a small minority of people who join the force because they really believe in 'serving and protecting' and they'll go above and beyond to do what they can to help you. Most people, the majority of people, join because it's a steady gig with decent benefits. They're just trying to get to retirement, and they're probably not going to go out of their way for you, but aren't likely to deliberately make your day worse, either. Think the DMV. And then there are the guys who joined up because they get a badge and gun to wave around, and they've always been bullies and are always going to be bullies. Now, here's the real problem: when a cop shows up on a call, the citizen has absolutely no control over which of those three they get, and no power to do anything about it if they get the worst option."

That was one of my deciding moments about going into a different profession. (Some other things he talked about were also part of it, as well as looking into the reality of police as opposed to the myth.)

 

[Introversion]

In other words, I'm pretty convinced by this and police violence that defunding the police and spreading out their current jobs is the way to go.

Uvalde did more for “defund (aka, revise) the police” than any protest did or could. But I still don’t expect anything to change. No Republican would ever propose changing anything about police other than maybe giving them more military hardware. Any Democrat who proposes any serious changes to police will be labelled “soft on crime”, “America-hating socialist”, etc.

 

[Catriona Grace]

My daughter recently resigned from the police department to stay at home with a new baby. My father, brother, uncle, grandfather, niece, and a couple of cousins were or are LEOs. My son-in-law just applied to the highway patrol. I work for the local sheriff's office victim services sector. I've not heard any of them or anyone I work with say a thing about being in it for the benefits and retirement expectations, which are not always that great, especially when coupled with the job's stress and dangers. The average length of time an officer stays on the job is 34 months. There certainly are those who join up for reasons other than service to the community, but in my experience, your ride along cop was unduly cynical about only a minority of law enforcement officers believing in "serve and protect."

In her first few months as an officer in a large metropolitan area, my daughter attended half a dozen LEO funerals, all people who died in the line of duty. She herself was on a team that repeatedly went into a burning town to convince people to evacuate, then served on search and rescue the next day. And I have had that call from the hospital, and am very, very thankful that both she and her partner survived that night. My county has lost two officers to suicide since December. It's a damned hard, heart-breaking, stress-laden job, but people suit up and go out to do it every day.

I am not looking to engage in debate; I am offering another viewpoint as someone who has spent her life in a law enforcement family.

 

[lizmonster]

It's not the fault of any law enforcement officer or department working hard to do good that the system as structured is fundamentally broken.

But the system as structured is fundamentally broken, and that puts everybody at risk, including LEOs.

 

[BenPanced]

It's not limited to gunfire, either: a cop in Arizona told a drowning man "I'm not jumping in after you." (Having almost drowned twice in my life, I can't even begin to describe the terror that man was going through, especially when he'd been told nobody's rescuing him.)

 

[Brigid Barry]

Without proper training anyone jumping in to save him could have resulted in more fatalities. Lifeguard certification isn't easy. Not that I agree with telling a drowning victim that. What was he supposed to do? Golly, no one is here to save me, guess I'd better stop drowning.

 

[lizmonster]

Without proper training anyone jumping in to save him could have resulted in more fatalities.

So, this is a good point. If this isn't a proper role for the police, we shouldn't have police involved - we should have trained rescuers on call.

"Defund the police" doesn't mean "do nothing." It means redesign.

 

[Introversion]

"Defund the police" doesn't mean "do nothing." It means redesign.

Which is why “defund” is one of the all-time worst, self-owning, bad marketing of a concept in my lifetime.

 

[lizmonster]

Which is why “defund” is one of the all-time worst, self-owning, bad marketing of a concept in my lifetime.

It is. It's accurate, I think, but it's tailor-made to gin up GOP outrage.

 

[Introversion]

It is. It's accurate, I think, but it's tailor-made to gin up GOP outrage.

Proponents spend so much time explaining, “No, see, defund just means…” Dumb, dumb, dumb.

It’s like marketing sushi as, “cold slices of raw dead fish”. Accurate, but offputting. If you have to begin most interactions by explaining what your marketing really means, your marketing has failed.

 

[Diana Hignutt]

Pass

 

[Introversion]

Progressives should frankly take a page from conservatives here. No one paying attention thinks “right to work” laws actually help workers. No one paying attention thinks “pro life” means anything other than anti-abortion.

Seriously, Democrat marketing sucks. Want to make policing work for most people? Call your legislation the “21st century policing act”, or the “modernize our defenders act”.

 

[Jazz Club]

My recollection is he repeated a lot of platitudes, but then someone asked what we could do.

Could we ignore the lights? No, of course not.

Could we drive to a police station with the car following, or at least get to a populated, well-lit area? No, we were legally obligated to pull over as soon as we saw the flashing lights.

Recently in the UK we had a terrible case where a serving Met police officer, Wayne Couzens, falsely arrested a woman, Sarah Everard, for breaking covid lockdown rules, which was never an arrestable offence in the UK anyway. He drove her out into the countryside and raped and murdered her. So now if we have concerns about a lone police officer trying to arrest us we're allowed to ask them to call the station to 'prove' they're not another Wayne Couzens. Yay for us I guess. Although, I can imagine the police getting a bit tired of it if too many people start to invoke this right.