Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
Sine when do you consider police moral after some of the crap you have called them?“Supposed to” is a moral opinion, not a legal claim.
Police are not legally obligated to protect anyone.
Sine when do you consider police moral after some of the crap you have called them?“Supposed to” is a moral opinion, not a legal claim.
No, I am saying that we, their employers, can try to hold them to our moral standard.Sine when do you consider police moral after some of the crap you have called them?
Police are not legally obligated to protect anyone.
The supreme Court ruliThe Supreme court ruling shot your point down years ago.
it ruled that the police are not legally obligated to protect anyone.
Oops.The Supreme court ruling shot your point down years ago.
it ruled that the police are not legally obligated to protect anyone.
Frist you must follow my moralsNo, I am saying that we, their employers, can try to hold them to our moral standard.
The supreme court overrules your pointOops.
Dude you are continuing to miss the point.
My point was that he was fired because he could no longer be trusted to do his job equally.
Your supreme Court ruling is irrelevant to that point.
I used the Phrase "to protect and serve," because it is painted on the doors but it is tangential to my point.
My point was trust.
Your supreme Court ruling is irrelevant to that.
Now do you understand?
So when the cops can't protect you they can't be suedThe supreme Court ruli
Your point was quite clearNo, I am saying that we, their employers, can try to hold them to our moral standard.
No, you just don't understand my point.The supreme court overrules your point
If you have issues take it up with them. and stop whining
Your point is irrelevant we are a nation of laws a REPUBLICNo, you just don't understand my point.
That much 8s perfectly clear.
No.Your point was quite clear
You thought the police were obligated to protect you
The Supreme court ruled otherwise.
Your point is irrelevant we are a nation of laws a REPUBLIC
The Supreme Court Ruled the police are not obligated to protect anyone.
Here was your pointNo.
That was clearly not my point.
Sheesh!
Try to understand it.
I was quite clear and have explained it to you several times since.
The U.S. Supreme Court over ruled your point and made it irrelevantCops are supposed to protect and serve all people.
If they have an animosity to a particular group of people then they cannot be trusted to protect and serve equally, in other words they cannot be trusted to do the job we are paying them for.
This they MUST be fired.
You have for the past two days defended your failed point thatYou have spent the last two days attempting and failing to address my point.
Therefore they can terrorize anyone they want with no recourse?Your point is irrelevant we are a nation of laws a REPUBLIC
The Supreme Court Ruled the police are not obligated to protect anyone.
I suggest that you arm yourself with the best weapon you can handleTherefore they can terrorize anyone they want with no recourse?