Police Duty to Rescue

Oct 2013
12,948
Europix
#41
Neither you, nor anyone else gets to decide that Americans are wrong. Frankly, as a European, and what your countries had previously done and the mess you put yourselves in now, where " doesn't remotely do it justice,

If you think something from my lands is absurd because of your own bias then yes, that's chauvinistic, as you believe your culture is superior to mine.

First, its rude. Second, its laughable that you'd even try to make that argument, as decaying once-great powers that now serve as invasion-bait welfare states, who essentially ruined the world in the 19th-20th century, don't get to lecture anybody else about the absurdity of their laws, designed to protect the civil rights and liberty of its citizens against the very excesses that European govts were renowned for.
Let me try again:

It hasn't anything to do with welfare states, former rusted glories or anything else.

It hasn't anything to do with the land of the free being absurd either.

It has to do with something I find absurd, and I did explained You why.

As an aside, You might try to read what I mean (eventually ask, if my English is unintelligible): I said Your reasonement is wrong, not USA.

Now, if You prefer to take me disagreeing with You as me attacking US, allow me to disagree: You are a part of US, but You aren't THE US.

You could also demonstrate why I am absurd in finding something absurd.

Or You can choose to not argument anything and simply puting me in the "chauvinistic no good European" box: problem solved.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2016
7,751
USA
#42
Let me try again:

It hasn't anything to do with welfare states, former rusted glories or anything else.

It hasn't anything to do with the land of the free being absurd either.

It has to do with something I find absurd, and I did explained You why.

As an aside, You might try to read what I mean (eventually ask, if my English is unintelligible): I said Your reasonement is wrong, not USA.

Now, if You prefer to take me disagreeing with You as me attacking US, allow me to disagree: You are a part of US, but You aren't the US.

You could also demonstrate why I am absurd in finding something absurd.

Or You can choose to not argument anything and simply puting me in the "chauvinistic no good European" box: problem solved.
I don't care if you find it absurd, its immaterial. Its not for you to even put your reasoning for finding it absurd into words, it serves no purpose. You think I'm ever going to value your opinion as much as I value the ideology of my own nation, which is thankfully, not like your own (in my opinion)? Who are you trying to convince, besides yourself that your culture is superior? I don't care about that.

What I care about is the CONSTANT ignorant and opinionated rants, almost entirely by Euros with superiority complexes, who think the US barbaric without having the first clue as to why we do the things we do, and believe the things we do. And you obviously missed that part. You're arguing as if you think the law is wrong. Its not for you to decide. Its just important for you to understand that its different, which causes the other stuff to happen.

I'm trying to teach you basic arithmetic so you understand why 2+2=4. You're trying to tell me you think it equals 5. You're missing the point.
 
Oct 2013
12,948
Europix
#43
You're opinion doesn't matter. You're not required to understand this in the least, you're an outsider. Those that matter are those of the Founding Fathers who created this country and provided the doctrine around which it exists. The crafters of additional Constitutional Amendments over the centuries. The scores of renowned Constitutional scholars who have contributed greatly to codifying one of the world's first free society (well before your own country!). The legislative bodies making the laws who need to know this stuff. Of course the judges themselves, especially of the US Supreme Court. And most importantly, the American citizens they all answer to, who are sovereign. ...
I'm sorry, but I have the impression You missed that we're discussing (well, sort of) on "Historum", and not in US.

So, until further notice, we both have the same liberties and duties, and they're regulated by "Historum's" rules, not by US Constitution, US laws, American mentality, aso.

As for how valuable is my or Your opinion, that isn't related to having the US citizenship but to what others think about our opinions.

...


This thread wasn't made by me so you or anyone else can find fault with the way someone else lives. It wasn't designed to get you to be convinced of accepting American values and culture, that's a task I don't want, which you'd almost certainly rebel against anyway. Its to demonstrate in one simple example, police not needing to help you in the US, as to why Americans aren't like you. ...
Maybe if You would be less sensitive, especially when it isn't the case?

I and others explained why we aren't like others, the different approach, the different understanding of the matter.

Why me explaining it is euro-chauvinistic while You explaining it should cause me a revelation ?!?

...


You were supposed to go, "Oh, wow. I didn't know that!" (which I know you didn't), and then proceed to have a rhetorical revelation of the sort like, "Wow, gee wiz, now I think I better understand some of the complex issues Americans face and why I don't understand them!" I wanted members outside the US to post about their own nation's policies not in a ridiculous attempt to sound more civilized than the barbaric Americans (more Euro chauvanism), but simply to show how different they are from everyone else, to explain why when they comment about things they don't understand, they're probably going to not come to the best conclusions.
Exactly what I did: I explained You why I see things how I see. Isn't that the best way "to show how different they are from everyone else"?


You know what's the worst thing?

That my post You are responding to isn't about US in particular. It's about fundamental rights and liberty all over the world. It's about principles.

I'm trying to teach you basic arithmetic so you understand why 2+2=4. You're trying to tell me you think it equals 5. You're missing the point.
It isn't basic arithmetics, Aggie.

But ok ....
 
Last edited:
May 2011
13,639
Navan, Ireland
#45
................................

What I care about is the CONSTANT ignorant and opinionated rants, almost entirely by Euros with superiority complexes, who think the US barbaric without having the first clue as to why we do the things we do, and believe the things we do. .......................
Well for a start I think you are hardly a poster to complain about 'ignorant and opinionated rants' since that seems your stock and trade and sorry the only person here who rants and would have a superiority complex may well be yourself.

I'm trying to teach you basic arithmetic so you understand why 2+2=4. You're trying to tell me you think it equals 5. You're missing the point .
No you are not your stating your opinion and how you view yourself and America to be superior and getting frustrating when you don't get sycophantic replies agreeing with you.

Its a discussion site-- your supposed to come here if you want to discuss, if you want to express your opinions stick to the Blogs.
 
Jun 2016
1,615
England, 200 yards from Wales
#47
Forcing an American to do something they don't want to do is to deny them liberty. That's the base of the Supreme Court ruling. The individual is still constrained by department regulation and policy, but they do not have to stop a crime in progress. They just have to attempt to catch the person thought to be responsible, arrest them, provide evidence that helps put them away following a trial.
OK, without suggesting that one system is right and another wrong or any of that stuff, but just, from interest, trying to understand an attitude that seems alien and strange.
(Incidentally does the 'duty to rescue' necessarily imply something legally enforceable, or just a recognised duty of that job?)

If they have to attempt to catch the culprit why is that any less a denial of liberty by forcing them to do something than if they had a duty to try to prevent the crime? They still are 'forced' to do it. (If not by law, by it being part of the job).

Does this apply to other services - is a firefighter duty-bound to rescue people from a burning building and try to extinguish the fire, or can they just let it burn and analyse how it happened afterwards? If they are supposed to rescue, why is their liberty different?

I can understand the police situation may be different in the question of liability, the risk of starting a gun-fight that may involve the innocent, but I don't really see why there is a principle of 'liberty' involved, any more than anyone else who has to do something because that is their job, even if it may involve risk (like the fire-fighter).
 

Tulun

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
3,637
Western Eurasia
#48
If you call 112 in Denmark, those who sit on the front line must make an assessment as to whether or what help should be sent, and if they show carelessness or incompetence, it happened they have been fired and punished with heavy fines.

Unless you expose yourself to mortal danger, in Denmark you can be punished with up to two years' imprisonment if you fail to help a distressed person.

As a minimum, you must prevent the accident from developing, then you should call for an ambulance or if someone is doing something criminal after the police.

This applies to all citizens in Denmark also the police whether they are at work or not.

By the way, I can't see that it should have anything to do with a nanny state, that people have both a moral and a statutory obligation to help their fellow human beings.
As i checked in my country the average citizen only has to offer aid or assistance "as it may be expected of him", that is a subjective category. I.e. if i see a random bleeding man or people fighting on the street, and i don't have any skills, like giving first aid etc. it may be enough if i just call 112. For medical personel, doctors, police etc of course that expectation is higher, and they belong to the "othewise obligated" category.
http://thb.kormany.hu/download/a/46/11000/Btk_EN.pdf

(section 166)

(1) Any person who fails to offer aid or assistance as it may be expected of him to an injured person, or to a person whose life or bodily integrity is in imminent danger, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not exceeding two years. (2) The penalty shall be imprisonment not exceeding three years for a felony, if the injured person dies, and his life could have been saved by aid. (3) The penalty for felony shall be imprisonment not exceeding three years in the case of Subsection (1), or between one to five years in the case of Subsection (2), if the emergency situation is brought about by the perpetrator, or if he is otherwise obligated to help. (4) The last phrase of Subsection (3) shall not apply against a person who is obligated to help on the basis of traffic regulations.

Moreover as the police here are also subject of military offences, their acts may also constitute other crimes too if they refuse to perform their law enforcement duty (i think depending on what exactly they don't do, the sections about Refusal of Service, Breach of Discipline in the Line of Duty, Evasion from Service Duty in the same law linked above could be also applied...)
 
Jul 2016
7,751
USA
#49
"more Euro chauvanism": a pretty grotesque example of the pot calling the kettle black!
And yet can't be denied. A Euro and I can hold the same level of disdain for one another's culture, doesn't stop the fact that if they werent aware of the legality discussed in this thread previously, and having ever made a comment about the US in relation to this subject, they did so out of ignorance.

Whether they don't agree, doesn't matter, doesn't change anything. Now they're been told, so maybe they're enlightened.

Probably not...
 

Similar History Discussions