Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: 8 Employees Stabbed at Tenn. Grocery Store

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mebane, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    342

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    766

    Post imported post

    "We commend him," Higgins said. "But we don't encourage people to take that kind of risk. He could have been hurt."
    In my opinion thethe police chief should be fired for making such a statement.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, VA, ,
    Posts
    689

    Post imported post

    We'll someone had to step up to the plate.A BIG +1 for Mr. Cope and his 9mm. While I am not familiar with the area where this occured, it goes to show you that bad things can happen anywhere. It's not limited to "bad" areas.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Mechanicsville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    548

    Post imported post

    44Brent wrote:
    In my opinion thethe police chief should be fired for making such a statement.
    I agree. Instead of encouraging correct behaviour by law abiding citizens, lets tell them it's to dangerous to be a good neighbor, seems to be his message.

    I myself have been on the receiving end of this same hypocritical attitude.

    Cop: How dare you arm yourself to defend your home? Thats what we are for. Someone could get hurt if you continue to do that.

    Me: Then where were you when they smashed in my door?

    Cop: We can't be everywhere at once.

    AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Mansfield, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    Like the LEO said "they can't be everywhere" and that tells me that I am the only one who is going to be there to defend my home and if that is the case I will defend it with extreme prejudice. End of story!!!!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Wasn't there a Supreme Court decision a while back that said the police do NOT have a duty to protect citizens or something to that effect?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Several, actually, to wit:



    Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases of this type. Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."
    The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.'s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [4] There are many similar cases with results to the same effect. [5]
    In the Warren case the injured parties sued the District of Columbia under its own laws for failing to protect them. Most often such cases are brought in state (or, in the case of Warren, D.C.) courts for violation of state statutes, because federal law pertaining to these matters is even more onerous. But when someone does sue under federal law, it is nearly always for violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 (often inaccurately referred to as "the civil rights act"). Section 1983 claims are brought against government officials for allegedly violating the injured parties' federal statutory or Constitutional rights.

    also:

    Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958);

    Keane v. City of Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1968);

    Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1983);

    Calogrides v. City of Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (S.Ct. A;a. 1985);

    Morris v. Musser, 478 A.2d 937 (1984); Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252, 649 P.2d 894 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982);

    Chapman v. City of Philadelphia, 434 A.2d 753 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1981);

    Weutrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super 324, 326, 382 A.2d 929, 930 (1978);

    Sapp v. City of Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla.Ct. of Ap. 1977);

    Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E. 2d 871 (Ind.Ct. of Ap.);

    Silver v. City of Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (S.Ct. Minn. 1969)

    and Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 61 (7th Cir. 1982).

  8. #8
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the list Brother Doc.storm.

    I've been looking for more of these to reference. Always good to have when people say that I'm trying to do the police's job. Many are surprised to learn that there job is not to protect Law abiding citizens but to protect the criminals.



  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    It's all awesome, Possum.



    -Doc

  10. #10
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    Not really to move this to a personal converstation, but..

    What lodge do you belong to? The Masonic symbol just kinda jumped out at me. I'm currently a member in Keningston 198 up in Maryland.

    In Virginia you cannot:
    "Carrying dangerous weapon to place of religious worship while a meeting for religious purposes is being held unless you have "good and sufficient reason."

    I wonder if Masonic Lodge meetings would be considered a place of religious worship?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Randolph Lodge #1268

    No, a Masonic meeting is specifically not a religious meeting. It is, therefore, legal to carry there; however, that is something that you should probably check with your WM about.

    http://www.grandlodgescotland.com/Pr...onicdeaths.htm

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    534

    Post imported post

    A great pleasure to welcome a fellow member of the Craft to the forum, Doc!

    TrueBrit.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Texas, USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Thank you TrueBrit, It's good to be here;m let me extend a large, and warm 'Howdee' to you and Possumboy.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    doc.storm wrote:
    Several, actually, to wit:



    Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases of this type. Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."
    The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.'s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [4] There are many similar cases with results to the same effect. [5]
    In the Warren case the injured parties sued the District of Columbia under its own laws for failing to protect them. Most often such cases are brought in state (or, in the case of Warren, D.C.) courts for violation of state statutes, because federal law pertaining to these matters is even more onerous. But when someone does sue under federal law, it is nearly always for violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 (often inaccurately referred to as "the civil rights act"). Section 1983 claims are brought against government officials for allegedly violating the injured parties' federal statutory or Constitutional rights.

    also:

    Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958);

    Keane v. City of Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1968);

    Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1983);

    Calogrides v. City of Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (S.Ct. A;a. 1985);

    Morris v. Musser, 478 A.2d 937 (1984); Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252, 649 P.2d 894 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982);

    Chapman v. City of Philadelphia, 434 A.2d 753 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1981);

    Weutrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super 324, 326, 382 A.2d 929, 930 (1978);

    Sapp v. City of Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla.Ct. of Ap. 1977);

    Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E. 2d 871 (Ind.Ct. of Ap.);

    Silver v. City of Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (S.Ct. Minn. 1969)

    and Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 61 (7th Cir. 1982).
    You might add Gonzalez v. Castle Rock and Deshaney v. Winnebago County

    ProguninTN

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    doc.storm wrote:
    Several, actually, to wit:



    Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases of this type. Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."
    The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.'s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [4] There are many similar cases with results to the same effect. [5]
    In the Warren case the injured parties sued the District of Columbia under its own laws for failing to protect them. Most often such cases are brought in state (or, in the case of Warren, D.C.) courts for violation of state statutes, because federal law pertaining to these matters is even more onerous. But when someone does sue under federal law, it is nearly always for violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 (often inaccurately referred to as "the civil rights act"). Section 1983 claims are brought against government officials for allegedly violating the injured parties' federal statutory or Constitutional rights.

    also:

    Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, 293 NYS2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958);

    Keane v. City of Chicago, 98 Ill. App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1968);

    Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1983);

    Calogrides v. City of Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (S.Ct. A;a. 1985);

    Morris v. Musser, 478 A.2d 937 (1984); Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252, 649 P.2d 894 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982);

    Chapman v. City of Philadelphia, 434 A.2d 753 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1981);

    Weutrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super 324, 326, 382 A.2d 929, 930 (1978);

    Sapp v. City of Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla.Ct. of Ap. 1977);

    Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E. 2d 871 (Ind.Ct. of Ap.);

    Silver v. City of Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (S.Ct. Minn. 1969)

    and Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 61 (7th Cir. 1982).
    You might add Gonzalez v. Castle Rock and Deshaney v. Winnebago County.

    ProguninTN

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bristol, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    65

    Post imported post

    I was hoping that this incident would spark a discussion here! Fortunately Mr. Cope had time to go to his truck and retrieve his weapon. And thankfully the attacker submitted when he saw the gun. He obviously was not completely insane....

    Does anyone want to start a petition to outlaw kitchen knives in Memphis, in order to make the grocery stores safer?Sorry, I couldn't help it.

    Thank you doc.storm for the references.Realizing that I am the one responsible for the safety of myself and my family was my main motivationto startcarrying. Is there a way to access this type of case information online? Through a state or federal web site, for example? -Opie

  17. #17
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    England just had a "turn in your knife" day. It is illegal to own knifes there. I don't know the full story, but was wondering about kitchen knifes and such.

    The news report I could the end of did mention that axes were on the list of illegal items turned in on that day.

    I'm going to look for a better reference than the ending of a radio program.

  18. #18
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    Thank you for these. I used them in my letter back to Senator John Warner. Not OC related, but 2nd Amendment related.

    He compared his support of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act to another bill. I don't believe the LEOSA is related because:

    Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981), states:fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.

    Which is in the text you provided. To me that spells it out that it is the responibility of the citizen to protect themselves.

    doc.storm wrote:
    Several, actually, to wit:



    Warren v. District of Columbia ...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •