Conga line

So- firstly, there were two rulings by two judges that contradict in this case. One saying there was no responsibility to protect and one saying there was, at least in this case. To the question- in a nutshell that is what they are saying. In legal terms- police serve the law. They are not under any obligation to protect an individual save for special circumstances- such as a person in police custody. Police are empowered to protect the public directly, but serve an indirect role of protection through enforcement of law. So for instance- if you were being stabbed in front of a police officer- they do not have a legal duty inherent to their post to protect you. They do have a legal compulsion to arrest the person committing the crime, but when they do so after the crime is complete is up to them. In states with a “good Sumerian law,” any person is legally compelled to assist another who is in imminent threat. They are not however required to put themselves into direct harm- so for...

... instance, a person who hears another who fell down a well but doesn’t get help would be a criminal, but if you are trapped in a burning car, calling emergency services is generally sufficient to avoid legal recourse. So even in states where such laws exist- a police officer is not explicitly required to put themselves in danger to help random citizens in need. As for the school- schools have obligations to protect students- but those tend to be along the lines of ensuring only authorized adults are allowed to take children from school grounds, or safeguarding a child’s personal information, or providing what is deemed adequate and to code safety equipment and features for buildings and school grounds. There is not a standing law which requires school or faculty to protect children from... Out of control construction equipment, a plane landing on the school, lightening strikes, nuclear war, terrorists, armed criminals, etc. it falls outside their scope of liability. To place it...

... within the liability of a school tomprotect children from gunmen- schools would have to be empowered with the legal rights required to ensure absolute protection or face liability. Prisons aren’t built and ran the way they are just to keep people in- as said earlier- convicts are in the protection of the law and so prisons are also ran as they are to help ensure prisoner safety. So in essence- requiring a school to protect children from armed assault would require schools be fortified and ran like prisons to maintain maximum control and safety. Likewise- to force police to act as body guards as well as keepers of law is not tenable. It deprives a person a basic choice as it pertains to their own survival. There’s a reason police sacrificing themselves for others is heroic- they aren’t required to. When they do it shows their character. So it’s imperect but there is no perfect solution.