[s1artibartfast]

Cops have no legal obligation in the US to protect people from crime. They can watch you be mugged without lifting a finger. They might be fired, but the victim isn't entitled to protection.

It basically comes down to positive and negative rights. Someone is at fault if they harm you, but nobody is required to help you, even the government.

[ClumsyPilot]

> nobody is required to help you, even the government

Seems very convenient, what am I paying taxes for then?

[krapp]

You're paying taxes because your government forces you to under threat of violence.

[ecb_penguin]

If police had a legal obligation to protect people from crime, everyone would have recourse if the police failed to protect them. Bar fight? Sue the police. Domestic violence? Sue the police.

It would literally lead to the collapse of the justice system.

[betenoire]

Really? You don't think there is a middle ground? Are the cops watching this fight or hearing about or later?

[alienthrowaway]

>[...] but the victim isn't entitled to protection.

Which is the my point. If cops don't have an obligation to save anyone from a fire, then why would random Joe get into trouble for similar inaction. GP was mistaken about the laws in America.

[s1artibartfast]

Indeed, we are in agreement. they were in disbelief responding to my parent post.