New York City is a place where there is a huge police force and many other public security forces. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a man actively and boastfully attempting to expand gun prohibition across the nation, has plenty of protection for himself. The people, however, are not permitted to own firearms. A couple of years ago the multiple killer, “subway stabber” Maksin Gelman went on a killing spree leaving four dead and many more injured. He had, of course, every confidence that he would be striking unarmed victims--a personal subsidy to his lifestyle choice from the New York City government. He would have gone further if he hadn’t targeted Joseph Lozito, a mixed martial arts practitioner. Lozito stopped and pinned Gelman, but only after being severely stabbed. Another “civilian” (the wrong word to use since police are not soldiers), Alfred Douglas, probably saved Lozito’s life by staunching wounds and getting him to calm down before he bled to death.
But Lozito contends that two transit officers did not help until well after the damage was done and he, bleeding from stab wounds, had subdued the killer. According to him, “two transit officers had locked themselves in a motorman's car only a few feet from him at the time of the attack.” The court has overruled Lozito’s negligence lawsuit against the city.
Why? Did the courts find that Lozito’s allegations were false, or at least not proven by the evidence? No, their ruling did not concern any of that. The NYPD did not defend their transit officers by arguing that they risked life and limb as law enforcement agents to rescue people who were under attack. They defended them on other grounds:
“Lozito sued for negligence, but city lawyers say his demand for unspecified money damages should be tossed because the police had no “special duty” to protect him or any individual on the train that day—there's a long-standing legal precedent requiring cops to put the public safety of all ahead of any one individual’s rights.”
The court sided with the cops.
Let me translate this for you: the same cops who will confiscate any gun or knife you might have, who will arrest you for carrying anything that would help you defend yourself, have no obligation to protect you if you are attacked with deadly force by someone else who has a weapon.
This is why gun prohibition isn’t a matter for calm discussion. It is evil sadism. It is a desire to see murder and mayhem unleashed upon a population that has been disarmed by force. Meanwhile the protected ruling class never worries about personal security the way you and I do. Few if any of the TV infotainment spokes-models have to worry about their safety. They can afford security and the police respond quickly to their phone calls.
It is all a win-win for them. First we get disarmed. Then we get victimized from time to time so the police state can pretend that we need them—that we couldn’t take care of ourselves. In the meantime they have no legal obligation to protect any one of us. They get to watch people die and shed a few crocodile tears.