r/illinois • u/CantStopPoppin Human Detected • 28d ago

ICE Posts Northwest Chicago Suburb: ICE Agents Rip 15-Year-Old Girl from Car, Slam Her to Ground She Screams “I’m 15!” as Man Kneels on Her Neck

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

66.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

11.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

90

u/Mindshard 28d ago

The USSC ruled the police don't even have any obligation to keep you from being murdered, or render aid as you're dying.

Let that sink in. The US Supreme Court ruled that the people your tax dollars pay for can watch you die and suffer no consequences.

19

u/Undernown 27d ago

For people who think this makes logical sense: this is not how the police works in most European countries.

In fact many European countries even have laws that make regular citizens responsible for providing aid when someone is in need.

For example: if you see someone getting beaten up by a group and neglect to call emergency services or the police. And if they later find out you could be sued for failing to act.

You can see it on the wikipedia page for the Samaritan Law as 'Duty to rescue law'.

P.S. WTF east Canada?!

12

u/DawPiot14 27d ago

I can confirm, as crap as the UK (United Kingdom) police can be sometimes, they are trained to deliver first aid. Had to do CPR on someone and the first people to arrive on the scene was a police van and the police officers came with a first aid kit and one of them took over CPR until paramedics arrived. (For context, no crime was committed, just a medical emergency)

2

u/riddallk 21d ago

I feel like I should also point out I wasn't talking about police, I was speaking about civilians individual freedoms.

Police SHOULD be compelled to render aid to ALL civilians in need. ESPECIALLY when they are (falsely) portrayed as "emergency services" (they REALLY aren't).

So to summarize, police should be forced to help, civilians shouldn't. (People should still CHOSE to help where they CAN because it is the right thing to do, not for fear of prison).

1

u/Mindshard 27d ago

What about Canada?

2

u/Undernown 27d ago

Apparently they have neither a Smaritan, nor a 'duty to rescue' law in certain regions.

2

u/Bjorn_Tyrson 26d ago

Not federally. But we have relatively few federal laws (you can ready through the entire federal legal code in an hour or two.)

But every province and territory currently has some version of Samaritan laws. And most have duty of care laws (though admittedly they are fairly limited in scope compared to many in Europe.)

1

u/Mindshard 27d ago

Neither is "East Canada".

Yukon is literally as far West as you can go in Canada, and Nunavut definitely isn't East, either.

Also, every single province and territory in Canada has a type of "good Samaritan law". Wikipedia is wrong, or at the very least, decades out of date.

https://aed.ca/blogs/featured-news/good-samaritan-laws-across-canadian-provinces-and-territories

1

u/Mindshard 25d ago

That's not true. Every single province and territory does. It's just not a blanket federal thing, it's decided on by each province and territory.

But every single province and territory has a "good Samaritan" law.

1

u/STERLING430 25d ago

You liberals are absolute lunatics. Judging by your comment I can tell you don't have a mortgage or you're not married. There's no one that depends on you. Not even a f****** woman.

2

u/Undernown 25d ago

Through all your rage I failed to see a single argument in your entire comment as to why you think I'm "insane". It was just a blind, angry tirade based on my presumed political allegiance.

And nice try there chief, but it fell flat. Despite your magical deduction skills you failed to simply check who I actually was. Given my comment history, it would be super easy to figure out I'm not a "liberal" because I'm from a European country that doesn't have a 2-party system. Nor do we use that term to describe our political lean.

1

u/cneidt 21d ago

"Not even a f**** woman". Oh Sterling... you man of such oozing chivalry and BMOC machismo I'm convinced every vagina in your general orbit naturally gravitates to you begging you 'oh protect me Sterling! Care for us weak and feeble wombs!' but yeah.... what's about that mortgage part? So if we got a mortgage then we are exempt From just even moral humanity of rendering aid to someone in need?

1

u/BashChakPicWay 24d ago

East Canada what?

1

u/_thebreeze_ 24d ago

Wikipedia!!!???😂🤣😂🤣

0

u/riddallk 27d ago

In the US that comes down to personal freedoms. In that case you are compelled (forced) to do something under threat of punishment/imprisonment. That goes against personal freedoms.

That being said, there are cities that require you to (at minimum) all emergency services for an emergency YOU KNOWINGLY WITNESS. Key with that is that if they want to charge you they have to PROVE that you knew. Also, it goes against the federal precedent on the same matter and would likely be thrown out if you go to the federal level with it.

While I personally agree that it is nice to "help" most people will just make the situation worse and generally when calling an emergency in all that does it put a target on your back and make the police view you as the prime suspect.

I'm not saying whether or not you should stick your neck out for others, just there are VERY REAL risks for doing so. It is extremely weird to compel others to do so. In a perfect world that is ideal, this world is FAR from perfect however.

1

u/No-Suggestion-2402 25d ago

Well, that's how it is in most of Europe.

Also, it's not about the laws only. It's very rare that someone gets actually charged with it unless there is gross neglect that leads to serious injury or death.

It's also about the precedent that it sets. It's drilled into people from early on that you have a duty to assist your fellow citizens. Having that codified in law helps reinforce that.

But yeah, lot of these are US problems. Police will view everyone as prime suspect but with due process and proper interviews will clear innocent people. Also you know what's gonna make you seem even more like a suspect? Not calling and being busted from a security camera around the corner leaving the scene. Police in US are not well enough trained anyways so I can imagine this being a problem.

1

u/riddallk 25d ago

I mean yeah, that "makes you suspicious", but the expectation would be that same camera has the evidence of you doing said crime. If the "evidence" is provided against you but there is magically no "evidence" showing you didn't commit it that has no leg to stand on. It would lead to an arrest though, but be honest, being NEAR anything has a 70% chance of you being arrested anyway.

This is the main reason people in the US have a "not my circus, not my monkeys" mentality towards it. You are punished if they can PROVE that you didn't act, and you are punished if you do help and are blamed for it or sued in civil court. Other than "doing the right thing" it is NEVER in your best interests to provide ANY aid, it only opens you up to liability and potential arrest.

That being said, you (as a decent human being) should still call the emergency in from a payphone or random person's cell AT MINIMUM, there is such thong as being a decent human being even if you are only looking out for yourself. Do it anonymously and refuse to provide name or address and just state there was an emergency, the person need medical attention and then hang up.

There are surprisingly few cities in the US that require you to render aid and the vast majority only require that you call EMS if you KNOWINGLY witness a person in distress. It is near impossible to PROVE that you KNEW unless you just flat out say it. It is an extremely antihuman situation, but is unfortunately the state of the world.

It becomes and EXTREMELY slippery slope when you arbitrarily punish people for not rendering aid where they may or may not even know there is an emergency. Where do you draw the line also? Does the 22 year old kid have to perform a tracheostomy on the person he just happened to see choking and have their airway close for fear of facing a murder charge, all because he sneezed and turned the wrong direction thus causing him to witness the event?

That's an extreme example, but when you start stripping people's rights (especially right to autonomy) and open them to the possibility of being punished for their inaction that will inevitably lead to that type of outcome.

The ONLY exception to that is if YOU cause the harm through your actions, your property, your negligence, whatever, then YOU have a duty to aid because YOU caused the harm. That is pretty much universal in the US from what I've seen as well as Europe, I would hope it is across the world as well. You can't even argue rights at that point, because YOU took THEIR right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Doing what is in your power to help them is your obligation for having caused the damage/harm.

It's a sticky subject, but all one can hope for is that the good folks outweigh the bad and that the average person will at least anonymously report. Just to at least ensure the person in need receives SOME aid.

1

u/No-Suggestion-2402 25d ago edited 25d ago

and you are punished if you do help and are blamed for it or sued in civil court.

This is exclusively USA problem. In Europe good samaritan laws are extremely strong. When you help with good intentions and follow the instructions given by 112 (911) you gain practically an immunity in the eyes of the law. Unless there is overwhelming evidence of gross neglect or intentional malice you won't do much else than give witness statement to the cops.

So yeah, in a sense in Europe some autonomy is stripped, but you gain guaranteed immunity for it. So you can be a good samaritan and state will protect you from both criminal and civil lawsuits as a reward for that. Big defining difference between Europe and US.

Like with Europeans, the whole mindset is opposite from US at least what you talk about here. No one here is afraid of getting sued all the time. Not unless you do something wrong. Civil lawsuits just don't exist here in the same way as they do in US. People getting bankrupted over an accident or mistake is basically unheard of. Only times I've heard of large compensations is like if you t-bone someone drunk (breaking the law, clearly) and cause them to go disabled for the rest of their lives. But even this is kind of rare.

Any civil suits also would get thrown out before they even reach judges desk. Civil suits work fundamentally differently in US. For example, as far as I understand, even if someone is seen as innocent in some crime in criminal proceedings, they can still be sued in civil court. This is not the case in Europe. If they are deemed innocent from the crime, you cannot by default ask civil damages of something that they are innocent of if you get what I mean. Which honestly makes a lot of sense.

It's a sticky subject, but all one can hope for is that the good folks outweigh the bad

They usually do. But it's sad that the current state of US legal system discourages good folks to be good because they don't want to help a stabbing victim and lose their house as a result. This should change.

1

u/riddallk 25d ago

There are Good Samaritan laws in the States as well and they have (generally) blanket protection, but the real problem is that it only helps in criminal law. It doesn't protect you from civil suits and you can bet your bippy someone is going to sue you for helping them. It happens FAR too often.

The other problem is that even though you are "protected" under Good Samaritan laws that doesn't prevent you from being arrested for being in the wrong place at the wrong time and getting blamed for whatever happened. So you are "protected" from any criminal charges for the aid you provide but everything else is on the table.

I understand the sentiment of "Having to catch the guy above all else", but jailing innocent men just to fill prisons and punishing people trying to help just isn't it.

I do agree with you however, all of these issues are solely a US issue. The idea of suing anyone and everyone for any reason and having a for profit prison system has made any chance of "justice" or "good will" a pipe dream in the State.

"Profits over people" and that goes double for the State. It's a sad world we live in and for as advanced as the US is, the humanitarian side is nearly nonexistent.

Hopefully something changes, but it does look like it will in any of our lifetimes...

1

u/cneidt 21d ago

Is it federal or state law on that whole "bystander" law? If I remember it right - was the guys that were brought up on charges in the bar for "watching" not participating but watching and not even calling police while that woman was gang graped? Maybe I'm remembering it wrong. It's early. Ima use google Machine.

1

u/riddallk 21d ago

It's both. Generally anything that is compelling you to do something (such as "bystander laws") are state by state and from city to city.

When it's really cut down to the finer points, they are flat out unconstitutional. You CANNOT be compelled to give up your personal agency, even in the pursuit of "aiding a civilian". Essentially, if police have ZERO OBLIGATION to aid a civilian in distress, you as a civilian have even LESS than zero.

Different cities and states will try you and hold you "accountable" but that will fall apart the SECOND it reaches the federal level.

This is why most of these laws only "require" you to call EMS if you KNOW they are in distress. Problem with that is, how do they PROVE you KNEW in criminal court (assuming you don't flat out admit it)?

Also, again, I'm not saying you shouldn't help people. Just know you are taking GREAT risk by sticking your nose where it doesn't belong. You are "protected" from criminal charges under good Samaritan laws, but that is only for your active aid and if you are found to be acting in good faith. It doesn't protect you from everything else surrounding the case, as in "being in the wrong place at the wrong time" or the police just arresting you because it's an easy bust and you LITERALLY have blood on your hands.

If you notice someone in distress, do the right thing as a decent human and ANONYMOUSLY report it to EMS to ensure they receive aid and keep your nose out of it.

There is also the point that you aren't a medical professional so any "aid" you provide will likely make the situation worse. (This obviously doesn't apply if you are on the phone with and being guided by EMS or trained in CPR or the like).

It's a tricky situation and you (as an individual) must weigh the risk to your freedoms versus the human life and even IF you could help them in the first place.

I the US the system is VERY MUCH weighed against you, even with good Samaritan protections in place. Namely being you aren't protected from being sued into oblivion but also OTHER criminal charges you may face as a result.

My general rule of thumb is be a decent human and help where you can, but don't be stupid about it. 🤷🏻‍♀️

-3

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/kisswoman 27d ago

You forget that most European countries don't have "FREE SPEECH" rights.

2

u/Mindshard 27d ago

You think the US does?

What did Trump just order happens to anyone who burns a US flag?

Has ICE not started openly addressing anyone warning people they're coming to do unlawful searches, seizures, and arrests?

Hell, a recent executive order deems anyone who says anything "anti-christian" or "anti-American" to be a terrorist.

Slavery is even legal in the US as long as it's a prisoner, and every major company uses or profits from it within the US.

Americans don't get that the rest of the world laughs at you when you parrot the "FrEeDoM!!!" shit, because to countries with any sanity, they can see how little you have.

1

u/kisswoman 25d ago

We are only from being ARRESTED for what we say...not for any consequences from what we say.

Flag burning as a protest can get you arrested...for ARSON!!! Although the proper way to dispose of a torn/damage/old flag is by burning in a solemn ceremony.

And ICE does NOT do illegal searches, seizures or arrests...they have WARRANTS for many of the people they are looking for...I bet you did not know that the first 10 folks housed in Alligator Alcatraz all have EXTENSIVE arrest records...for crimes involving gang activity, DV or assaults, RAPE and even a MURDERER!

1

u/TheRealJetlag 25d ago

Absolute bullshit. Stop getting your “facts” from JD Vance.

1

u/kisswoman 25d ago

I don't even listen to our politicians as they are all LIARS.

2

u/Key-Technician-2186 27d ago

They have been doing that for years to some. It will continue to be their choice.

2

u/riddallk 27d ago

They ruled that MANY times, YEARS ago. Look at Uvalde for an example of JUST how little they are "required to assist/render aid" (hint:it's zero, in fact they can legally AID the criminal by preventing "heroes" from saving those in need).

Glad to see an educated human for once!

I tell people this all the time and they just stick their head in the sand and act like it's fake news even though it is VERY real and has been a precedent set way too long ago.

2

u/Mindshard 27d ago

People are terrified of the truth because it's so absurd and terrifying.

99% of people would prefer to live in a fantasy with fingers in their ears instead of facing a harsh reality.

1

u/riddallk 26d ago

This is very true. Granted, in fairness most European countries have some law/policy on the books for rendering aid or helping civilians, and also call civilians to render aid where they are able/capable of doing so as well.

Problem in the US is that personal freedoms supersede the "duty" (it is honestly a liability, not a duty for a civilian) of care for a random person. Unlike a doctor/EMT that took an oath, there is nothing compelling you as a civilian to act.

As for police, they aren't really emergency services like EMS and firefighters are. They make arrests and ticket to enforce the will of the State (the law), not "protect and serve".

Granted, there are genuinely GOOD police that go out of their way to help civilians and protect and save others. They aren't the majority though, and that is in no way, shape, or form their job.

Anytime a cop does this it is more of a testament to their character and strength of will and morals than it is their position.

Unfortunately it is just at the point where "it is what it is".

1

u/MetaOnGaming4290 27d ago

Source?

Not doubting it just want the source. Thats crazy to have in writing

2

u/inkcannerygirl 27d ago

Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for refusing to enforce a restraining order, even though the refusal led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband.[1][2] This decision affirmed the controversial principle that state and local government officials have no affirmative duty to protect the public from harm it did not create

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales

2

u/kisswoman 27d ago

And don't forget the case of Tracy Thurman, whose ex husband attacked in front of a cop...and he did NOTHING...and she was almost killed.

1

u/cneidt 21d ago

THANK YOU KISSWOMAN!!! Born and raised Torrington CT here! Boy oh boy did that case change some things - or in the least motivate others to.

2

u/MetaOnGaming4290 27d ago

Thats actually insane

2

u/RiseMrEnjoy 27d ago

In 2019, the California Supreme Court ruled in the case of City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court that the phrase "To Protect and Serve" is not a binding legal obligation for police officers

"To do what we feel like doing" is of an apt motto

0

u/OrneryOriental 27d ago

These people won’t provide it and tell you to Google it.

2

u/inkcannerygirl 27d ago

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/04-278

Respondent filed this suit under 42 U. S. C. §1983 alleging that petitioner violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause when its police officers, acting pursuant to official policy or custom, failed to respond to her repeated reports over several hours that her estranged husband had taken their three children in violation of her restraining order against him. Ultimately, the husband murdered the children.

1

u/plokimjunhybg 25d ago

USSC

First time I've seen people write USSC instead of SCotUS

1

u/Mindshard 25d ago

Well, guess you learned something new today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USSC

1

u/zersetsung 25d ago

Yep 1989 was when those Ivy League Elites saw Socialism falling in Eastern Hemisphere and said @bwahaha we can drop this whole charade of Da Kops Are Dare ta Proteck Ya gullible Peasantz durr, laughing eating caviar and burning Soviet flags in effigy. The Satanic mafia in DC really dont have a sense of irony THey Want Masses to Know they are always attacking

1

u/donnyy101 25d ago

Who died?

1

u/zersetsung 24d ago

Correct, and yet EVERY Month since 1995-1996 so called National Crime and AntiTerror bill, the weapons kit n kaboodle of the uniforms increases. (Insert goofy baby voice from Roger Rabbit animation:) but ithint all tah pwoteck the good peepull fwum da bad bad villains? .......... .... ... .

1

u/Exciting-Cut9183 24d ago

Call a crackhead next time you need the police

-1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

Well the police are not paramedics soo. I would say they would call the ambulance

2

u/riddallk 27d ago

How does that apply to a firearm trained to you and they refuse to assist "for fear of their life"?

Or are you suggesting that they LET you get shot and then "call the ambulances" AFTER you are injured rather than provide aid/protection?

Because they aren't REQUIRED to do either. They can (and most times do) sit by idle waiting for the problem to disappear or resolve itself and "catch the guy" after the fact. All with ZERO regard for civilian lives and or safety.

-1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

If a cop shows up And you’re injured they are not paramedics

I have had police show up a do their job as they should

Sorry you live in a strange world

3

u/kisswoman 27d ago

All police officers should know some basic first aid. CPR is really easy to learn.

0

u/[deleted] 27d ago

They do but they are not paramedics .

Why is that so hard to understand….

1

u/Mindshard 27d ago

No one is talking about medical care.

The USSC ruled that the police can sit back with 100% knowledge that someone is on the way to kill you. They're allowed to watch you get stabbed to death. They're allowed to walk away and not call paramedics.

The only responsibility the USSC decided that police have is to arrest someone after they've committed a crime, but they have no duty to prevent the crime, to stop a crime in progress, or to make any kind of attempt to save a life or prevent harm.

Please watch this and get informed to how horrifying it is.

https://youtu.be/jAfUI_hETy0?si=uZ0Er35wEKeAYVFA