No Immunity?

Anyone else get the feeling that with this CIT training and OEMC getting tossed under the Rahm Bus that we (the CPD) are going to be sent to every single call that comes into 9-1-1 very shortly?

Fire has the option to refuse, but we don't - unless a supervisor steps up and codes the job. That makes this article even more disturbing:

• The Illinois Supreme Court ruled 4-3 to discard a rule that protects fire, police and ambulance services accused of failing to provide a level of response from lawsuits.
  
  Cook County Record reported that justices Thomas Kilbride, Anne Burke, Charles Freeman and Mary Jane Thesis came together to abolish the public duty rule. Chief Justice Rita Garman, Robert Thomas and Lloyd Karmeier joined in a dissent to the majority position.
  
  "We conclude that the underlying purposes of the public duty rule are better served by application of conventional tort principles and the immunity protection afforded by statutes than by a rule that precludes a finding of a duty on the basis of the defendant’s status as a public entity," Kilbride wrote in the lead opinion. "Accordingly, we hereby abolish the public duty rule and its special duty exception. Therefore, in cases where the legislature has not provided immunity for certain governmental activities, traditional tort principles apply."

This appears to be a big deal - based entirely on the "perception" of protection "owed" to individuals by the police and fire services. You know who might have a decent shot at a giant class-action type lawsuit? Low crime areas stripped of police protection who then suffer a rise in crime. Kind of like the stuff the "CrimeInWrigleyville" blog keeps track of.