I think people conflate three different things: local cops, federal agents, and the TV version of “the police” where everyone’s a friendly public servant with infinite patience and a heart of gold.

“Protect and serve” isn’t a universal promise law enforcement makes to you. It’s an LAPD-origin motto that got adopted as a slogan because it sounds comforting on a cruiser door and in a script. Federal officers (DHS, ICE, FBI, etc.) don’t “pledge protect and serve” like they’re your neighborhood guardians. Their binding commitment is the federal oath: support and defend the Constitution and faithfully discharge their duties. That’s not marketing, that’s the actual job description.

So when someone says “law enforcement’s social contract can’t be malleable,” I agree on the substance but not the framing. The binding part isn’t a vibes-based contract, it’s the real one: statutes, constitutional limits, agency policy (including use-of-force rules), supervision, and consequences when those are violated. That’s what’s supposed to restrain state power.

And the same is true on the civilian side: you have rights, but you don’t have a free license to escalate into force, obstruction, or street violence and then act shocked when the situation gets ugly. Once either side treats rules as optional, you don’t get “justice,” you get a loop: fear, anger, escalation, injuries, riots, then everyone digs in harder.

Also: “cops are your friends” is mostly a TV hallucination. Some are decent, some are not, and institutions can be brutal even when individuals mean well. If you want “binding,” demand law, clarity, and accountability, not slogans.