Police officers are not robots

I was trying to apply the liberal approach to human (and not only)  beings  with basic rules of freedom and fairness (as per Haidt) to police work. And found no reason for police officers to protect other people based on fairness to the police officers (they are expected to be violent to other people) and freedom of their ultimate choice to protect themselves. Now I understand that liberals consider police officers as robots with The Three Laws invented by Isaac Asimov back in the 1940s. However, police officers are not robots and, considering the liberal approach (i.e. no authority, no loyalty, no sanctity) they have to follow the opposite rules:

First  Law

A police officer must protect only own existence, also for the sake of people who love them.

     

     Second Law

A police officer must obey the orders given by the immediate commander only (not by any other human beings) except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

Third Law

A police officer may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm except where such orders would conflict with the First or Second Law.

I think the Buffalo police officers who left special team observe these three rules and showed their protest  to be considered as robots following The Three Laws. This gives me some optimism about what will happen in the US after the current unrest and protests calm down. I hope people will respect the police officers as human beings. Otherwise, the police will be fully demoralized. To protect people, the police officers have to demonstrate loyalty to the team and people, follow the authority of commanders, and believe that they may sacrifice their livers for better life for their relatives and others. Currently, the authority and society demonstrate that they consider the police officers as robots following the rules invented by Asimov.