The family of David Rathband have said they will not appeal over their failed High Court claim against the shot police officer's former employer.
But speaking to mark the fourth anniversary of their brother's death, Darren Rathband and Debbie Essery maintained they had no regrets about pursuing the action.
They had claimed that Northumbria Police were negligent in failing to pass on a warning that gunman Raoul Moat had called 999 and threatened he was "hunting for officers" in July 2010.
Less than nine minutes later Moat blasted the defenceless officer twice in the face, and PcRathband killed himself in February 2012.
Mr Justice Males rejected their claim, saying it was "well-established law" that police did not owe the public or officers a "private law duty of care" when making operational decisions.
Mr Rathband said: "Debbie and I have considered appealing as we believe the judge is wrong in regards to the police holding a duty of care.
"However, justice is not for the common person, therefore we will not be appealing. Sadly all police officers can and will be placed in situations where others make bad decisions.
"Let's hope they get support from the Police Federation should they ever have to question decisions made which result in them being injured."
Despite having a bill of at least £100,000 in legal fees hanging over them, he said the family had just been continuing something his brother started.
He also said that the Pc had put in place "adequate measures" for them in case they lost the case.
"We have no regrets taking on David's litigation. He started it, he knew better than anyone how he was left unprepared and in harm's way," he said.
"Those who were involved in the tragic events on July 4th will have to come to terms with the final outcome, as we have to.
"David considered others before himself and made sure there was adequate measures in place to ensure any fees were not an extra burden on Debbie and I."
Reflecting on their brother's legacy, he said they would never forget him and said officers continued to do their jobs "at risk from those who have no desire to conform to social standards".