14 Jul 20
Senate passes sweeping police reform bill, limits qualified immunity protections
The Senate passed a sweeping reform police package hours before daylight broke this morning, ending a 5-day stalemate over changes to qualified immunity protections for police that split Democrats and generated days of protests in front of the State House.The Senate passed a sweeping reform police package hours before daylight broke this morning, ending a 5-day stalemate over changes to qualified immunity protections for police that split Democrats and generated days of protests in front of the State House.
So now the police/fire will have to carry personal liability insurance.
For public servants whose job is to be in contact with people in
troubled situations, they surely can expect to be tied up in court
with multiple frivolous law suits.
Police in Boston, not allowed to attend the meeting, vow to step
down from their jobs.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/07/14/senate-passes-sweeping-police-reform-bill-limits-qualified-immunity/
@earl-of-trumps saidYou can't force individual police officers to carry liability insurance.
Senate passes sweeping police reform bill, limits qualified immunity protections
[i]The Senate passed a sweeping reform police package hours before daylight broke this morning, ending a 5-day stalemate over changes to qualified immunity protections for police that split Democrats and generated days of protests in front of the State House.The Senate passed a s ...[text shortened]... www.bostonherald.com/2020/07/14/senate-passes-sweeping-police-reform-bill-limits-qualified-immunity/
Instead, the departments will have to carry it, like law firms carry malpractice insurance and businesses carry workers' compensation insurance.
Since the state funds the police anyway, I'm not sure what real world impact this will have.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@earl-of-trumps saidI suspect one of those "cycle" things kevcvs57 was talking about is going to happen...
Senate passes sweeping police reform bill, limits qualified immunity protections
[i]The Senate passed a sweeping reform police package hours before daylight broke this morning, ending a 5-day stalemate over changes to qualified immunity protections for police that split Democrats and generated days of protests in front of the State House.The Senate passed a s ...[text shortened]... www.bostonherald.com/2020/07/14/senate-passes-sweeping-police-reform-bill-limits-qualified-immunity/
1) In the near future more cops in "dangerous situations" will hesitate and be murdered.
2) None of it will be heard in the media
3) Enrollment Law Enforcement will dwindle
4) Criminal activity will grow
5) Urban poverty increases
6) More black people die
7) Urban poverty increases
8) More black people die
.
.
.
@joe-shmo saidOr
I suspect one of those "cycle" things kevcvs57 was talking about is going to happen...
1) In the near future more cops in "dangerous situations" will hesitate and be murdered.
2) None of it will be heard in the media
3) Enrollment Law Enforcement will dwindle
4) Criminal activity will grow
5) Urban poverty increases
6) More black people die
7) Urban poverty increases
8) More black people die
.
.
.
joe-shmo falls of his cycle and bumps his head, thus knocking some sense into his thick skull and he stops talking nonsense.
Why on earth would you ever give a person with a gun and a badge qualified immunity in the first place.
Furthermore: can the right wing gun lobby who claim that they need their guns as protection against a potentially despotic State explain why they think that qualified immunity is a good thing.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@kevcvs57 saidIts another one of those "cycles". Cops have guns, because criminals have guns. Criminals have guns because cops have guns AND because some people don't have guns. Good people have guns because criminals have guns, cops have guns, and government has guns, and they use guns to provide food for their family, and because they just like them and have the RIGHT to own them. Also... some good people DON'T have guns because they think cops have guns and government has guns. Some good people may make the false equivalence that criminals have guns, thus guns are criminal so they won't own guns. Sadly this leads to more guns in the hands of criminals by the logic above...
Or
joe-shmo falls of his cycle and bumps his head, thus knocking some sense into his thick skull and he stops talking nonsense.
Why on earth would you ever give a person with a gun and a badge qualified immunity in the first place.
Furthermore: can the right wing gun lobby who claim that they need their guns as protection against a potentially despotic State explain why they think that qualified immunity is a good thing.
In the end the cycle amounts to...
More black people die
@joe-shmo saidAnd right wingers pretend to care while opposing any real efforts to strike at the roots of crime.
Its another one of those "cycles". Cops have guns, because criminals have guns. Criminals have guns because cops have guns AND because some people don't have guns. Good people have guns because criminals have guns, cops have guns, and government has guns, and they use guns to provide food for their family, and because they just like them and have the RIGHT to own them. Also. ...[text shortened]... ds of criminals by the logic above...
In the end the cycle amounts to...
More black people die
In fact, however, violent crime has plummeted substantially since the early 1990s. While it would be better if it fell further, in fact there is no "crisis" of violence requiring extra powers be given to police. Right wingers favor this because they know who the police will be unleashed on; mostly poorer communities, usually of color.
"Qualified immunity" is a judicially created doctrine that probably misreads the intent of those who created Civil Rights law. https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-qualified-immunity-and-what-does-it-have-do-police-reform
@joe-shmo saidAhh right so if GUNS are the problem why not start the long process of limiting and tightly controlling gun ownership. ( it’s ok I was just joshing ya )
Its another one of those "cycles". Cops have guns, because criminals have guns. Criminals have guns because cops have guns AND because some people don't have guns. Good people have guns because criminals have guns, cops have guns, and government has guns, and they use guns to provide food for their family, and because they just like them and have the RIGHT to own them. Also. ...[text shortened]... ds of criminals by the logic above...
In the end the cycle amounts to...
More black people die
Taking away this immunity is an important message to cops and potential cop on civilian shooting victims.
I don’t understand why you keep recruiting people who are clearly incapable of doing their jobs. The cops job is to arrest and if need be take out bad people if they are posing an imminent threat to the cops or those they are sworn to protect.
If they are taking out those whom they are sworn to protect on such a regular basis, clearly something needs to change.
I would put the entire community of cops in the US on a 1yr probation and instigate a programme of detoxification of its ranks whilst giving the remainder and new ( Better screened ) recruits better training and support.
Here’s an idea, if you pay more you get better qualified staff, at the very least you’d get a larger pool to be more selective from.
First thing: basic physical and psychological fitness criteria need to be introduced or vastly improved. Just from watching videos posted here it’s obvious you have far too many clinically obese cops on the street who, after 5mins, will probably have to resort to a dangerous choke hold or a gun to subdue a resistant arrestee.
14 Jul 20
@joe-shmo saidthose are all possibilities, yes.
I suspect one of those "cycle" things kevcvs57 was talking about is going to happen...
1) In the near future more cops in "dangerous situations" will hesitate and be murdered.
2) None of it will be heard in the media
3) Enrollment Law Enforcement will dwindle
4) Criminal activity will grow
5) Urban poverty increases
6) More black people die
7) Urban poverty increases
8) More black people die
.
.
.
we'll see going forward if this treatment goes viral
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@kevcvs57 said"The cops job is to arrest and if need be take out bad people if they are posing an imminent threat to the cops or those they are sworn to protect.
Ahh right so if GUNS are the problem why not start the long process of limiting and tightly controlling gun ownership. ( it’s ok I was just joshing ya )
Taking away this immunity is an important message to cops and potential cop on civilian shooting victims.
I don’t understand why you keep recruiting people who are clearly incapable of doing their jobs. The cops job is to ...[text shortened]... ins, will probably have to resort to a dangerous choke hold or a gun to subdue a resistant arrestee.
If they are taking out those whom they are sworn to protect on such a regular basis, clearly something needs to change."
"regular basis" - do you have any stats to justify this claim?
How many black people just minding their own business were stopped by cops and shot for absolutely no reason whatsoever without any provocation?
The "qualified immunity" is because cops have to make gut instinct judgement calls in the field. If they hesitate, they potentially risk having those they protect killed or being killed themselves. They don't have the smug academic luxury of 20-20 hindsight. How many times are you forced to make those type of decisions daily in your profession? The amount of times those decisions must be made is proportional the the likelihood of encountering a violent offender.
Removed
Where is the likelihood of encountering a potentially violent criminal while policing greatest?
100% Mitchell, South Dakota - Pop. ≈ 15k
0% Opelousas, Louisiana - Pop. ≈ 16k
3 votes • Final results
14 Jul 20
@no1marauder And right wingers pretend to care while opposing any real efforts to strike at the roots of crime.
In the long run, we may find out that such a move is more harmful than the "roots of the crime".
We'll see how it plays out
14 Jul 20
@joe-shmo said“ How many black people just minding their own business were stopped by cops and shot for absolutely no reason whatsoever without any provocation? ”
"The cops job is to arrest and if need be take out bad people if they are posing an imminent threat to the cops or those they are sworn to protect.
If they are taking out those whom they are sworn to protect on such a regular basis, clearly something needs to change."
"regular basis" - do you have any stats to justify this claim?
How many black people just minding the ...[text shortened]... he likelihood of encountering a violent offender.
[poll]3D8F085520EDB23AE60DCF28A5117636[/poll]
Provocation? There is no ‘provocation’ for killing someone other than those I’ve mentioned unless you believe that being a bit stroppy carries a death sentence or sleeping it off in your own car is a capital offence. Your not making sense here.
14 Jul 20
@kevcvs57 saidThey weren't "being a bit stroppy" they resisted arrest and ATTACKED the officers.
Provocation? There is no ‘provocation’ for killing someone other than those I’ve mentioned unless you believe that being a bit stroppy carries a death sentence or sleeping it off in your own car is a capital offence. Your not making sense here.
Try to at least tell the truth once in awhile.
Had they complied and been arrested they'd be alive today.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
@kevcvs57 saidBlack out drunk in a Wendy's drive through, passed out, vehicle running is a clear provocation. It is a violation of drinking and driving laws. He was a clear and present danger to himself and the community around him.
“ How many black people just minding their own business were stopped by cops and shot for absolutely no reason whatsoever without any provocation? ”
Provocation? There is no ‘provocation’ for killing someone other than those I’ve mentioned unless you believe that being a bit stroppy carries a death sentence or sleeping it off in your own car is a capital offence. Your not making sense here.
I had a friend...white. Did a similar thing. Problem with alcohol. While drinking and driving he pulled his vehicle over on the side of an onramp and passed out. His window was smashed out, he was arrested ( without resisting - i.e he didn't assault the officer, strip the of their tasers, fire at them and attempt to "flee" the scene ) . He was taken to jail, fined and released the next day. Had he been black, nothing different would have happened. If he had done what "Brooks" had done he may very well have had a similar outcome.