Cops Must Have Immunity Removed

[Shadow Wolf]

1. End qualified immunity
2. Make cops pay for their own liability insurance.
3. Make a percentage of settlements come from their department budget and/or their retirement plan.

Then you will see police brutality end almost overnight.

We also need protections from wrongful detainments, arrests, pull overs, and other such things. And getting those things wrong should be a permanent demerit on their record. No is perfect, but mistaking donut glaze for drugs, pulling people over for legal things, invading the home of the obviously wrong person, shooting unarmed civilians, these things should forever taint their record. But they don't even have a federalized or permanent record to begin with.

 

[Revoltingest]

Accident victim attacked & arrested by cops for...uh...it's not clear.

 

[esmith]

I must disagree on this idea for the following reason.
A. Facts
1. At the present time crime in the U.S. is on the rise.
2. It appears that in many areas of the country the perpatrator is the now cosidered the victim due to social injustice
3. LEO are being prosecuted for their actions in dealing with a crime in process
4. Media in many cases only show the last few seconds of an interaction between a LEO and a civilain

Some if not many LEO in certain parts of this country look at what could happen to them if they are preceived to be in the wrong when dealing with an incident.
Therefore why should they risk their entire livelihood if there is a posibiltiy that they will "loose-it-all" if they act.
Why do you think it is increasingly hard to retain and recuit LEO's.

Yes there are incidents when a LEO is in the wrong and should be proscuted, however, IMO, this happens in very rare cases.
One of the main reasons that an interaction between a LEO and a civilian goes wrong, again IMO, is that the civilian did not follow the request of the LEO
or acted in a manner that could be concived as a threat to the LEO.

Righ now civility within the country is going downhill at an alarming rate and given this I can see if it does not improve there will be more adverse interaction between
those that are charged with enforcing the laws and those that the law is supposed to protect.

 

[Revoltingest]

I must disagree on this idea for the following reason.
A. Facts
1. At the present time crime in the U.S. is on the rise.

Ironically, cops are among those committing many crimes.
Having said that, we should be cautious about meeting a
rising crime problem by giving more cops more capability
to violate with impunity the laws they're charged to enforce.

2. It appears that in many areas of the country the perpatrator is the now cosidered the victim due to social injustice

That some people hold a loony view isn't the problem.

3. LEO are being prosecuted for their actions in dealing with a crime in process

This happens when cops egregiously violate the law.
If one examines specific cases where cops are convicted,
one will see that no reasonable cop would've behaved so.

4. Media in many cases only show the last few seconds of an interaction between a LEO and a civilain

Shortcomings in the media aren't the problem.
To you, I recommend the youtube channel....
Audit The Audit
You'll get a reasonable full legal analysis of
cop & civilian interactions. And sometimes
the cop gets the A grade, while the civilian
gets the F.

Some if not many LEO in certain parts of this country look at what could happen to them if they are preceived to be in the wrong when dealing with an incident.
Therefore why should they risk their entire livelihood if there is a posibiltiy that they will "loose-it-all" if they act.
Why do you think it is increasingly hard to retain and recuit LEO's.

Cops should be constantly aware of sanctions for
improper behavior. It's the only mechanism to keep
them from running amok.
With a license to kill, the profession should have
much higher pay, & much more stringent requirements.
Cops should be fewer & better. And many of their
current functions are inappropriate, & should be handled
by others, eg, social workers.

Yes there are incidents when a LEO is in the wrong and should be proscuted, however, IMO, this happens in very rare cases.
One of the main reasons that an interaction between a LEO and a civilian goes wrong, again IMO, is that the civilian did not follow the request of the LEO
or acted in a manner that could be concived as a threat to the LEO.

Civilians aren't trained to interact with cops, so they
deserve some slack by cops, who are supposed to
protect & serve....not rage, bully, & abuse.
Even when civilians behave in a manner inconsistent
with their own interests, this should not mean losing
civil rights. Cops should be able to remain calm &
civil even in the face of insult. Clearly not all cops
are suited for the job.

Righ now civility within the country is going downhill at an alarming rate and given this I can see if it does not improve there will be more adverse interaction between
those that are charged with enforcing the laws and those that the law is supposed to protect.

True dat.
But I am seeing some positive changes in departments
as a result of ubiquitous phone recordings, youtube, &
civil suits against cops & governments. It's a slow
process to reform such a behemoth, eh.

 

[pearl]

The other side of having been granted immunity, it annuls a witnesses' right to claim, plea, 'the 5th' during questioning,

 

[Revoltingest]

The other side of having been granted immunity, it annuls a witnesses' right to claim, plea, 'the 5th' during questioning,

That seems odd.
Does qualified immunity really function
as immunity granted a testifying witness?

 

[pearl]

Does qualified immunity really function
as immunity granted a testifying witness?

Pleading the 5th protects one from implicating oneself in a crime, it grants immunity from being prosecuted for any crime admitted to while a witness. Usually offered when the information is crucial to prosecuting a case.

 

[Revoltingest]

Pleading the 5th protects one from implicating oneself in a crime, it grants immunity from being prosecuted for any crime admitted to while a witness. Usually offered when the information is crucial to prosecuting a case.

A cop testifying in a criminal trial would be
concerned that they'd be implicated in a crime,
one for which they'd get qualified immunity...
I wonder what an example of that would look like?

 

[averageJOE]

I must disagree on this idea for the following reason.
A. Facts
1. At the present time crime in the U.S. is on the rise.
2. It appears that in many areas of the country the perpatrator is the now cosidered the victim due to social injustice
3. LEO are being prosecuted for their actions in dealing with a crime in process
4. Media in many cases only show the last few seconds of an interaction between a LEO and a civilain

Some if not many LEO in certain parts of this country look at what could happen to them if they are preceived to be in the wrong when dealing with an incident.
Therefore why should they risk their entire livelihood if there is a posibiltiy that they will "loose-it-all" if they act.
Why do you think it is increasingly hard to retain and recuit LEO's.

Yes there are incidents when a LEO is in the wrong and should be proscuted, however, IMO, this happens in very rare cases.
One of the main reasons that an interaction between a LEO and a civilian goes wrong, again IMO, is that the civilian did not follow the request of the LEO
or acted in a manner that could be concived as a threat to the LEO.

Righ now civility within the country is going downhill at an alarming rate and given this I can see if it does not improve there will be more adverse interaction between
those that are charged with enforcing the laws and those that the law is supposed to protect.

To the part that I put in bold and underlined: You are correct. There is a term for it, it's call "contempt of cop". Which is not a crime at all. It is very common for a cop to feel disrespected, threatened, or made to feel suspicious all for exercising your rights.

It makes absolutely no sense at all have a job that requires split second decisions given to people who are never held accountable for making wrong decisions.

Back the Blue till it happens to you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

LEO

Lesbians Eating Octopus?
I don't know RW acronyms or lingo.
Spell then out so we all know or keep getting sarcastic replies (this goes for all and not just RWers).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

One of the main reasons that an interaction between a LEO and a civilian goes wrong, again IMO, is that the civilian did not follow the request of the LEO
or acted in a manner that could be concived as a threat to the LEO.

Being autistic isn't a threat.

 

[Curious George]

Lesbians Eating Octopus?
I don't know RW acronyms or lingo.
Spell then out so we all know or keep getting sarcastic replies (this goes for all and not just RWers).

Usually “law enforcement officers”. Sometimes just written LE for law enforcement. (Side note: I am not completely sure because I didn’t read esmiths post. But if that context fits then it is likely correct. The term is not a right wing abbreviation but common in LE, social work (SW), and legal work.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Usually “law enforcement officers”. Sometimes just written LE for law enforcement. (Side note: I am not completely sure because I didn’t read esmiths post. But if that context fits then it is likely correct. The term is not a right wing abbreviation but common in LE, social work (SW), and legal work.

The point was it's bad form to use acronyms amd initialisms without defining them. Not everyone belongs to the same circles, works the same fields, or has the same interests. It's unreasonable to expect people to know and assume they will.
Another example, if you don't have political rabies the recent threads with "MTG" looks like a funny thing because it doesn't make any sense because to a nerd MTG is Magic the Gathering.
This is why we spell things out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I must disagree on this idea for the following reason.
A. Facts

Oh boy! Facts!

1. At the present time crime in the U.S. is on the rise.

Okay this is a statement that should have been supported, but it appears to be true. Though we are nowhere near the rates of thirty years ago. Just sayin'.

2. It appears that in many areas of the country the perpatrator is the now cosidered the victim due to social injustice

This is an extremely vague claim that needs a lot of evidence. Without evidence it is worthless.

3. LEO are being prosecuted for their actions in dealing with a crime in process

Again, citation needed. I thought that we were dealing with "facts" here.

4. Media in many cases only show the last few seconds of an interaction between a LEO and a civilain

Again, citation needed. Do you know the neat thing about facts? They can be supported by reliable sources.

Some if not many LEO in certain parts of this country look at what could happen to them if they are preceived to be in the wrong when dealing with an incident.
Therefore why should they risk their entire livelihood if there is a posibiltiy that they will "loose-it-all" if they act.
Why do you think it is increasingly hard to retain and recuit LEO's.

Perhaps, but this is about as far from a "fact" as you can get. It appears to be only an opinion.

Yes there are incidents when a LEO is in the wrong and should be proscuted, however, IMO, this happens in very rare cases.
One of the main reasons that an interaction between a LEO and a civilian goes wrong, again IMO, is that the civilian did not follow the request of the LEO
or acted in a manner that could be concived as a threat to the LEO.

We may disagree about the frequency of this, but I probably agree. This does not appear to be such a case. Sometimes a civilian cannot obey given orders.

Righ now civility within the country is going downhill at an alarming rate and given this I can see if it does not improve there will be more adverse interaction between
those that are charged with enforcing the laws and those that the law is supposed to protect.

Dang this does not look like a fact either. Overall I am highly disappointed. I was promised facts which should all have been supported if they were facts and instead I only got a very right wing opinion. I am going to have to score you rather low at 3 out of 10 and that is being generous.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Dang it, I almost forgot that I was going to offer a video that discuss how immunity may be addressed in an upcoming Supreme Court decision. Considering the current makeup of the court I do not think that it bodes well for @Revoltingest . It involves a YouTube video.

Would anyone care to see it?

 

[pearl]

Trump aide offered immunity to testify before grand jury about Mar-a-Lago docs: Sources - ABC News

 

[esmith]

Ironically, cops are among those committing many crimes.
Having said that, we should be cautious about meeting a
rising crime problem by giving more cops more capability
to violate with impunity the laws they're charged to enforce.

That some people hold a loony view isn't the problem.

This happens when cops egregiously violate the law.
If one examines specific cases where cops are convicted,
one will see that no reasonable cop would've behaved so.

Shortcomings in the media aren't the problem.
To you, I recommend the youtube channel....
Audit The Audit
You'll get a reasonable full legal analysis of
cop & civilian interactions. And sometimes
the cop gets the A grade, while the civilian
gets the F.

Cops should be constantly aware of sanctions for
improper behavior. It's the only mechanism to keep
them from running amok.
With a license to kill, the profession should have
much higher pay, & much more stringent requirements.
Cops should be fewer & better. And many of their
current functions are inappropriate, & should be handled
by others, eg, social workers.

Civilians aren't trained to interact with cops, so they
deserve some slack by cops, who are supposed to
protect & serve....not rage, bully, & abuse.
Even when civilians behave in a manner inconsistent
with their own interests, this should not mean losing
civil rights. Cops should be able to remain calm &
civil even in the face of insult. Clearly not all cops
are suited for the job.

True dat.
But I am seeing some positive changes in departments
as a result of ubiquitous phone recordings, youtube, &
civil suits against cops & governments. It's a slow
process to reform such a behemoth, eh.

Maybe you and others see that in your part of the country but we see or hear of very little of it out here.I exclude the states bordering the Pacific ocean since the news reporting is lacking in those states except for CA. It seems media does not know we exist.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe you and others see that in your part of the country but we see or hear of very little of it out here.I exclude the states bordering the Pacific ocean since the news reporting is lacking in those states except for CA. It seems media does not know we exist.

The things I reported are all across the country.
Moreover, I've found it interesting that they occur
in urban & rural areas, northern & southern areas,
& conservative & liberal areas.

 

[Curious George]

The point was it's bad form to use acronyms amd initialisms without defining them. Not everyone belongs to the same circles, works the same fields, or has the same interests. It's unreasonable to expect people to know and assume they will.
Another example, if you don't have political rabies the recent threads with "MTG" looks like a funny thing because it doesn't make any sense because to a nerd MTG is Magic the Gathering.
This is why we spell things out.

Hey, don’t shoot the messenger. I was just trying to be helpful.

 

[Revoltingest]

The point was it's bad form to use acronyms amd initialisms without defining them. .

To be fair, "LEO" is commonly used this way.
So I cut some slack when posters use the term
without defining it.

Context is essential. In a thread about Philippine
politics, "MILF" doesn't mean what we'd first think.
Moro Islamic Liberation Front - Wikipedia