Cops are getting in on the looting and property damage: https://www.foxcarolina.com/news/po...cle_6fe321b0-a5da-11ea-9587-d7e6fa18bd0e.html Reminder that ACAB.
Frankly, doing away with immunity for police officers sounds like giving up. It says they are no longer trusted to do their jobs, and instead of building trust, we just assume that we will never be able to trust them again.
There's clearly a middle ground between not being able to do your job and being protected from being absolutely incompetent at your job though.
That's the issue though. It's in the name. Qualified immunity is...qualified. It's limited. It was never intended to protect those who violate someone's constitutional rights or violate clearly established law. So, I'm a-okay with reform. I have a problem with elimination. If something goes sideways, you can still sue the agency with qualified immunity. It just means that, so long as constitutional rights weren't violated or clearly established law is broken, you can't sue the officer themselves and seize their assets. Edit: If qualified immunity has been used to shield someone when they violate someone's constitutional rights or if they break clearly established law, then that's a problem with the courts, not the doctrine or the police.
I'll definitely be able to trust cops again, as long as they are strung up by their necks in the town square.
I know the protests are coming to my gated community because b ricks have been placed on the ground in front of every house. It must be some form of organized plot because they are all aligned from the road to the garage of every house so that protesters can just pry them up out of the ground and throw them at police and property. But we were smart, we parked our cars on them like it was a driveway. Let us see those antifa thugs use them now.
I am pretty sure if I were to go out protesting I would bring my paintball mask and some of the body armor I have. I would probably bring some soapy water and some rinsing water. I would certainly bring a camera to record things.
The courts invented the doctrine, and have upheld it and expanded it time and time again. The only way to pierce it is if the case has the exact same circumstances as one before, otherwise the judge can throw it out. Which means that except for mirroring circumstances in cases existing previous to the establishment of the doctrine, it’s a Catch-22 to get new circumstances as “clearly established”. The doctrine is rotten, and a judicial invention that directly contravenes the legislation that allowed suits against government officials for rights violations in the first place, while pretending it isn’t.
my take is if a cop breaks the law they should be punished accordingly. Nobody is above the law. Sadly this is the theory, the reality is far more complicated.
well that's not binary thinking or broad-brushing! So tell me are you so strong in your convictions that you would never, ever, ever call the police/refuse police assistance for help no matter how dire your situation? Bet you aren't!
Well, obviously gas masks are a tool of aggression. If only the protesters would stick to defensive weapons, such as guns.
I would sure think twice about calling some cops to help out my black neighbor if he was having trouble. That is a way to kill a black man. Cops killed more black men than cancer.
The case does not have to have the exact same circumstances, at least in the circuit I work in. If any court is taking it to the extreme of "qualified immunity applies here because there was no previous cases inwhich the officer was a lefthanded Capricorn who allegedly committed his brutality under the pale moonlight against a person whose name ended in ie," then that is ridiculous. But there are obviously thousands of cases that have gone forward with qualified immunity, in federal courts and as I said before, the state law remains an option. Nothing is inherently wrong with judicial inventions, unless you dislike such things as the right to counsel in criminal cases, Miranda rights, the exclusionary rule, etc.
Please attempt to respond without insults, if possible. I don't know that you do or don't condone what happened to George Floyd. But, you do support a southern republican party. and that party, by it's own admission, is against black people protesting for their rights.
So about equal between the two of you. And if you don't want people insulting you, don't insult others by putting words in their mouths.
Immunity isn't needed when they have anonymity... Barr's collage of DoJ agency personnel called in to DC are not showing nametags or even, in many cases, agency markings. That "riot cop" bashing your skull in could be FBI, ATF, DEA, BoP or US Marshals, and you'd have no way to know who to sue for the resulting disabilities. The DoJ under Barr says this is all just dandy, and you could identify them from CCTV if needed (like it's going to be turned on or able to get enough detail on a face wearing a helmet and riot mask...). Funny, under the last administration, they had rather more sensible ideas: Edit: Apparently you can add ICE, CBP and TSA officers to the list above. All three of which don't have the best of reps when it comes to a measured response...
I'm interested in the theory that this was a hit - that George had something on a dirty cop, and the cop used the arrest as an excuse to bump him off. That would, of course, give us Murder One.
I think whether it was a hit or not is irrelevant, when prosecutors like Giuliani have shown how the actions of the cop can be shown as premeditation after a certain point, thereby ALREADY making it Murder One. Although, if that theory could be proven, the case becomes a slam dunk, so there's that.
By ‘good cop’ you mean someone who doesn’t themself abuse civilians, but just sits back and lets other do it? That charge their union with making any kind of accountability near impossible? Where were all the ‘good cops‘ in Minneapolis arresting Chauvin after watching the video of him murdering George Floyd? I’m coming to the conclusion that the current batch of State Security Forces are too far gone down the Warrior/Blue Line rabbit hole to be reformed into an accountable civilian police force.
The courts? Aren't there internal investigations? and if those internal investigations show something that falls under "qualified immunity" aren't the courts going to give that more weight than not? So, it can't be just the courts. It also has to be the doctrine of the police.
When the NYPD went on strike crime fell. https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proactive-policing-crime-20170925-story.html
disagree about cancer and here's why: statistically a black male has a 1 in 1,000 chance of getting killed by a cop. A black documentary maker provided that info. Guarantee more than 1 in 1,000 black males die of cancer. But I see what you are saying. Yes if you call a cop to help out a black neighbor try to be present when the cops come so you can intervene or provide info so they know they are the victim and not the suspect. Sad you have to do that but why risk it? That's the reality of the situation.
George and the dirty cop both worked security at the same establishment at one point. I'm interested in what (if any) info his soon-to-be ex wife will provide as to the cop's character and possible motivations!
are those cops fired yet? If not, has the mayor of that city seen the video? The mayor of Atlanta would fire their asses on the spot.
