5 ms·
The difference is a single police officer would have personal responsibility similar to the way any driver is careful not to cause damage to there's on the road
by headShrinker 10y ago
The difference is a single police officer would have personal responsibility similar to the way any driver is careful not to cause damage to there's on the road. The city simply rolling out for settlements means officers never feel the heat for malpractice
- DrScump 10y ago<The difference is a single police officer would have personal responsibility> You're speaking of private insurance, then. If you were an insurer, would you offer such a policy at a premium low enough for public agencies to justify buying? And even if so, I see a lawsuit risk there: "This agency must have known that Officer Dicey was a ticking time bomb -- they even took out an insurance policy on him!" How do you think your average American jury would react to that?
- pasquinelli 10y agoi think the idea is a police officer would have to carry their own malpractice insurance as a prerequisite to the job. they pay for it because it's mandated.