3 ms·

Sorry to spam with this comment but... Police should be self-insured, backed by their pension plan. Without real incentive to change, there is no change.

bradleyjg 6y ago
First targeting indemnification in addition to QI needs to be a talked about goal. So far, I’m seeing a lot of articles about QI and none about indemnification.
tehwebguy 6y ago
As long as this doesn't limit damages. I personally think municipalities should be on the hook for these so that they have some responsibility for the actions of their police force.
- pstuart 6y ago
  It hasn't worked so far. The incentives have to be direct.
hnick 6y ago
That might work, but I think focusing on the money is a very USA approach to issues. Other countries don't seem to have that incentive structure, yet still avoid these issues (at least the blatancy of them). Are the pensions controlled by the police unions?
- pstuart 6y ago
  The USA is a very USA kind of place. No clue on how their pensions are run, my comments are of the armchair variety. All I know is that the system is broken and money is the key lever in the system.
- thephyber 6y ago
  Pensions vary per state. In California, police pensions are mostly aggregated in an organization that specializes in administering public sector state/local employees (except teachers) called CalPERS. The department pays into the pension for the employee if I have my facts straight. Some cities have gone bankrupt because they chose not to do this. Police unions largely exist for setting the employment contracts, lobbying (err “bribing” if you aren’t in the US) legislators for favorable legislation language, and to assist union members if they get into administrative problems (like being caught on camera killing an unarmed civilian) or if they are disabled/killed.
CryptoBanker 6y ago
Why not insured by actual insurance companies? Surely after any incident the insurance company would raise premiums and after a certain point it would no longer be affordable for bad cops to be cops. This wouldn't be too different from a medical professional being required to have malpractice insurance.
- pstuart 6y ago
  Yes, that's fine. The key point is making the police financially liable for their transgressions.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  That's what I came around to, cops should get a stipend to pay their bond. And make sure the insurance companies have full access to their personal files. I think that would get rid of 90% of your problem cops right there. Because they'd be unable to find insurance.

bradleyjg 6y ago

First targeting indemnification in addition to QI needs to be a talked about goal. So far, I’m seeing a lot of articles about QI and none about indemnification.

tehwebguy 6y ago

As long as this doesn't limit damages. I personally think municipalities should be on the hook for these so that they have some responsibility for the actions of their police force.

pstuart 6y ago
It hasn't worked so far. The incentives have to be direct.

hnick 6y ago

That might work, but I think focusing on the money is a very USA approach to issues. Other countries don't seem to have that incentive structure, yet still avoid these issues (at least the blatancy of them). Are the pensions controlled by the police unions?

pstuart 6y ago
The USA is a very USA kind of place. No clue on how their pensions are run, my comments are of the armchair variety. All I know is that the system is broken and money is the key lever in the system.
thephyber 6y ago
Pensions vary per state. In California, police pensions are mostly aggregated in an organization that specializes in administering public sector state/local employees (except teachers) called CalPERS. The department pays into the pension for the employee if I have my facts straight. Some cities have gone bankrupt because they chose not to do this. Police unions largely exist for setting the employment contracts, lobbying (err “bribing” if you aren’t in the US) legislators for favorable legislation language, and to assist union members if they get into administrative problems (like being caught on camera killing an unarmed civilian) or if they are disabled/killed.

CryptoBanker 6y ago

Why not insured by actual insurance companies? Surely after any incident the insurance company would raise premiums and after a certain point it would no longer be affordable for bad cops to be cops. This wouldn't be too different from a medical professional being required to have malpractice insurance.

pstuart 6y ago
Yes, that's fine. The key point is making the police financially liable for their transgressions.
Gibbon1 6y ago
That's what I came around to, cops should get a stipend to pay their bond. And make sure the insurance companies have full access to their personal files. I think that would get rid of 90% of your problem cops right there. Because they'd be unable to find insurance.