7 ms·

If you are a private security agent for a mall what's the difference with a cop patrolling a mall? In sectors where private compete with public that's very dif

by Ceezy 5y ago

If you are a private security agent for a mall what's the difference with a cop patrolling a mall? In sectors where private compete with public that's very difficult to understand why people should be regulated by different laws.

koheripbal 5y ago
People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity. If you're saying we should expand qualified immunity, I agree.
- rdtwo 5y ago
  The problem comes when the people doing their jobs are also abusing their power for personal gain or vendetta and can’t be punished.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. They aren’t, outside of government-agent immunities. > ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity No, it is not how it works. The idnividual agent is generally personally liable, but the employer generally is often also liable for the torts of its agents under the principle of respondeat superior, or more directly if it also checks all the boxes for having committed a tort without considering that principle.
- Ceezy 5y ago
  I think it's more about finding the right middle ground than anything else. So expanding is good if people are still responsible in a way. I agree that a lot of time the institution are liable (mostly for ordering people to achieve impossible target).
- voxic11 5y ago
  Did you even read the bill? That is exactly what it does > INDEMNIFICATION BY PUBLIC BODY.--A judgment awarded pursuant to the New Mexico Civil Rights Act against a person acting on behalf of, under color of or within the course and scope of the authority of the public body shall be paid by the public body.

by Ceezy 5y ago

koheripbal 5y ago

People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity. If you're saying we should expand qualified immunity, I agree.

rdtwo 5y ago
The problem comes when the people doing their jobs are also abusing their power for personal gain or vendetta and can’t be punished.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. They aren’t, outside of government-agent immunities. > ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity No, it is not how it works. The idnividual agent is generally personally liable, but the employer generally is often also liable for the torts of its agents under the principle of respondeat superior, or more directly if it also checks all the boxes for having committed a tort without considering that principle.
Ceezy 5y ago
I think it's more about finding the right middle ground than anything else. So expanding is good if people are still responsible in a way. I agree that a lot of time the institution are liable (mostly for ordering people to achieve impossible target).
voxic11 5y ago
Did you even read the bill? That is exactly what it does > INDEMNIFICATION BY PUBLIC BODY.--A judgment awarded pursuant to the New Mexico Civil Rights Act against a person acting on behalf of, under color of or within the course and scope of the authority of the public body shall be paid by the public body.