4 ms·

Well, when there is reimbursement (via lawsuits) it is the city that pays for it. The police should be self-insured, backed by their pension fund. They are gra

Well, when there is reimbursement (via lawsuits) it is the city that pays for it. The police should be self-insured, backed by their pension fund. They are granted incredible power with no real accountability.

nicoburns 5y ago
They should be at risk of losing their jobs for poor behaviour like this (and if they senior figures within the police forces don't deal with it, then they should be at risk of losing their jobs).
- spacemanmatt 5y ago
  They should risk well more than their jobs for their criminal behavior. I'm so sick of qualified immunity I could convict a cop for chewing gum.
  - nicoburns 5y ago
    I agree in general, although I'm not sure criminal prosecution would be worthwhile/appropriate for breaking a door down. For more serious crimes absolutely.
    - spacemanmatt 5y ago
      I think they should experience the MORE legal risk for a trespass and property damage that I do. You seem to be arguing that they should still have qualified immunity, but maybe not so much of it, if I'm understanding?
      - nicoburns 5y ago
        I guess I feel like there are pretty much no circumstances in which I would need to break down a door. Whereas police officers are likely to find themselves in circumstances where breaking down a door is legitimately the right thing to do quite a bit more often. So perhaps some allowance for that is merited. I'd like to live in a world where lawsuits aren't necessary to achieve justice, except in extreme cases.
        spacemanmatt 5y ago
        Ok, so let's say there is a circumstance and a process by which they obtain justification from a judge, in the form of a warrant. Then they execute the warrant on the wrong address. Why should a cop enjoy immunity for an unjustified felony trespass and property destruction just because they were justified at another address? That's the kind of problem we have now. It's not that cops can't get a warrant for what they do. It's that they are not punished for the stuff they do without a warrant, that you and I would (and rightly should) be punished for.
theshrike79 5y ago
This, exactly this. Police pension funds should be the source of all police misconduct payments. The older guys would _immediately_ weed out the bad apples when it starts hurting their own wallet badly enough. Paying for misconduct from city funds is a joke.
- alexashka 5y ago
  This. It is indeed a joke. I highly doubt there'd be any immediate weeding out, but it would begin to restore some accountability and make it less police vs the world and more about police vs incompetent/corrupt police.

nicoburns 5y ago

They should be at risk of losing their jobs for poor behaviour like this (and if they senior figures within the police forces don't deal with it, then they should be at risk of losing their jobs).

spacemanmatt 5y ago
They should risk well more than their jobs for their criminal behavior. I'm so sick of qualified immunity I could convict a cop for chewing gum.
- nicoburns 5y ago
  I agree in general, although I'm not sure criminal prosecution would be worthwhile/appropriate for breaking a door down. For more serious crimes absolutely.
  - spacemanmatt 5y ago
    I think they should experience the MORE legal risk for a trespass and property damage that I do. You seem to be arguing that they should still have qualified immunity, but maybe not so much of it, if I'm understanding?
    - nicoburns 5y ago
      I guess I feel like there are pretty much no circumstances in which I would need to break down a door. Whereas police officers are likely to find themselves in circumstances where breaking down a door is legitimately the right thing to do quite a bit more often. So perhaps some allowance for that is merited. I'd like to live in a world where lawsuits aren't necessary to achieve justice, except in extreme cases.
      - spacemanmatt 5y ago
        Ok, so let's say there is a circumstance and a process by which they obtain justification from a judge, in the form of a warrant. Then they execute the warrant on the wrong address. Why should a cop enjoy immunity for an unjustified felony trespass and property destruction just because they were justified at another address? That's the kind of problem we have now. It's not that cops can't get a warrant for what they do. It's that they are not punished for the stuff they do without a warrant, that you and I would (and rightly should) be punished for.

theshrike79 5y ago

This, exactly this. Police pension funds should be the source of all police misconduct payments. The older guys would _immediately_ weed out the bad apples when it starts hurting their own wallet badly enough. Paying for misconduct from city funds is a joke.

alexashka 5y ago
This. It is indeed a joke. I highly doubt there'd be any immediate weeding out, but it would begin to restore some accountability and make it less police vs the world and more about police vs incompetent/corrupt police.