5 ms·

Get rid of Qualified Immunity for starters. Next should be some sort of malpractice insurance that police must carry themselves (none of this using our tax doll

Get rid of Qualified Immunity for starters. Next should be some sort of malpractice insurance that police must carry themselves (none of this using our tax dollars to pay for their own crimes).

rootusrootus 4y ago
Although it gets misused, there is a very good reason for qualified immunity. Get rid of it and nobody will ever become a cop. And even if you could find people, you'd have to pay a pretty ridiculous salary, especially with an insurance requirement. Better to reform the official checks & balances on police power so they are more effective.
- ROTMetro 4y ago
  Checks and balances don't work. Just look at the whole student debt issue. Someone sued and the Biden administration changed the rule so that the person suing no longer had standing, taking away access to the courts. Trying to sue the government from inside the prison system is just naive. And even when it works, it doesn't work. We sued because we were housed in inhuman conditions. Because only inmates in one wing of the prison sued, the ruling only applied to inmates housed in that wing, even though the rest of the prison was exactly the same as what the Court had just ruled inhumane and unconstitutional. Qualified immunity is a made up right by the courts (it doesn't exist in law) and places SOME animals above other animals when it comes to accountability. I thought we were all equal? All Americans should be responsible for their actions, government employees > accountability simply because they have a special 'job' should not be a thing.
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    > Checks and balances don't work. Just look at the whole student debt issue. Someone sued and the Biden administration changed the rule so that the person suing no longer had standing, taking away access to the courts. This is because the standing they had was tenuous to begin with, his claim was that the issue was he'd be taxed on the 20K in cancelled debt and couldn't opt out. So it was clarified that he could, and suddenly he is no longer harmed. You don't have standing to sue if you aren't harmed. Student loan companies have a somewhat less tenuous argument, but the real issue is that Biden's actions were probably legal, and checks and balances don't exist to prevent the government from doing legal things.
- tastyfreeze 4y ago
  The police must follow all the same laws that we do. Giving any kind of immunity enables officers to be "above the law". If an officer gets accused of rights violations it should be settled in court, not dismissed out of hand.
  - selectodude 4y ago
    Pretty sure if you handcuffed somebody without their consent, regardless of what they were doing, you’d have to answer for it in court. Cops are above the law. They are the violence arm of the local government.
    - mywittyname 4y ago
      They aren't acting above the law, but within it. They are legally allowed to detain people in certain situations. It's perfectly fair for the law to allow certain groups to do something that's illegal for other groups to do. For example, illegal for people not sanctioned by the government to drive on public roads.
- nullc 4y ago
  > and nobody will ever become a cop. Most (almost all?) police officers in the US have a union negotiated contract where the employing agency indemnifies them. Not only do you not need QI to avoid the liability you're concerned about, but the infrastructure is already in place.
- TomSwirly 4y ago
  > Get rid of it and nobody will ever become a cop. Hello, I live in Europe. We don't have qualified immunity here, but we have police officers. How do you explain this? Germany is by the way far more litigious than the US, so no, don't go pulling this, "But we have more lawsuits" thing. ---- Is there a way to stop you guys doing this? "It's impossible to do X" when in fact you are the only country that doesn't do X? It's simply embarrassing after decades and generations of this.
  - BrandoElFollito 4y ago
    I didn't know that Germany was more litigious than the US (I am French). Is there a particular reason for that? (fast courts for instance, or the ability to gain tengoble money from the litigation? (something we do not have in France))
mike_d 4y ago
Qualafied immunity is the cornerstone of a functioning democracy. People who advocate for its elimination only know about it from the negative context and don't fully understand its value. For example say a rich person murders their partner. The cops show up and the killer says "if you arrest me I will drag all of you into court personally for years to come and bankrupt your families." Without QI the officers need to make a decision if justice is worth the risk of personal loss. Or if a rich person wants to build a new deck which is denied a permit, QI is what prevents them from personally dragging everyone involved to court personally. QI does not eliminate personal liability when a crime has been committed. If an officer shoots someone and is charged criminally, they can then be sued personally.
- _jal 4y ago
  > Qualafied immunity is the cornerstone of a functioning democracy. I take it you believe the US became a functioning democracy in 1967, then? That's when Pierson v. Ray was decided and QI was invented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray
  - mike_d 4y ago
    Without getting into a longwinded discussion of specifics, QI as a concept within the legal system has existed for quite a long time. The case you cite is where it was codified into an explict short-circuit that prevented the cases from being filed in the first place.
    - _jal 4y ago
      No, please - name cases you're thinking of. I am extremely curious about what you'll cite. Because there was a specific reason QI came to be, and it was not a matter of a long-established doctrine being formalized. I'll wait.
      - mike_d 4y ago
        https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3680714# https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3680714# and then click on view PDF. I don't think I can deep link to it directly. Should give you a good context and background going back to the 1800s.

Get rid of Qualified Immunity for starters. Next should be some sort of malpractice insurance that police must carry themselves (none of this using our tax dollars to pay for their own crimes).

rootusrootus 4y ago

Although it gets misused, there is a very good reason for qualified immunity. Get rid of it and nobody will ever become a cop. And even if you could find people, you'd have to pay a pretty ridiculous salary, especially with an insurance requirement. Better to reform the official checks & balances on police power so they are more effective.

ROTMetro 4y ago
Checks and balances don't work. Just look at the whole student debt issue. Someone sued and the Biden administration changed the rule so that the person suing no longer had standing, taking away access to the courts. Trying to sue the government from inside the prison system is just naive. And even when it works, it doesn't work. We sued because we were housed in inhuman conditions. Because only inmates in one wing of the prison sued, the ruling only applied to inmates housed in that wing, even though the rest of the prison was exactly the same as what the Court had just ruled inhumane and unconstitutional. Qualified immunity is a made up right by the courts (it doesn't exist in law) and places SOME animals above other animals when it comes to accountability. I thought we were all equal? All Americans should be responsible for their actions, government employees > accountability simply because they have a special 'job' should not be a thing.
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  > Checks and balances don't work. Just look at the whole student debt issue. Someone sued and the Biden administration changed the rule so that the person suing no longer had standing, taking away access to the courts. This is because the standing they had was tenuous to begin with, his claim was that the issue was he'd be taxed on the 20K in cancelled debt and couldn't opt out. So it was clarified that he could, and suddenly he is no longer harmed. You don't have standing to sue if you aren't harmed. Student loan companies have a somewhat less tenuous argument, but the real issue is that Biden's actions were probably legal, and checks and balances don't exist to prevent the government from doing legal things.
tastyfreeze 4y ago
The police must follow all the same laws that we do. Giving any kind of immunity enables officers to be "above the law". If an officer gets accused of rights violations it should be settled in court, not dismissed out of hand.
- selectodude 4y ago
  Pretty sure if you handcuffed somebody without their consent, regardless of what they were doing, you’d have to answer for it in court. Cops are above the law. They are the violence arm of the local government.
  - mywittyname 4y ago
    They aren't acting above the law, but within it. They are legally allowed to detain people in certain situations. It's perfectly fair for the law to allow certain groups to do something that's illegal for other groups to do. For example, illegal for people not sanctioned by the government to drive on public roads.
nullc 4y ago
> and nobody will ever become a cop. Most (almost all?) police officers in the US have a union negotiated contract where the employing agency indemnifies them. Not only do you not need QI to avoid the liability you're concerned about, but the infrastructure is already in place.
TomSwirly 4y ago
> Get rid of it and nobody will ever become a cop. Hello, I live in Europe. We don't have qualified immunity here, but we have police officers. How do you explain this? Germany is by the way far more litigious than the US, so no, don't go pulling this, "But we have more lawsuits" thing. ---- Is there a way to stop you guys doing this? "It's impossible to do X" when in fact you are the only country that doesn't do X? It's simply embarrassing after decades and generations of this.
- BrandoElFollito 4y ago
  I didn't know that Germany was more litigious than the US (I am French). Is there a particular reason for that? (fast courts for instance, or the ability to gain tengoble money from the litigation? (something we do not have in France))

mike_d 4y ago

Qualafied immunity is the cornerstone of a functioning democracy. People who advocate for its elimination only know about it from the negative context and don't fully understand its value. For example say a rich person murders their partner. The cops show up and the killer says "if you arrest me I will drag all of you into court personally for years to come and bankrupt your families." Without QI the officers need to make a decision if justice is worth the risk of personal loss. Or if a rich person wants to build a new deck which is denied a permit, QI is what prevents them from personally dragging everyone involved to court personally. QI does not eliminate personal liability when a crime has been committed. If an officer shoots someone and is charged criminally, they can then be sued personally.

_jal 4y ago
> Qualafied immunity is the cornerstone of a functioning democracy. I take it you believe the US became a functioning democracy in 1967, then? That's when Pierson v. Ray was decided and QI was invented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson_v._Ray
- mike_d 4y ago
  Without getting into a longwinded discussion of specifics, QI as a concept within the legal system has existed for quite a long time. The case you cite is where it was codified into an explict short-circuit that prevented the cases from being filed in the first place.
  - _jal 4y ago
    No, please - name cases you're thinking of. I am extremely curious about what you'll cite. Because there was a specific reason QI came to be, and it was not a matter of a long-established doctrine being formalized. I'll wait.
    - mike_d 4y ago
      https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3680714# https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3680714# and then click on view PDF. I don't think I can deep link to it directly. Should give you a good context and background going back to the 1800s.