Time to start prorating individual officer's salary for the % of their shift time that has extant video footage?
These body cams are useless if the video can go conveniently missing whenever it needs to.
These body cams are useless if the video can go conveniently missing whenever it needs to.
> Even departments with few problems are experiencing rate increases of 30 to 100 percent. Now, insurers also are telling departments that they must change the way they police.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/20...
(/s)
Better to reform the official checks & balances on police power so they are more effective.
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.
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.
Cops are above the law. They are the violence arm of the local government.
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.
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.
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.
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))
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.
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.
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.
Should give you a good context and background going back to the 1800s.
No it doesn't. The case will get thrown out on some other grounds when the officials sends in their report on why the permit was denied. Likewise, not responding to the lawsuit could result in a default judgement regardless of QI.
We can keep frivolous lawsuits by people pissed off with bureaucracy from happening while also allowing government officials to be sued for the actual economic damages they inflict on people.
Just upload the video automatically to some central server. Then the corruption on police station level can't get to it.
You could do the upload via mobile network if a "bang" is heard too.
I think their is another kind, used more in cities, with bodycam uploading the video directly, with 3 modes (low-res, lowframe, low-res, normal framerate + audio, and high res high framerate).
> There was little doubt that fence cutting would be criminalized, but what was to be done about ranchers who were fencing over public roads and lands? Here the Texas Legislature stood with the rich, making fence cutting a felony punishable by two to five years in prison, while for the cattle barons who encroached on public land, the punishment was a misdemeanor and a small fine of $10 to $100.
ie levying a slight tax to enable it rampantly through surface-level law and order