269
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
269 points (99.6% liked)
News
22903 readers
4163 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's awesome we are finally holding the police financially liable for their actions. My bad, it's the taxpayers again.
You want change? Demand police accountability.
Police aren't civilians and they aren't workers. Abolish their "union" as well as Qualified Immunity. They can earn the right to not be prosecuted while doing their job...
Police are supposed to be civilians. The whole idea of America avoiding mitary dictatorship was vested in the Army being under the control of the Commander in Chief, a civilian chosen by civilians. In conjunction with the police force being comprised of civilians otherwise its just a military with a different name. You can make the argument they're above civilians in current times but this is by no mean integral to policing, and is in fact antithetical to the American idea of police.
Don't get me wrong I still think they're problematic even in the theoretical best case scenario, but they're definitely civilians.
I'm not an expert on the origins of police in the US, but I thought their origin story was basically to oppress the civilian population to protect corporate property.
Like, their entire purpose and why they were given authority was so that they could beat down civilians in the name of corporate profits. Which is the opposite of what you're claiming.
How are those contradictory? Can a civilian force not shakedown people to protect property?
Or are you asking me why they made a theoretical safety on the idea of policing instead of just telling everyone 'Hey these are going to be our new chosen opressors, have fun!'
I think the idea is that civilian force has governmental protections that other civilians would otherwise never have.
Qualified immunity started in 1967. These protections aren't inherent to policing, they've been slowly added on over time.
Or take settlement money out of police pension funds.
Police absolutely ARE CIVILIANS
The problem is police aren't treated like civilians.
Oxford Languages definition:
I'm obviously using the term in a non-military context as the topic is policing, not military or international conflict.
Where's Oxford again? American policing is based on the fact that a civilian force polices a civilian body. Its part of the tools to avoid military dictatorship, the same way the President is a civilian chosen by the people to be the Commander in Chief of the military.
Marriam-webster:
Cool now tell me what common parlance has to do with the legal classification of police officers? (Hint: legally cops are civilians)
Goalpost shifted
The argument was always that cops are civilians, no posts have been moved, you just realized you're wrong and a definition from a non legal document doesn't mean jack shit when it comes to government classification.
Civilians don't get free passes on murder, torture, intimidation, false evidence, etc etc etc.
So many people are anti-union but when it comes to the police union they're oddly silent...
Friend's mom frequently complained about unions - any union - because she heard people complaining on Fox or at work. She was a 20-year member of the police union (not as an officer). And bragged about that too.
He could never convince her of the mental disconnect there.
Like who?
Who is anti-union? Let me introduce you to the history of union busting in the US:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1
They are literally above the law. So again, not civilians. That's the difference. They aren't a real union because it's not workers banding together.
Cops don't have qualified immunity in Colorado
30 months of probation?! That’s basically a slap on the wrist. That’s not accountability, that’s doing the absolute minimum to make it LOOK like “see, we’re accountable!”. Dude handcuffed a person in a car on railroad tracks.
And 100 hours of public service... you mean like his job?
Take some overtime and sleep in a cruiser, he'll have it done in two weeks anyway.
Did you read the post you replied to? They said financially liable. Read through the quote you responded with and tell us where they are held financially liable. They are (rightfully) mad that it's the taxpayers that are effectively paying out the settlement instead of the police force.
Perhaps you should read it.
Oh, whew, at least it's not the tax payers! You really got 'im with your crafty reading of the article.
Is this sarcasm? I'm not sure.
Insurance is not free, you pay for it, if you have a claim your premiums go up.
Insurance companies don't exist because of goodwill, they exist for profit.
edited.
No worries, thanks
I guess that's technically accountability. Doesn't sound like much of a punishment.
And this is damn near a unicorn. (and likely would have been swept under the rug without cam footage - just like every other case where cops see justice) Just like one black president didn't signal the end of racism, a small percentage of cases where someone OTHER THAN taxpayers are on the hook for police misbehavior doesn't signal the end of a need for reform, it signals a nearly imperceptible change to the status quo. I'm grateful for the change, but it's barely a start.