• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020 - Biden/Harris

PeacefulWarrior said:
NO THANKS.

I'm against any law that further handcuffs our great Police Officers and gives more leeway to the dangerous criminals that they have to deal with every day.

Not supportive of it. Qualified Immunity exists for very good reasons and must continue to exist.

I have a feeling if a lot of the Cop Haters had their way and further hamstring the Police so criminals can run even wilder over everyone, there will come a time in the not so distant future when everyone will be wishing they hadn't done that.
Once the entire nation coast to coast looks like Downtown Detroit. Man...wont that be nice? :rolleyes:

The Misconduct Registry, body cams, and stuff like that are fine by me.

Remember folks: the Police are STILL the good guys, no matter what your shrieking 24/7/365 Hysterical Media Stream is pumping out all day every day. They are deliberately misleading you to not "report" the news, but they create the news now. Just like Mike Brown. Dont be a fool, dont be conned into that. Its all a lie.👍
And, FFS, do NOT name the law after some low life career violent criminal that attacked innocent people in their homes. Sheeeezusss F Christ -smh-
Click to expand...
We get it. Cops = Good. Doctors = Good. Psychiatrist = Good. Homeless person = bad. Except when you have murder cops and all the rookies are too scared to chastise or control the belligerent veterans. 🤷‍♂️
 
TurtleDude said:
ucr.fbi.gov

Officers Feloniously Killed

ucr.fbi.gov


  • 26 of the alleged offenders were White, 16 were Black/African American, 1 was American Indian/Alaska Native, and 1 was Asian (See Table 42.)
16 out of 44 is sure higher than 13%
Click to expand...
That cant be right because near the borders mexican gangsters shoot at cops more than anyone else. In most youtube videos of cops in shootouts its vs old white war veterans or mexican gangsters.
 
Minnapolis tore down George Floyd memorial and Repairirations to Tulsa descendants special repairations stimulus to heach person 2 checks atleast, free housing. Mclain Taylor Breaonna, George Flodyd minnapolis put back the Memorial! BLM is not a bad organizations lies on by peoples on facebook they are called racists.
 
Qualified immunity divides
lawmakers in police reform talks.
What is that legal defense?

USA TODAY

www.usatoday.com www.usatoday.com

1624327893095.png​
Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., are leading negotiations on police reform legislation on Capitol Hill.

What is qualified immunity?
Qualified immunity is a legal provision that protects government officials from being held personally responsible for potential on-the-job misconduct or unconstitutional actions. It does not apply in criminal cases.

The Supreme Court introduced the doctrine in 1967 for law enforcement officers who were acting in "good faith."

1624327928804.png​
Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, founders of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream, are among those who have called for an overhaul in policing in the United States.

Its current form traces back to the court's 1982 ruling in Harlow v. Fitzgerald when the court determined that "objective terms" were necessary to find whether misconduct warrants individual punishment.

Specifically, the court determined that a person could successfully sue a government official only if that person violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

1624327960217.png​
A demonstrator rallies for police reform in September 2020 in Rochester, New York, after the death of Daniel Prude at the hands of police.

U.S. Supreme Court has ruled recently on qualified immunity
The Supreme Court has also indicated it may revisit the scope of qualified immunity soon.

In November, the court overturned a ruling that protected Texas corrections officers from a prisoner's lawsuit that alleged he'd been kept in "shockingly unsanitary" conditions.

"Confronted with the particularly egregious facts of this case, any reasonable officer should have realized that Taylor’s conditions of confinement offended the Constitution," the court wrote.

In February, the court similarly ruled that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals should reconsider a case where it upheld qualified immunity.

Some legal analysts argue that the rulings from the court may foreshadow a complete re-thinking of qualified immunity, though others point out the cases in question may merit extreme circumstances.
 
I wish police offices stopped creating situations where a career criminal dirt-ball is turned into a national hero.
 
HangLow said:
Qualified immunity divides
lawmakers in police reform talks.
What is that legal defense?

USA TODAY

www.usatoday.com www.usatoday.com

Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., are leading negotiations on police reform legislation on Capitol Hill.

What is qualified immunity?
Qualified immunity is a legal provision that protects government officials from being held personally responsible for potential on-the-job misconduct or unconstitutional actions. It does not apply in criminal cases.

The Supreme Court introduced the doctrine in 1967 for law enforcement officers who were acting in "good faith."

Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, founders of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream, are among those who have called for an overhaul in policing in the United States.

Its current form traces back to the court's 1982 ruling in Harlow v. Fitzgerald when the court determined that "objective terms" were necessary to find whether misconduct warrants individual punishment.

Specifically, the court determined that a person could successfully sue a government official only if that person violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."

A demonstrator rallies for police reform in September 2020 in Rochester, New York, after the death of Daniel Prude at the hands of police.

U.S. Supreme Court has ruled recently on qualified immunity
The Supreme Court has also indicated it may revisit the scope of qualified immunity soon.

In November, the court overturned a ruling that protected Texas corrections officers from a prisoner's lawsuit that alleged he'd been kept in "shockingly unsanitary" conditions.

"Confronted with the particularly egregious facts of this case, any reasonable officer should have realized that Taylor’s conditions of confinement offended the Constitution," the court wrote.

In February, the court similarly ruled that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals should reconsider a case where it upheld qualified immunity.

Some legal analysts argue that the rulings from the court may foreshadow a complete re-thinking of qualified immunity, though others point out the cases in question may merit extreme circumstances.
Click to expand...
I agree with even CATO. Qualified immunity is an injustice.
 
New York's voter initiative a few years ago had a rather inventive solution to this: if someone is employed by the state government and they commit a felony in line with their employment, then they lose their pension. I would like to see some element of this added as part of a block grant or something for financial disincentives on top of providing legal disincentives for police to harm the people they are supposed to protect.

I'm also wondering if mandatory minimum sentencing should be used for those who are public employees, betray the public trust, and loss of life to provide a further legal disincentive.

However, the problem is that too many bad officers who seem too have obviously committed some crime (usually homicide unfortunately) against the public trust are too often acquitted. Part of this problem is because lawyers try to go for the home run, when really they have all the evidence they need for a lesser charge, like felony negligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom