A SCOTUS Opening

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-23-2020, 12:08 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, I did specify the personal liability in the beginning of my post. Perhaps I should have added "from the individual responsible rather than the institution" to the end instead of assuming it was understood based on the opening. I understand how the policy works, and I understand what it would mean to end the practice. I hold a position for my city in which the city can side with me if my decisions are challenged, which results in the City Attorney's office representing me, or they can actually take me (and the four others on the board) to court and we would be faced with hiring attorneys individually to defend ourselves. While my role is not one of life and death, or even violence, I do understand how the decisions you make can result in something like that.

I guess my issue is that I would like to see some other potential policy solutions to potentially replace qualified immunity. Things that could prevent situations such as those that you detail from reaching full litigation, but still allows for holding officers personally responsible in situations where they were in the wrong. I'm not in favor of the responsibility resting entirely on the department.

I do want to also point out that much of what I have read on the topic doesn't come from left-wing sources; it actually comes from libertarian writing. This is less about left v. right than you perceive.

I'm not opposed to a change in the policy that allows a lawsuit to proceed in the case of gross and willful negligence.  The problem with that is the current climate has a very skewed idea of what constitutes this.  I wholly understand the distaste for an officer who routinely costs the municipality large sums of money because of their actions.  At the same time I absolutely have zero faith that a LEO is going to get a fair shake in this regard in the current climate.  So while I'm not opposed to some of what you propose in theory I don't think it could be fairly implemented right now, or in the near future.  I can tell you this, with no exaggeration on my part, that such changes would cause an enormous spike in the crime rate.  Criminals already feel emboldened by the current zeitgeist, they say it to us all the time.  This type of change would only exacerbate this, to a startling degree.