10-23-2020, 01:22 PM
(10-23-2020, 12:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: There's a substantial difference.
I never claimed there wasn't.
Quote:First off, a doctor's patients are not inherently hostile to them.
Usually, not. I've never had to put anyone in physical or chemical restraints. I've only be subjected to yelling and threats to the point other patients asked if they should leave because they feared for their safety.
Quote:Secondly, every doctor has mandatory malpractice insurance that covers this.
The hospital has malpractice insurance for me that protects the hospital. It does not protect me personally. If I want to protect my "house, life savings, and college fund" I need to purchase additional malpractice insurance individually on my own.
Quote:Now, I can see the wheels turning already, why not make officer's get similar insurance? The answer is because officers will be sued personally at a far greater rate than a medical doctor.
Maybe. Maybe not. I was under the impression the lawyers sue whomever they can sue including both the individual and the institution. Since doctors in general earn more than police officers I don't see a financial incentive to sue police officers individually, but not doctors. But, as you know, that's just speculation on both our parts.
Quote:Allow me to clue you into something, most of the people law enforcement deals with are criminals (I'm off course talking outside of things like traffic stops and the like). Criminals will lie, about anything, at the drop of a hat. They will lie under oath, they will lie to any investigator, in fact lying is so engrained in them they will continue to lie when actually telling the truth is in their best interests. I've told many of them the following before I start speaking to them; we're going to talk and you're going to lie to me. I'm going to point out that you're lying and then you're going to lie in a different way. This process repeats itself for two hours plus (depending on the severity of what's being discussed) until we finally start getting to some truth. When I'm asked why I don't believe someone I tell them I'd check out a window if they told me the sky was blue.
There is an idiom among medical providers which goes something like this, "Patients lie." Don't take my word for it. Ask around. I'm sure they don't lie as prodigiously as criminals.
Quote:Also, in a medical malpractice suit there isn't much "he said, she said". There are definite facts to point to, decisions made and when they were made, that separate medical professionals can then judge. Almost every lawsuit against an LEO is going to be a "he said, she said". Even with another officer backing up the story you'll get the "blue wall of silence" assumption that they are lying to protect their fellow officer and remember that a civil suit does not require a unanimous jury.
I chuckle at the idea there is no "he said, she said" at a malpractice suit. Lawyers are gonna do their lawyer thing.
Quote:In short, if you haven't done this job or interacted with criminals as part of your job (e.g probation, parole, correctional officer) you really don't understand just how dangerous this idea of ending qualified immunity really is. It will destroy law enforcement and create a criminal's paradise.
I can only imagine your reaction if I had actually suggested ending qualified immunity rather than pointing out just one other profession that could lose their "house, life savings, and college fund" due to an on the job decision or action. But, I'm kinda sick of seeing cops shoot suspects in the back running away from a traffic stop, or punching a reporter in the face with a riot shield for no reason, or body slamming the wrong suspect into the ground breaking their arm over a case of mistaken identity because the officer didn't take 30 seconds to ask what was going on, or destroy a half a million dollar house to arrest an armed shoplifter and then offer $5000 in damages. So I'd like to see police officers show a little more responsibility.
