No, no...NO! I want to believe he's sitting around miserable every day with a large debt hanging over his head. If I want to believe it that makes it true.Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
Doesn't it?
Printable View
No, no...NO! I want to believe he's sitting around miserable every day with a large debt hanging over his head. If I want to believe it that makes it true.Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
Doesn't it?
Only if you're tearing down statutes. The US system is built for degenerates. We never recovered any part of a judgment, either, after successfully defending a suit btw. Only those losses were actually out of pocket. At least it wasn't 450,000 worth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
If you all didn't catch it, Colorado ended qualified immunity. So the judges and the prosecutors have absolute immunity against any allegation, no matter how atrocious, and officers can get sued by noncollectable transients every time they are arrested until officers realize they have "transient immunity".
If we're going to end Q.I., we may as well end all immunities - sovereign, judicial, prosecutorial, and end bankruptcy too. Fair's fair, after all.
Best thing that could happen (unfortunately for us) is for all the cops - state, county and city, to quit on June 30th (it goes into effect July 1st) and make Colorado a demo for the rest of the country.
O2
Why? It's not a bad bill for those to whom it applies (and it is bad for not applying to all). This article goes over some of the particulars:Quote:
Originally Posted by O2HeN2
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib.../#452b735378ae
QI is a clear contradiction to the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and Section 1983 (if one isn't a mealymouthed lawyer or judge with an agenda), and, like the Constitutionality of the Income Tax, was fabricated by the invalid and illicit machinations of an unchecked SCOTUS (which despite the retarded fantasies of Neo-Cons and Liberals everywhere, when it goes their way, is not an infallible mechanism of Constitutional interpretation, as evidenced by the last 100+ years of bullshit driveling forth from their collective pens).
So now cops get a % of individual responsibility when they violate the state constitution. They're indemnified, so frivolous lawsuits aren't going to hurt them financially. Etc.
I'm sure we'll hear the following:
"Why are we all being lumped together because of a few?"
"Why would we want to interact with them if it could result in unfavorable legal consequences?"
"The system is out to get us!"
etc.
Funny, I've heard all those before, but they were met with derision and the trope of "If you're not doing anything wrong, what do you have to be afraid of?" or "consequences have actions", etc.
So when Jaquan Jamarius Jathon (made up name; hat tip to Key and Peele's East/West Bowl skit) does something wrong, and people point to any number of factors as to why, so-called Conservatives hoist up "individual responsibility!!!!!!" flag. Well, isn't it convenient when such a standard elicits a cry for special standards contra an equal playing field.
But I don't think it's about race, despite the narrative having been shifted. I think its about power. And tripping on the big dick that tends to give some.
Imagine how the deputy below would have gotten away with this, if it wasn't recorded on a body cam:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrKuC74jdNc
Is that a "bad apple"? Nope, it's 4 bad apples, because none of them stopped it. How many bad apples are there at departments across the nation? There are around 18,000 police departments nationwide. Not sure if that includes Sheriffs Office. Let's say that there's 2 bad apples per department, which seems fair. That's 36,000 bad apples. There are about 800,000 police in America (at the high end of estimation); not sure if that includes sheriffs. So that's 4.5% of the police force nationwide are bad apples. And it might actually be higher on average, with some departments having none and some having 4,6 10, etc. That's a problem.
If every combat platoon of 30 individuals had 4.5% bad apples unchecked by good NCOs and the wrathful phallus of the UCMJ, they'd have 1.35 walking international incidents on their hands and the SMA's boot up the entire US Army's ass in short order.
Think about that.
Quoting your article:
Except in federal courts, any officer of the State of Colorado is going to be subject to 11th amendment sovereign immunity which is all but impenetrable. So QI is completely terminated for officers in all state courts - where 9/10 suits would've been brought anyway - and now they also extend to "failure to act". I happen to know quite a bit about ?1983 claims. Extending them to "failure to act" literally may make the burdens so broad that just about anyone may be able to successfully sue in any circumstance. Officer shows up after seven minutes for a choking kid and tries to help? Winning lawsuit. Officer writes a warning to your 17yo kid who has an accident an hour later? Winning lawsuit.Quote:
To be clear, the new Colorado law doesn’t end the doctrine of qualified immunity; Section 1983 claims filed by Coloradans in federal court would still be subject to qualified immunity.
Correct, it's not a wholesale ending of QI.
I agree with 4th Judicial DA candidate Michael Allen that this bill is unfair in that it creates a double standard between local and state.