No. From the entire police dept’s pension fund. Them bad apples would soon get separated out by those more concerned about their own pension than closing ranks.
San Bernardino will pay $390k to settle suit against cop who arrested 7th graders "to prove a point"
21 Likes
Even better.
13 Likes
Crime doesn’t pay! Point proved Peoples!
If you punish the entire police department for the failings of one officer, how is it any different from what this officer did to the girls?
- Who do you think protects these jerkoffs?
- There are so many things different, the two things are completely dissimilar. It starts with power, and who has it.
16 Likes
It’s funny, when things are good it’s all “the brotherhood of law enforcement” and “the thin blue line” and “support your local police union”. In a case like this when a cop abuses his authority, unity goes out the window and it’s “don’t punish all of us for a few bad apples”.
14 Likes
I don’t believe in punishing people based on suppositions. Prove their guilt and punish them according to the law. If you don’t have anything to prove in court then there is no reason to punish them.
1 Like
So the cop’s point was, “If you think Middle School is bad, wait until the system bullies you!”
3 Likes
Bullshit. Even when there is video evidence of police shooting unarmed, sometimes cuffed people, they still often get off without even a slap on the wrist. There have been a few exceptions recently, but its still not the rule.
16 Likes
you might not agree with the suggestion to charge the bill to the departments pension fund, but how is that suggestion even remotely close to what that officer did to those girls?
i find that sort of conflation very counterproductive to discussion.
the idea that a department is accountable for the actions of its officers merits some discussion before writing off wholesale, performance based pensions might not be the answer, but some sort of reform to policing in general is required and i think we should be open to discussing what that means.
i would advocate for better training, especially in de-escalation techniques and civil rights, and shifting back towards a public servant attitude rather than an assault squad fear based mentality. they should be there to help people first and foremost reducing harm and damage however possible, rather than viewing everyone as a potential hostile suspicious suspect waiting to be caught for something. the usa needs some serious changes to de-escalate the situation between the police and the public and change the script for for policing even means.
11 Likes
Because the officer chose to punish all of the girls for the perceived actions of some of them. How is that so hard to understand?
Such a thing exists. Police departments often secure civil liability insurance for large protests, so that when they inevitably violate the constitutional rights of protesters, they are insulated from the subsequent lawsuits.
The insurance blatantly incentivizes police departments to violate rights as a matter of policy. This might seem contradictory, but it’s not when you consider the real purpose of the police.
3 Likes
Some 650 people, Portland officers and their friends and families, rallied downtown Tuesday to protest recent command decisions. They carried signs and wore freshly printed blue T-shirts bearing the motto, “I Am Chris Humphreys.”
Humphreys is the 10-year veteran at the heart of two recent high-profile incidents of police force. Three years ago, he chased and then fell on James Chasse, the schizophrenic man kicked and Tasered by police after they spotted him urinating on a Pearl District sidewalk. Chasse died in police custody from blunt force trauma to the chest.
8 Likes
one was illegal and intended to intimidate a group of children, and pressure them to get the desired outcome, it was not the intended punishment.
the other would be legal if court ordered and punitive reparation because costs incurred through inappropriate actions have to come from somewhere, and police are supposed to be policing each other, children are not.
sure they are similar in that one persons actions has consequences that affect more than that one person, whom they affect is a matter of responsibility, blame, reparation, and bearing the cost. is it the general public? is it the department? it has to be someone.
16 Likes
Don’t worry we’ll get’em next time!
Boy howdy, you dense aintcha? New here I guess.
3 Likes
This is a problem with any kind of insurance. It’s called moral hazard. Does homeowner’s insurance incent arson? Actually yes, but rarely.
2 Likes
silly seventh graders haven’t gotten to zinn yet and think the 5th amendment is still a thing. millenials amirite?
1 Like
just think, todays teenagers will never see a world where new south park episodes are good. another precious resource squandered by gen x 
1 Like
