NYC ends qualified immunity for NYPD officers

[FortuneTeller]

Yes, the Police did a great job of keeping the masses from taking over part of the city in Seattle.

Oh, just a minute, on second thought, they failed miserably:

And just imagine, IF they had been defunded before all of this, they would of taken over the whole city.

 

[UsualName]

As a home owner and a business owner I am paying the city taxes for services. This includes garbage collection, fire department service, and police protection. If the city fails to uphold its responsibility to provide the police and fire protection services that I am paying for -- then I should certainly have the right to sue for damages.

If I knew the city was not going to live up to their agreement to provide these services then I would have spent my tax money on private measures to provide my home and business with with security and fire protection. Eminent Domain cuts both ways -- to have any authority the city must provide the services they promised.

There’s no basis in you being a payer or not. It wouldn’t make a difference.

As to suit, you don’t have one in your scenario.

 

[gwb-trading]

There’s no basis in you being a payer or not. It wouldn’t make a difference.

As to suit, you don’t have one in your scenario.

You better go read all the references I provided on this subject.

 

[UsualName]

You better go read all the references I provided on this subject.

Socthe equal protection clause would prohibit a public service exclusions based on tax payer status. Imagine a police service refusing to secure a church in a riot because the church is not a tax payer. Not going to happen.

In these matters, if a state or municipality has a positive law on the matter making the locality or state responsible for damage, then that’s their choice. Otherwise you’re out of luck.

 

[gwb-trading]

Socthe equal protection clause would prohibit a public service exclusions based on tax payer status. Imagine a police service refusing to secure a church in a riot because the church is not a tax payer. Not going to happen.

In these matters, if a state or municipality has a positive law on the matter making the locality or state responsible for damage, then that’s their choice. Otherwise you’re out of luck.

Actually in many states you are not out of luck --- there are still laws on the books saying cities are financially responsible for uncontained violent civil unrest. I would urge you to go read the links I provided on the subject.

 

[UsualName]

Actually in many states you are not out of luck --- there are still laws on the books saying cities are financially responsible for uncontained violent civil unrest. I would urge you to go read the links I provided on the subject.

I acknowledge that but that stipulation is not inherent to any public service.

 

[gwb-trading]

I acknowledge that but that stipulation is not inherent to any public service.

Can you explain the City of Baltimore being sued by business owners for financial damages from recent riots that the police failed to intervene in -- based on the Maryland riot act statute?

It is long overdue to hold all cities financially responsible for violent riots where they fail to take action to protect lives and property. Enough of cities ordering police to shirk their duties and responsibilities.

 

[UsualName]

Can you explain the City of Baltimore being sued by business owners for financial damages from recent riots that the police failed to intervene in -- based on the Maryland riot act statute?

It is long overdue to hold all cities financially responsible for violent riots where they fail to take action to protect lives and property. Enough of cities ordering police to shirk their duties and responsibilities.

You mean this suit that was dismissed?

https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local...filed-by-businesses-after-2015-baltimore-riot

 

[Cuddles]

It is long overdue to hold all cities financially responsible for violent riots where they fail to take action to protect lives and property. Enough of cities ordering police to shirk their duties and responsibilities.

What if the cops decided to sit it out or drag their feet due to politics as was the case in many municipalities and as championed by many conservatives? Should the city still be held liable due to shitty employees? What recourse should be taken for such sabotage

 

[gwb-trading]

What if the cops decided to sit it out or drag their feet due to politics as was the case in many municipalities and as championed by many conservatives? Should the city still be held liable due to shitty employees? What recourse should be taken for such sabotage

When the city orders the officers to not do their jobs in protecting property and people when serving the community -- then the city should be held financially responsible for damages to property and people.

If a city orders a officer to do their job and they refuse to protect property and people when serving the community then the officer should be terminated. Of course, in some cities police unions are an obstacle in holding officers accountable for properly doing their jobs.