Other State Apple Valley MN, basically red flag law-ish at its worst.

[Member 34319]

It never mentions red flag laws, but going off what the cops stated as a reason to go looking seemed like a red flag gun law thing.

I love the conversation the cops have among themselves though!

Read More

 

[Koda]

thats a good reminder video but the video (6:27) is against qualified immunity, whats the consensus on that?

 

[Member 34319]

thats a good reminder video but the video (6:27) is against qualified immunity, whats the consensus on that?

Generally, I think it's a movement towards removing or changing the legal precedent around what cops can and can not do with or without legal consequences.

In my opinion…

Some things I've seen on his and similar channels is pretty nuts.

It's because of these sort of YouTube channels that I own multiple cameras on multiple things now. I follow the law, and I am much more knowledgeable about my rights due to watching these encounters. I pray that I never have an encounter like some of these videos show, but dear god it scares me that I could easily be the person in some of the videos.

 

[Koda]

Iirc, it protects officers from being sued for performing their duity s but there are the few bad cops like your video that should have repercussions....

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

whats the consensus on that?

End it!

Frequently Asked Questions About Ending Qualified Immunity - Institute for Justice

“Qualified immunity” is a special legal protection for all local, state, or federal government workers who can only be held accountable for violating someone’s rights if a court has previously ruled that it was “clearly established” those precise actions were unconstitutional.

ij.org

ETA:

It doesn't only "protect" LEO's

Under qualified immunity, government workers can only be held accountable for violating someone's rights if a court has previously ruled that it was "clearly established" those precise actions were unconstitutional. If no such decision exists-or it exists, but just in another jurisdiction-the official is immune, even if the official intentionally, maliciously, or unreasonably violated the law or Constitution.

 

[nehalemguy]

.......so I can watch it later.

-E-

 

[Koda]

End it!

So if a cop gets sent to the wrong house to arrest someone, or if a cop has reasonable suspicion of a crime... But is wrong. What would protect him from liability while performing his duties?

 

[Member 34319]

So if a cop gets sent to the wrong house to arrest someone, or if a cop has reasonable suspicion of a crime... But is wrong. What would protect him from liability while performing his duties?

That there is the problem.

Who needs the protection? The officer that willingly followed orders, be it possibly unknown to them they are correct, or the family about to get the no knock forced entry at the incorrect home?

ETA…

Better question. Who has more rights violated. The officer willingly working as a public servant performing a no knock forced entry, be it this person may not know they are at the wrong house, or the poor family about to have a horrible evening laying in bed at the wrong house?

 

[nwslopoke]

They were hell bent on arresting him. I don't know if he did it or not, but they didn't seem interested in actually asking him related questions, either. Just come outside.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

So if a cop gets sent to the wrong house to arrest someone, or if a cop has reasonable suspicion of a crime... But is wrong. What would protect him from liability while performing his duties?

I see your point, but it's not like any of the cops would meet in a garage later to change the search warrant or anything to try and cover up their mistakes, right?


Or would they . . . ?

The link I provided addresses that issue

SHOULDN'T POLICE BE ENTITLED TO MAKE REASONABLE MISTAKES IN DIFFICULT SITUATIONS?

Yes, but the Constitution already addresses that concern without the need for qualified immunity. Most constitutional claims against police are brought under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits only unreasonable searches, seizures, and force. Check out this statement from the Supreme Court: "The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments-in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving-about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation." So, an officer's reasonableness-which is considered based on the circumstances he faces in any given situation-already provides leeway in police interactions. Since the Constitution already prescribes an appropriate standard, the additional obstacle that qualified immunity presents only frustrates the Constitution's proper operation.

 

[Koda]

So, an officer's reasonableness-which is considered based on the circumstances he faces in any given situation-already provides leeway in police interactions.

The problem with reasonableness is its subjective. As evident by the lack of police in liberal cities....

Would you trust your being sent to the right house? Would you trust the 911 caller reporting "man with a gun" to be honest? Who here would want to be an officer without the protection of qualified immunity? Would you?

 

[Xaevian]

The problem with reasonableness is its subjective. As evident by the lack of police in liberal cities....

Would you trust your being sent to the right house? Would you trust the 911 caller reporting "man with a gun" to be honest? Who here would want to be an officer without the protection of qualified immunity? Would you?

Doctors don't have qualified immunity and kill lots of people, yet we still have doctors. For example.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

The problem with reasonableness is its subjective. As evident by the lack of police in liberal cities....

Would you trust your being sent to the right house? Would you trust the 911 caller reporting "man with a gun" to be honest? Who here would want to be an officer without the protection of qualified immunity? Would you?

If the officer is given information they have no reason to not believe to be true they are acting reasonably, but that isn't what the QI argument is about. I could spend all day pulling up videos of "Real Life Police: Caught On Camera!!" videos far worse than the one in the OP, but instead I would point out that no one in the .gov involved in getting 114 on the books and passed can be prosecuted even if they are on tape saying they know the law is unconstitutional because of QI.

And because you asked, I would not want any officers on the force that are there because of QI

 

[Koda]

Doctors don't have qualified immunity and kill lots of people, yet we still have doctors. For example.

And they face lawsuits for it.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

And they face lawsuits for it.

I too wish for a responsibility free life

 

[Koda]

I too wish for a responsibility free life

what about all the officers in prison right now?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

what about all the officers in prison right now?

Search me, maybe send them a card? But also, what about the officers in the OP that were not only ready to arrest the guy "just because" but also very comfortable talking about it almost like they had done it before and didn't have to worry if their partner would be cool with it.
Not to get into a Richard swing contest over this, but I have no doubt I can find more cases of officers that should be in jail that aren't because of QI, and far more people that are in jail that shouldn't be because a cop did something like those two were planning than cops in jail because they made an truly honest mistake.

 

[Koda]

Search me, maybe send them a card? But also, what about the officers in the OP that were not only ready to arrest the guy "just because" but also very comfortable talking about it almost like they had done it before and didn't have to worry if their partner would be cool with it.
Not to get into a Richard swing contest over this, but I have no doubt I can find more cases of officers that should be in jail that aren't because of QI, and far more people that are in jail that shouldn't be because a cop did something like those two were planning than cops in jail because they made an truly honest mistake.

There are about 800000 officers in the US, roughly. Im not certain if there are any statistics on any that got away due to QI.
Note: Im not supporting QI Im asking questions to learn more so I can form an opinion. Im undecided on the issue actually but I trust and respect your opinions here. I dunno about this Richard guy though...

 

[Xaevian]

And they face lawsuits for it.

In this case, your question was why would anyone be a cop without qualified immunity. My response is there are many, many professions that don't have qualified immunity, have to deal with the consequences of bad decisions even to the point of someone dying over it, but people still will do the job.

Qualified immunity is too much. Way too much.

 

[Member 34319]

There are about 800000 officers in the US, roughly. Im not certain if there are any statistics on any that got away due to QI.
Note: Im not supporting QI Im asking questions to learn more so I can form an opinion. Im undecided on the issue actually but I trust and respect your opinions here. I dunno about this Richard guy though...

I was in a similar boat. I blindly followed the path set out for gun owners, that we were supposed to be pro police. Like it's part of some package deal. Own guns, "Comgrats, here is your thin blue line T-shirt."

I'm not saying this is you, but I too didn't know much.

I'm at the point where I gravely respect police officers for the F'd up bubblegum they have to deal with. The absolutely horrible work conditions and hours. The most depressing part is the absolute lack of training and education. Or corrupt training and education.

In this video, someone somewhere up the ladder knows they are sending these two to perform a non warrant stop. While perfectly legal to do so, the CONSTITUTION protects you from these. THEY ALREADY KNOW THIS. Even the two ladies at the door know. They BLATANTLY discuss the fact they have NOTHING on the guy.

It's a hard topic. There are lots of details that muddy the water. At the end I'm not against removing QI from officers. I'm also not against changing our policing systems. Better training and education.

Let's put it this way. To practice medicine, you need years of education. Even more time experiencing medicine to get good at it.

To be a lawyer, you need years of education, and many years of experience practicing to be considered good.

To ENFORCE laws, aka be a police officer, there is no education requirement. Training is little to none depending on the state and or city. Experience is often not there as most don't make it that long or those in it long enough leave.

We place more value on two of the three and it is becoming very obvious we made a mistake.

If we didn't treat Police Officers jobs like that of a Garbage Man's. Maybe we wouldn't be in this boat. Society needs enforcement or we get Portland. However society needs better enforcement at the same time.