Originally posted by KlawThe same tax payers that are paying the settlements are the ones who paid/funded their training and arming. They/we did this in exchange for the benefit of their protection. We cant fund them and reap the benefits then disavow responsibility when something goes wrong.
Using tax money collected from people to pay for police settlements is making people who are not liable pay for it.
Originally posted by truejedi
True, but it is managed by the police. It's losses are police losses. It isn't guaranteed by the taxpayer.
Oh okay, I see what you mean. Ideally yeah. When their behaviour starts hurting the bottom line of those around them, people are going to be more interested in making sure their colleagues don't act like idiots. That in turn will lead to an uptick in general behaviour being better.
Re: Re: Taxpayers should not have to pay for police brutality
Originally posted by Darth Thor
So... Defund the Police ?
since nobody seemed to notice, this bit of snark ended the thread. every single act of police brutally ever committed in the u.s. was paid for thanks to your tax dollars/police salaries. next time do threads better, op 👇
Originally posted by Raptor22
The same tax payers that are paying the settlements are the ones who paid/funded their training and arming. They/we did this in exchange for the benefit of their protection. We cant fund them and reap the benefits then disavow responsibility when something goes wrong.
That's an interesting take that I hadn't thought about.
Originally posted by cdtm
Police officers are also human beings. It isn't really reasonable to expect anyone to risk their life when the probability of random acts or violence is high because of the area they patrol.Really, its the same sort of double standard we use for our politicians vs family, where we expect our significant other to prioritize the husband/wife/kid over strangers in a community, yet expect leaders to be place the public needs against personal needs.
By the same token, we essentially want peace officers who think nothing of sacrificing their own lives for a public service.
Yes, it is. It is literally their ****ing job. Do not want a dangerous job? Go do something else.
Originally posted by -Pr-
Oh okay, I see what you mean. Ideally yeah. When their behaviour starts hurting the bottom line of those around them, people are going to be more interested in making sure their colleagues don't act like idiots. That in turn will lead to an uptick in general behaviour being better.
The "good apples" are doing nothing to stop the "bad apples" now, and they already have plenty of incentive to do so. The only way this stops is if police have to carry their own insurance, and are individually responsible. This notion of collective responsibility does not work.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Yes, it is. It is literally their ****ing job. Do not want a dangerous job? Go do something else.
There is a line between danger and self sacrifice.
I expect no one to care any less for their life then I care for my own. No matter their profession.
Asking a police officer to be absolutely 100% certain someone is holding a gun, is asking them to be shot. Because in the time it takes to verify whether its a phone or a gun, you will be shot.
Originally posted by cdtm
There is a line between danger and self sacrifice.I expect no one to care any less for their life then I care for my own. No matter their profession.
Asking a police officer to be absolutely 100% certain someone is holding a gun, is asking them to be shot. Because in the time it takes to verify whether its a phone or a gun, you will be shot.
Not if it's a phone.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The "good apples" are doing nothing to stop the "bad apples" now, and they already have plenty of incentive to do so. The only way this stops is if police have to carry their own insurance, and are individually responsible. This notion of collective responsibility does not work.
As much as I disagree with parts of your post, the insurance thing would be a good idea, sure.
Originally posted by cdtm
There is a line between danger and self sacrifice.I expect no one to care any less for their life then I care for my own. No matter their profession.
Asking a police officer to be absolutely 100% certain someone is holding a gun, is asking them to be shot. Because in the time it takes to verify whether its a phone or a gun, you will be shot.
That is an argument for stricter gun laws, not for police to continue to shoot people with impugnity.