Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yep, many larger municipalities have insurance that pays the majority of lawsuit awards. It's not like they are taking it out of the police dept. budget.
"Overcome the wall of blue"??? Health care costs are already taking care of that.
The fact that you think this is "flourishing" is disturbing.
1) Insurance policies have caps, as I'm sure you are aware.
2) Insurance policies have contractual terms that if violated allow them to disclaim coverage. I am not sure if there are exceptions for municipalities, but for most employer/business insurance, things like employee negligence are typically covered, but gross negligence, intentional acts and criminal behavior are typically excluded from or severely limited in coverage.
3) Whether covered by insurance or not, the taxpayer still foots the bill. Who do you think the buck is passed to when an insurance company has an extra $80,000,000 in claims to pay out that they otherwise would not have? You, me and all of the other policyholders out there. A reduction in these types of claims is good for everyone.
I do feel police misconduct is flourishing, in the sense that inadequately addressed incidents embolden the bad apples and are therefore are allowed to persist in a much greater number than is necessary. For clarification, I include more than fatalities and severe injuries in this qualification.
I am a person of color who has never had so much as a speeding ticket. However, I have been present during several police interactions with other minorities and often witnessed extremely rude, unprofessional and/or abusive behavior from the police when merely initiating contact. One incident seared into my memory (that I would not believe had I not seen it with my own eyes): Three policemen and their canine officer had a boy that couldn't have been older than 14 (and that's only if he was small for his age) cornered against the wall of the library. One officer was screaming at the boy that he was "lying" and "full of *hit" while the dog (on a leash) was barking wildly and lunging aggressively toward him. Another officer grabbed a backpack from the boy's hand and dumped its contents out on the sidewalk, spreading them around with his foot and looking at the stuff. The third stood there in silence. The boy was wide-eyed, so terrified he had urinated himself, and wasn't saying a word. People on the street were looking around at each other in confusion and horror; many seemed to want to do something to stop this obviously outrageous "questioning" but no one seemed to know what to do. One passerby told the officer going through the backpack contents that the boy was probably too scared to say anything because being cornered by three big adults with guns and a snarling German Shepherd would freeze most grown men in fear, nevermind a child; he was told to shut up and keep on moving. When another person tried to record the encounter, that same officer grabbed her phone. Eventually a large enough crowd formed that the officers became self-conscious, put the kid in cuffs and took him away in a squad car (leaving his personal belongings there on the sidewalk). I found out later that the kid fit the description of a person who had stolen a cell phone from someone on the street (I have no idea if he actually did or what happened to him).
I don't know if the kid sued or not, but he clearly had a case for intentional infliction of emotional distress among other things. There's a a suit that probably wouldn't happen under my proposed system: one of those three officers would have the presence of mind to know his own money was on the line and would tell the other two to knock it off.
1) Any taxpayer who does not want his or her hard-earned money put toward police brutality/wrongful death settlements (currently $100,000,000 per year in New York City alone and counting);
2) Any one of the great majority of law enforcement officers who actually treats citizens (of all colors) with respect, cares about the people in their community, performs his or her duties without causing undue harm to those in their charge, does not otherwise power trip or abuse their authority and is tired of having their personal character and profession defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number of psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to sneak into the system, don the uniform and make life more difficult for their fellow officers; and
3) Any one of the great majority of persons of color who positively contribute to society, their communities and families, do not lead abject lives of crime and violence, who simply want to be the individuals that they are, building and leading happy, fulfilled lives like everyone else, and is tired of having their personal character and very personhood defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to make life more difficult for the rest of us.
My proposal is this: when a wrongful death/brutality action involving an officer is lost or settled, rather than the entire payment coming from the municipality's budget, half of the proceeds owed to the aggrieved party should come from the overall fund used to pay accruing and matured pensions of those within the law enforcement community (beat cops on up to top brass). If at any point pension funds dip to a predetermined floor amount, everyone takes a hit to their proportionate share of the overall fund to make up for it (similar to an assessment in a condominium community). In my opinion, it is nearly impossible for a bad apple to go completely unnoticed by the peers and supervisors with whom they spend so much time. However, the existing system does not properly incentivize those in the best position to prevent the bad apple from wreaking havoc on the public from doing so. I would be willing to bet a pretty penny that by imposing a consequence felt by all, it would force police to truly police themselves.
No longer would those in charge fail to properly discipline or discharge officers showing red flags of progressively egregious behavior. No longer would so many individual bad apples feel carte blanche to take out his or her frustrations in life on whatever citizen happened to be unlucky enough to cross their path that day. No longer would fellow officers look the other way, stand by, cover for or otherwise tolerate one of their own disrespecting or brutalizing a civilian.
Instead, bad apples are dismissed before they have the opportunity cause substantial damage (one can be retrained to remember to use the proper TPS reports and such, maybe even how to employ more tact when engaging with the public, but someone who has reached adulthood without knowing how to keep themselves from reacting to provocative behavior/speech or reign in his own violent impulses should not carry a deadly weapon or be in a position of authority). Instead, an officer will remind himself to remain calm, professional and not take the bait when some street punk runs his mouth. Instead, an officer will intervene and deescalate a heated verbal exchange between his partner and a civilian before it turns physical.
If you feel what I have just proposed seems radical, consider that the "sink or swim together" method of accountability is not a remotely novel idea, and in fact already exists within many facets of our society. For example, an employee perpetrating a fraud upon the public can open his personal coffers as well as those of his company to massive financial liability, even if no one else was aware of it. An attorney who discovers that his partner has stolen escrow money but turns a blind eye is legally just as culpable as the thieving partner. Though he did not steal a dime, he and the firm may be forced to pay back victims anyway. Also, a lookout during a robbery who never sets foot in the store or possesses a weapon can be charged with murder (and sued civilly for wrongful death) if his accomplices shoot and kill the store clerk, even if the lookout was told beforehand there would be no weapons or violence involved. If we expect other professionals and even criminals to be held responsible for those they are in bed with, why not police?
I believe the persistence of police misconduct is not attributable to any unique pathology, rather it flourishes for the exact same reason any human being repeatedly pursues a particular behavior: the reward (behaving in any manner you see fit with impunity) continues to outweigh the risk (losing resources, employment and/or doing prison time). Protests cannot change this. Lectures cannot change this. "Internal discipline" cannot change this. Retraining cannot change this. The only thing powerful enough to overcome the wall of blue is the loss of green.
Your thoughts are welcome
If you're concerned about money, then body cameras are the way to go. They'll show just who was doing what. And I'm thinking, stop some of the lies regarding brutality and racism.
I find it interesting that you talk of the "persistence" of police misconduct, yet are completely silent regarding the persistence of false accusations toward the police.
1) Any taxpayer who does not want his or her hard-earned money put toward police brutality/wrongful death settlements (currently $100,000,000 per year in New York City alone and counting);
2) Any one of the great majority of law enforcement officers who actually treats citizens (of all colors) with respect, cares about the people in their community, performs his or her duties without causing undue harm to those in their charge, does not otherwise power trip or abuse their authority and is tired of having their personal character and profession defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number of psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to sneak into the system, don the uniform and make life more difficult for their fellow officers; and
3) Any one of the great majority of persons of color who positively contribute to society, their communities and families, do not lead abject lives of crime and violence, who simply want to be the individuals that they are, building and leading happy, fulfilled lives like everyone else, and is tired of having their personal character and very personhood defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to make life more difficult for the rest of us.
My proposal is this: when a wrongful death/brutality action involving an officer is lost or settled, rather than the entire payment coming from the municipality's budget, half of the proceeds owed to the aggrieved party should come from the overall fund used to pay accruing and matured pensions of those within the law enforcement community (beat cops on up to top brass). If at any point pension funds dip to a predetermined floor amount, everyone takes a hit to their proportionate share of the overall fund to make up for it (similar to an assessment in a condominium community). In my opinion, it is nearly impossible for a bad apple to go completely unnoticed by the peers and supervisors with whom they spend so much time. However, the existing system does not properly incentivize those in the best position to prevent the bad apple from wreaking havoc on the public from doing so. I would be willing to bet a pretty penny that by imposing a consequence felt by all, it would force police to truly police themselves.
No longer would those in charge fail to properly discipline or discharge officers showing red flags of progressively egregious behavior. No longer would so many individual bad apples feel carte blanche to take out his or her frustrations in life on whatever citizen happened to be unlucky enough to cross their path that day. No longer would fellow officers look the other way, stand by, cover for or otherwise tolerate one of their own disrespecting or brutalizing a civilian.
Instead, bad apples are dismissed before they have the opportunity cause substantial damage (one can be retrained to remember to use the proper TPS reports and such, maybe even how to employ more tact when engaging with the public, but someone who has reached adulthood without knowing how to keep themselves from reacting to provocative behavior/speech or reign in his own violent impulses should not carry a deadly weapon or be in a position of authority). Instead, an officer will remind himself to remain calm, professional and not take the bait when some street punk runs his mouth. Instead, an officer will intervene and deescalate a heated verbal exchange between his partner and a civilian before it turns physical.
If you feel what I have just proposed seems radical, consider that the "sink or swim together" method of accountability is not a remotely novel idea, and in fact already exists within many facets of our society. For example, an employee perpetrating a fraud upon the public can open his personal coffers as well as those of his company to massive financial liability, even if no one else was aware of it. An attorney who discovers that his partner has stolen escrow money but turns a blind eye is legally just as culpable as the thieving partner. Though he did not steal a dime, he and the firm may be forced to pay back victims anyway. Also, a lookout during a robbery who never sets foot in the store or possesses a weapon can be charged with murder (and sued civilly for wrongful death) if his accomplices shoot and kill the store clerk, even if the lookout was told beforehand there would be no weapons or violence involved. If we expect other professionals and even criminals to be held responsible for those they are in bed with, why not police?
I believe the persistence of police misconduct is not attributable to any unique pathology, rather it flourishes for the exact same reason any human being repeatedly pursues a particular behavior: the reward (behaving in any manner you see fit with impunity) continues to outweigh the risk (losing resources, employment and/or doing prison time). Protests cannot change this. Lectures cannot change this. "Internal discipline" cannot change this. Retraining cannot change this. The only thing powerful enough to overcome the wall of blue is the loss of green.
Your thoughts are welcome
So do we take the auto pension money to pay the death suits in the GM ignition deaths since they built the cars. Then just think we have millions of claims against property so many who commit crimes until paid off. Now about a debtors prison ;now that a idea. In fact hold anyone involved in the protest in Ferguson responsible for the looting and burn plus make them pay the widows and children of those two dead cops that they encourged.
Blah, Blah, Blah......cop hating drivel if you ask me.
Hey, while we're at it. Let's do this to every occupation. Y'know, so when the guy on another floor of your building, whom you've never met, does something wrong, everyone has to reach into their retirement account and pay up. The only winners here are the scumbag lawyer and client.
Ok, then lets do this for criminals too. Find the group or groups, families and such of the criminals and start directly taking money from their retirements to offset the costs of their crimes. Remove the tax payer from that process by reducing the Social Security benefits for family members of criminals. Let the families start dealing with these criminals.
I would favor all the award, court costs, lawyer fess come from current retirees.
Rogue cops would most likely need protection from family members who were retired cops.
ocnjgirl, We pay the insurance which passes the cost plus their profit back to US. Let the cops pay. THEY caused it!.
The OP's idea is ridiculous, and so is yours. You don't penalize everyone for the misdeeds of a few.
In addition, it's obvious that neither you nor the OP are aware that many police agencies and municipalities routinely settle bogus claims to not incur the costs of arguing a suit and further burdening taxpayers.
Threatening the pensions of retired officers is a terrible idea.
However, every police officer should be required to obtain an insurance policy. Every incident, the premium is increased. No different than auto insurance.
Those officers having high premiums, might not be able to afford their profession.
1) Any taxpayer who does not want his or her hard-earned money put toward police brutality/wrongful death settlements (currently $100,000,000 per year in New York City alone and counting);
2) Any one of the great majority of law enforcement officers who actually treats citizens (of all colors) with respect, cares about the people in their community, performs his or her duties without causing undue harm to those in their charge, does not otherwise power trip or abuse their authority and is tired of having their personal character and profession defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number of psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to sneak into the system, don the uniform and make life more difficult for their fellow officers; and
3) Any one of the great majority of persons of color who positively contribute to society, their communities and families, do not lead abject lives of crime and violence, who simply want to be the individuals that they are, building and leading happy, fulfilled lives like everyone else, and is tired of having their personal character and very personhood defined by a sensationalist media hyperfocusing on the actions of a relatively few number psychopaths, sociopaths, sadists and garden variety idiots who manage to make life more difficult for the rest of us.
My proposal is this: when a wrongful death/brutality action involving an officer is lost or settled, rather than the entire payment coming from the municipality's budget, half of the proceeds owed to the aggrieved party should come from the overall fund used to pay accruing and matured pensions of those within the law enforcement community (beat cops on up to top brass). If at any point pension funds dip to a predetermined floor amount, everyone takes a hit to their proportionate share of the overall fund to make up for it (similar to an assessment in a condominium community). In my opinion, it is nearly impossible for a bad apple to go completely unnoticed by the peers and supervisors with whom they spend so much time. However, the existing system does not properly incentivize those in the best position to prevent the bad apple from wreaking havoc on the public from doing so. I would be willing to bet a pretty penny that by imposing a consequence felt by all, it would force police to truly police themselves.
No longer would those in charge fail to properly discipline or discharge officers showing red flags of progressively egregious behavior. No longer would so many individual bad apples feel carte blanche to take out his or her frustrations in life on whatever citizen happened to be unlucky enough to cross their path that day. No longer would fellow officers look the other way, stand by, cover for or otherwise tolerate one of their own disrespecting or brutalizing a civilian.
Instead, bad apples are dismissed before they have the opportunity cause substantial damage (one can be retrained to remember to use the proper TPS reports and such, maybe even how to employ more tact when engaging with the public, but someone who has reached adulthood without knowing how to keep themselves from reacting to provocative behavior/speech or reign in his own violent impulses should not carry a deadly weapon or be in a position of authority). Instead, an officer will remind himself to remain calm, professional and not take the bait when some street punk runs his mouth. Instead, an officer will intervene and deescalate a heated verbal exchange between his partner and a civilian before it turns physical.
If you feel what I have just proposed seems radical, consider that the "sink or swim together" method of accountability is not a remotely novel idea, and in fact already exists within many facets of our society. For example, an employee perpetrating a fraud upon the public can open his personal coffers as well as those of his company to massive financial liability, even if no one else was aware of it. An attorney who discovers that his partner has stolen escrow money but turns a blind eye is legally just as culpable as the thieving partner. Though he did not steal a dime, he and the firm may be forced to pay back victims anyway. Also, a lookout during a robbery who never sets foot in the store or possesses a weapon can be charged with murder (and sued civilly for wrongful death) if his accomplices shoot and kill the store clerk, even if the lookout was told beforehand there would be no weapons or violence involved. If we expect other professionals and even criminals to be held responsible for those they are in bed with, why not police?
I believe the persistence of police misconduct is not attributable to any unique pathology, rather it flourishes for the exact same reason any human being repeatedly pursues a particular behavior: the reward (behaving in any manner you see fit with impunity) continues to outweigh the risk (losing resources, employment and/or doing prison time). Protests cannot change this. Lectures cannot change this. "Internal discipline" cannot change this. Retraining cannot change this. The only thing powerful enough to overcome the wall of blue is the loss of green.
Your thoughts are welcome
Or, people can simply become civilized and refrain from taking the things that aren't theirs.
Hmmmm..., Instead of taking money from police pensions, we should start dipping into the revenues allocated for the welfare system AND the prison food system - every time a dirtbag commits a crime...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
