Boston crime thread - all posts go here. (Boston: for sale, law)

[id77]

Originally Posted by bigfatdude

And who gets to decide whether those bruised ribs were unnecessary - could it be the jury with lynch mob waiting outside and cancel mob waiting online? And more importantly, who in their right mind would be willing to get dragged to court after every arrest of non-cooperating perp? No one likes ambulance-chasing parasites but there's going to be 100 cruiser-chasing parasites for each one of those if qualified immunity is completely abolished.

And speaking of qualified immunity, how do you feel about judges - should we get rid of their qualified immunity and hold them responsible for all the violent recidivist criminals who went on to injure or murder someone when the judge felt like they deserved 386437645th second chance?

So my choice is a jury that may or may not be influenced by the court of public opinion who may convict a not-as-bad officer of wrongdoing or continue to have really-bad officers get to do really bad things with no consequence? I'll take the jury, thanks.

The mobs waiting outside would eventually subside, but you also know they're as angry as they are for a good reason. Policing in this nation built a bonfire of abuse and misconduct for over a century, and they do not just get to walk away from it without consequence. It's on the police system to fall on their swords and start to fix things.

As for judges, their immunity is more restricted, but even then ... if you are found to be criminally negligent in a decision, there should be consequences. Doesn't matter if you're a cop or a judge. Nobody's above the law.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by msRB311

I have to admit I've seen and smelled a lot of black men smoking in their cars, any time of day. I'm not judging but it is illegal and it is a reason to get pulled over.

I honestly have not seen this done by other folks...just black men.

I assure you black men have not cornered the market on cannabis OUIs.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by msRB311

I have to admit I've seen and smelled a lot of black men smoking in their cars, any time of day. I'm not judging but it is illegal and it is a reason to get pulled over.

I honestly have not seen this done by other folks...just black men.

Thank you, Sherlock Holmes.

[bigfatdude]

He did not, it was straight up profiling because what you described (i.e. three young black males in a car with out of state license plates on New England drug trafficking superhighway) unfortunately fits the profile of drug traffickers. As mentioned previously everyone knows who the dope peddlers are but no one is cooperating which is why cops must resort to random traffic stops of those who fit the profile hoping they luck out with dumb criminals who leave a gun or drugs in plain view instead of looking for a very specific car with very specific license plate driven by a very specific person. And, funny enough, quite a few criminals are dumb and get busted that way, more than through any other means, though unfortunately when it comes to MA according to our judges even someone busted with a medium-sized arsenal and a trunkload of fentanyl deserves at least 873483475 second chances before they get locked up.

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

why??

[bigfatdude]

So let's try again - are you expecting every cop to be OK with getting dragged to court by the new breed of ambulance-chasing parasites and quite possibly losing everything they have every single time they arrest someone who's resisting? Whatever it is you're smoking, please do share!

Or do you expect the cops to not arrest anyone who refuses to go willingly in order to not get sued and ruined by the said parasites? If so, what's stopping the perps from resisting every single time a cop tries to arrest them?

Originally Posted by id77

So my choice is a jury that may or may not be influenced by the court of public opinion who may convict a not-as-bad officer of wrongdoing or continue to have really-bad officers get to do really bad things with no consequence? I'll take the jury, thanks.

The mobs waiting outside would eventually subside, but you also know they're as angry as they are for a good reason. Policing in this nation built a bonfire of abuse and misconduct for over a century, and they do not just get to walk away from it without consequence. It's on the police system to fall on their swords and start to fix things.

As for judges, their immunity is more restricted, but even then ... if you are found to be criminally negligent in a decision, there should be consequences. Doesn't matter if you're a cop or a judge. Nobody's above the law.

[msRB311]

I don't profile often... but when I do...it's on black men smoking in their cars.

But seriously when I lived in Dorchester and roslindale I saw it all the time. Can't say I saw that in Milton or anywhere else.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

You're inferring a justification for rioting which isn't there.

Legitimate calls for reform can exist along side less legitimate mass rioting. Note: screaming ACAB isn’t an informed call for reform.

Yes. However legitimate calls for reform are also accompanied by a problem statement based on data, statistics, and reason along with a willingness to actually engage in dialogue and develop proposals for solutions based on same.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by bostongymjunkie

Yes. However legitimate calls for reform are also accompanied by proposals based on data, statistics, and reason along with a willingness to actually engage in dialogue based on same.

Your point? Aren entities like the ACLU not informed on laws and precedent? SCJs not informed on laws and precedent?

When I stated there were “issues” regarding qualified immunity I was referencing legitimate criticisms regarding scope, not some hot take on Twitter by a partisan hack.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by msRB311

I have to admit I've seen and smelled a lot of black men smoking in their cars, any time of day. I'm not judging but it is illegal and it is a reason to get pulled over.

I honestly have not seen this done by other folks...just black men.

This logic is very BBMM-like of you. But speaking about what you've seen as if it is generalizable without being tested doesn't fly.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by Shrewsburried

Your point? Aren’t entities like the ACLU not informed on constitutional law? Are SJC’s not informed on constitutional law?

When I stated there were “issues” I was referencing legitimate criticisms regarding scope, not some hot take on Twitter.

What do those organizations have to do with the popular police narratives being used to justify most reforms?


Edit: Since you edited-in the second sentence yes, there's room for legitimate conversations about reform on QI. But legit conversations about that one item are not what is front and center in the public square, in the media, or by interested parties in powerful political positions. This is not limited to an isolated "partisan hack" on Twitter.