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.
Some places are trying to pass law requiring cops to intervene and stop other cops who go too far. Conservatives everywhere are fighting tooth and nail against them. For example, Washington just passed such a law, but the vote was along party line.
Not here to debate. I don't understand. May be I am too stupid as a liberal. Please educate me why we should not require "good" cops to stop "bad" cops from brutalizing arrestees.
I think there is such a duty and expectation. That's exactly what the other two officers standing around in the Floyd case are going to be prosecuted for. I'm not sure what a new law would *change*. The remedy for failure would still be the same.
And what would the consequences for them have been?
In hindsight, they should have pulled Chauvin off. But these were inexperienced rookies. Two just out of the Academy.
Let's say they had pulled Chauvin off and Floyd had lived - they probably would have lost their jobs and if not lost their jobs been subject to no end of harassment from other cops going forward because, since Floyd would have survived, there would have been proof they had prevented his death.
Talk about no win. The other cops on the scene - if they didn't have bad luck, they wouldn't have any.
I think there is such a duty and expectation. That's exactly what the other two officers standing around in the Floyd case are going to be prosecuted for. I'm not sure what a new law would *change*. The remedy for failure would still be the same.
It might help to do away with some of the unhelpful culture that still lingers in some governments and police unions, that the officer is to be defended 100% of the time in any controversy. Not sure though, it's a complex issue.
Some places are trying to pass law requiring cops to intervene and stop other cops who go too far. Conservatives everywhere are fighting tooth and nail against them. For example, Washington just passed such a law, but the vote was along party line.
Not here to debate. I don't understand. May be I am too stupid as a liberal. Please educate me why we should not require "good" cops to stop "bad" cops from brutalizing arrestees.
Again, not here to debate. Please explain.
from your link ...
Quote:
But SB 5066 picked up three Republican votes Tuesday — including a yes by GOP Senate Minority Leader John Braun of Centralia — in its final vote on the Senate floor. It has also drawn support from some law enforcement groups.
In March, the Washington State Patrol Troopers Association and the Washington Fraternal Order of Police testified at a public hearing in support of the bill.
I think we'd all "want" fellow cops to intervene when a bad cop is using excessive force, specifically that force which is not policy.
Perhaps the difference comes in what is done to penalize those intervening officers if a 3rd party (say the media) decides they didn't intervene quickly or well enough.
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.
