New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity • Hacker News Board

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#131

Post by DocTomoe » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:00 AM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #95

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

> The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. This is a general problem with the US court system. People with more resources can use it to destroy people with fewer resources, because litigation is expensive and time consuming even if you ultimately prevail. This isn't a problem for the rich because they c…

Instead of creating yet another special case for government officials, the solution for the US problem is to go and take some ideas from Europe. In Germany, all costs associated with a lawsuit have to be paid/reimbursed by the losing party. This quickly solves the "I know I won't win, but lets ruin the other guy" problem.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#132

Post by pydry » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:02 AM UTC

upbeat_general wrote: post #27

coolspot wrote: post #17

I think that the Game theory suggests that cops will be less inclined to show up to a call or do anything to fight crime, because it could bring too much legal responsibility. Eat donuts, ignore the radio and you will be fine.

Except that it’s their job to do so. It’s relatively trivial to check what a police officer is doing if the department cares. Doctors can be sued for malpractice yet they still perform operations.

It's unfortunately not required that they do their jobs. This is established case law - in Castle Rock vs Gonzales.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#133

Post by pydry » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:11 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #53

coolspot wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure you are familiar with usual clientele of law enforcement officer, but usual day-to-day interactions are not nice. You will have to use violence, because nice obedient people don’t cause trouble. People that cops are called on will likely fight and resist and you will have a high chance of breaking someone’s bones (or kill someone). So, a rational cop can just avoid risky situations by doing absolute min…

> usual day-to-day interactions are not nice This describes a lot of jobs. Statistically, police work is less fatal than roofing, truck driving, garbage collecting and farming [1]. With respect to dealing with non-dangerous people who simply aren't nice, talk to a server or bartender or anyone who works in retail. > will likely fight and resist A small fraction (about one in eight) resist arrest [2]. Most of this is…

It probably would be a lot more dangerous if cops weren't so risk averse.

There's essentially no penalty for being a cowardly cop. The las Vegas cop who chickened out of confronting the shooter got fired, for instance, but even he was reinstated.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#134

Post by sneak » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:13 AM UTC

tomc1985 wrote: post #87

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

Wait, are you sure? If someone is acting as an agent of an entity then the entity is who you sue I am definitely not a lawyer or even good at "law" but that would just be insane if the truth is otherwise

The problem is that then when a police officer breaks the law and harms you, and you later sue them, the taxpayers end up paying the settlement due to the fact that you have to sue the whole department rather than the criminal themselves. There are no consequences, criminal or civil, for the person who actually broke the law.

New York City taxpayers pay $300M a year or so (IIRC) paying out civil judgements against the exceptionally violent NYPD.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#135

Post by bloak » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:13 AM UTC

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

Other countries don't have a problem with officials getting sued. In the UK there doesn't even seem to be a problem with employees getting sued; cases always seem to end up being against the employer. So why does only the US need "qualified immunity"? (That's a real question, not a rhetorical one.)

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#136

Post by sneak » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:16 AM UTC

torstenvl wrote: post #93

thebradbain wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they are required to The government is not requiring cops to send innocent people to jail, kill extrajudicially, or otherwise ruin peoples’ lives simply because they felt like it. In fact, that’s the exact opposite of justice, which is actually their mandate. > There’s no rational distinction between [police officers and health inspectors] One has leeway to kill innocent people outside of the court system b…

> Again, it is antithetical to their job to carry out injustice, and when people mess up their job bad enough, such a killing or framing an innocent person (intentionally or not), there should be consequences. You can't talk about justice in one breath and vengeance against the fall guy in the next. If a police officer unintentionally kills an innocent person because they were, e.g., ordered to perform an armed no-kn…

The government cannot act, it has no mass. Only human beings can act.

The person who pulls the trigger is the one who is the killer. The local government has no hands with which to operate a firearm's trigger.

Please be very careful not to misattribute or diffuse the responsibility for unnecessary violence carried out by violent, criminal cops.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#137

Post by daniellarusso » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:16 AM UTC

CA0DA wrote: post #3

> recover damages from the government when their constitutional rights are violated Great, so I'm paying for the sins of crappy cops via my taxes. Do I have an ability to influence my city or state to not hire unethical cops? (serious question)

Become mayor or governor.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#138

Post by wolfretcrap » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:16 AM UTC

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

In India also I can't sue officer, but officers will gladly use their powered to harass the F out of your life.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#139

Post by brnt » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:20 AM UTC

twhb wrote: post #117

brnt wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's undemocratic, because unless all lawyers are great and free for all, this path is a matter of money. Now, you may have bought into the libertarian marketing of freedom without democracy, after all so many Americans have, but there are extremely good reasons for why this is problematic, which are actually not that difficult to cobble together with some spare time.

Please try to stay civil. In response to your assertion that the courts don’t work: > If the laws that protect us aren’t good enough, then the solution is better laws, not to exempt some classes from the law!

I was not aware I was uncivil, certainly didn't mean to.

Your comment does not address the basic problem with a legislative implementation of freedom: it is undemocratic because the power to fight legal battles will always be constrained by money, therefore giving more weight to those that have more. That makes the legislative or libertarian version of freedom undemocratic. If that interests you, basically any critique of libertarianism will cover it. (Where it gets really interesting is where funding for its promotion come from!)

Better laws can be achieved by a democratic process also: you simply vote for candidates that advocate your view. This is democratic because everyone gets the same weight.

Naturally, if you have the means, that may seem inefficient, but then that was never the point of democracy, and as far as I am concerned, must never be the point of freedom either.

Re: New Mexico is the second state to ban qualified immunity

#140

Post by chmod775 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 9:26 AM UTC

mike_d wrote: post #40

The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. It applies to all parts of government. Didn't get the building permit for your kids horse barn? Sue the planning commission members individually. Animal control writes you a citation for Puddles not being on a leash? Unleash the lawyers. Health department gave yo…

Excuse me but how are "officials" special here? By that logic any job should have these protections.

They don't for obvious reasons. If people need protection from certain laws, then write that in the specific laws.