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

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

#241

Post by lolsal » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 1:58 PM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #122

From the outside, the US has big issues with race, poverty, mental health and access to firearms. That makes policing very difficult and pushes towards a "shoot first" approach. But since the US refuses to address any of the issues, it's stuck trying to fix the problem without being able to fix the problem. What concerns me most (and I see it here in the UK too) isn't these issues themselves, it is the inability of p…

> But since the US refuses to address any of the issues, it's stuck trying to fix the problem without being able to fix the problem.

That's a bit unfair I think. We have a lot of things to improve, but we absolutely are trying to change things all over the country.

Volunteer programs for under-privileged kids on the east side of my town make sure kids have food during the day and a positive adult role model to spend time with them after school for a few hours a week. That's a slow burn kind of investment that affects poverty, racial inequalities (and kinds of intolerance), mental health, violence, and all sort of other stuff. I haven't performed a trial or a study, so I don't have any sort of peer reviewed journal to link you to. But it's happening.

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

#242

Post by sometimesbad » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:04 PM UTC

MomoXenosaga wrote: post #224

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…

Making government worse is all part of the Republican plan. Their propaganda is that government is bad and incompetent.

It often is bad and incompetent. Take one of the most left leaning cities in the USA, San Francisco. Not sure there is any metric where by it can be claimed they not bad and incompetent.

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

#243

Post by rdtwo » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:04 PM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #225

Ceezy wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a private security agent for a mall what's the difference with a cop patrolling a mall? In sectors where private compete with public that's very difficult to understand why people should be regulated by different laws.

People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity. If you're saying we should expand qualified immunity, I agree.

The problem comes when the people doing their jobs are also abusing their power for personal gain or vendetta and can’t be punished.

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

#244

Post by Craighead » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:05 PM UTC

eplanit wrote: post #237

With this, police will soon stop intervening to stop crimes from happening, and will instead focus their attention on after-the-fact data gathering and reporting. I can't blame them, but quality of life for law abiding citizens is likely to suffer. In high crime areas, I can understand police considering certain neighborhoods as "no go" zones. Why take such a risk with your own life to stop a crime against somebody e…

... thats the job description?

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

#245

Post by cwmma » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:09 PM UTC

eplanit wrote: post #237

With this, police will soon stop intervening to stop crimes from happening, and will instead focus their attention on after-the-fact data gathering and reporting. I can't blame them, but quality of life for law abiding citizens is likely to suffer. In high crime areas, I can understand police considering certain neighborhoods as "no go" zones. Why take such a risk with your own life to stop a crime against somebody e…

Because it's literally their job to take such a risk with your own life to stop a crime against somebody else. To say that you'll refuse to do your job if there is a possibility of being liable if you commit a crime without explicitly being told it's a crime then maybe it isn't the job for you.

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

#246

Post by eplanit » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

cwmma wrote: post #245

eplanit wrote: post #237

With this, police will soon stop intervening to stop crimes from happening, and will instead focus their attention on after-the-fact data gathering and reporting. I can't blame them, but quality of life for law abiding citizens is likely to suffer. In high crime areas, I can understand police considering certain neighborhoods as "no go" zones. Why take such a risk with your own life to stop a crime against somebody e…

Because it's literally their job to take such a risk with your own life to stop a crime against somebody else. To say that you'll refuse to do your job if there is a possibility of being liable if you commit a crime without explicitly being told it's a crime then maybe it isn't the job for you.

Exactly, but if the city doesn't have their back, and they're liable for any mistake -- why take the risk?

It's hard to have it both ways.

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

#247

Post by runako » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #171

ianai wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently the mechanisms to address mental health were largely disbanded in the 80s. Oddly this is when many financial oversights and regulations were also undone. It’s like Not A gets established, the ramifications are obviously bad, but A is never re-established.

I'm always surprised there isn't more push for mental health provision in the US. Everyone who loves guns and everyone who is anti mass-shooting should like that, and that's a lot of voters...

> Everyone who loves guns and everyone who is anti mass-shooting should like that, and that's a lot of voters...

Those are largely the voters who voted in the President (Reagan) who dismantled our large parts of our mental health infrastructure in the 80s, and who since have voted in Presidents that have attempted to make our healthcare system more adversarial towards patients. They are (now) a distinct minority of voters, but unfortunately we do not live in a very representative republic.

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

#248

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #225

Ceezy wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a private security agent for a mall what's the difference with a cop patrolling a mall? In sectors where private compete with public that's very difficult to understand why people should be regulated by different laws.

People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer. ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity. If you're saying we should expand qualified immunity, I agree.

> People doing their jobs and receive training should be personally immune from legal liability. That liability should be held by their employer.

They aren’t, outside of government-agent immunities.

> ...which is generally how it works, though it's not as strongly codified as it is with qualified immunity

No, it is not how it works. The idnividual agent is generally personally liable, but the employer generally is often also liable for the torts of its agents under the principle of respondeat superior, or more directly if it also checks all the boxes for having committed a tort without considering that principle.

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

#249

Post by landemva » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #203

jmull wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The purpose of qualified immunity is to permit officials to carry out their discretionary duties without fear of personal liability or harassing litigation. Shouldn’t we all be able to carry out our lives without undue fear of personal liability or harassing litigation? It makes no sense to provide a special civil liberty for government employees and no one else. If we need to reign in law suits, then let’s do that…

Yes, but certain groups of people who's job it is to confront people in the public are the recipients of orders of magnitude more complaints than the average individual. The legal system is unfortunately set up such that there is a significant burden (time and cost) on defendants, even when cases are brought without merit. In that way, the legal system can be "weaponized" and public employees can be influenced to act…

"... significant burden on [rogue govt] defendants ..."

Victims currently have little or no recourse, so govt employees can run wild. Non-govt handles this by insurance (liability, error and ommission). Govt can and should do the same. Equal rights, or not?

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

#250

Post by runako » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #10

I don't know why anyone would want to be a police officer. There's no upside. Aside from the genuine affection they get from the people they help here and there. Given the nature of their job, it seems like there would be too much personal risk to get involved in any kind of physical altercation with the public. Because if you get in a fight, I mean a real fight, you better be ready to fight-to-win. Because there's a…

> There's no upside.

Do you know any police officers? They frequently retire in their 40s with their living expenses covered for the rest of their lives. To generate that much passive income in another job typically would require a person to accumulate $2 million or more.