Topic: Democrats Unveil Police Reform Bill (Read 399 times)
Is police reform really needed?
Most of these provisions are already existing law and introducing a bill with these things doesn't do anything to address socioeconomic issues which is the heart of most of these issues. Just a feel good bill to make people think that the government actually did something.
Most departments already mandate the usage of body cams. For departments that don't have them, they tend to be less funded. But democratic mayors are openly calling for police departments to be defunded so I'm not sure how you can force all departments to adopt body cams if you aren't willing to pay them. The NYPD budget is allocated and some ungodly percentage, like 95% (similar numbers for LAPD), go to paying out salaries. You're talking single digit percentages being used for buying department equipment.
Every single use of force is documented by any department. This includes mace/tasers to officer involved shootings. You can ask cops, all they do is write reports all day. Maybe there might be some merit to creating a national database for collective statistics but seems a bit pointless imo. Departments that operate in Baltimore are different than departments in affluent neighborhoods in suburban California. You can't nationally lump together all police departments.
This is rather vague which confirms this bill is nothing but a place holder so democrats can reference this bill claiming they actually tried to solve the issue of police brutality. Police already open themselves to immense liability any time they answer a call and it's not difficult to charge them. They might be referencing qualified immunity here but I'd argue that police need qualified immunity otherwise they risk being sued any time they attempt to stop a crime.
I don't think mandating body cams would be a constitutional issue, and most cops like bodycams regardless. It makes civil complaints go down because both the officer and the civilian know their entire interaction is being recorded. It's most likely a budget issue. Bodycams are expensive and it's expensive to store all that data.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Most departments already mandate the usage of body cams. For departments that don't have them, they tend to be less funded. But democratic mayors are openly calling for police departments to be defunded so I'm not sure how you can force all departments to adopt body cams if you aren't willing to pay them. The NYPD budget is allocated and some ungodly percentage, like 95% (similar numbers for LAPD), go to paying out salaries. You're talking single digit percentages being used for buying department equipment.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Every single use of force is documented by any department. This includes mace/tasers to officer involved shootings. You can ask cops, all they do is write reports all day. Maybe there might be some merit to creating a national database for collective statistics but seems a bit pointless imo. Departments that operate in Baltimore are different than departments in affluent neighborhoods in suburban California. You can't nationally lump together all police departments.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
This is rather vague which confirms this bill is nothing but a place holder so democrats can reference this bill claiming they actually tried to solve the issue of police brutality. Police already open themselves to immense liability any time they answer a call and it's not difficult to charge them. They might be referencing qualified immunity here but I'd argue that police need qualified immunity otherwise they risk being sued any time they attempt to stop a crime.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
I don't think mandating body cams would be a constitutional issue, and most cops like bodycams regardless. It makes civil complaints go down because both the officer and the civilian know their entire interaction is being recorded. It's most likely a budget issue. Bodycams are expensive and it's expensive to store all that data.
@squatz1 I am surprised that you have failed to mention that this is another political move by the Democrats who very well know that this bill shall never be passed, and yet they’re playing with people’s sentiments for their own political gains. Also one of the reforms that you have mentioned can spectacularly backfire as hackers can hack into police body cam, and release sensitive information to the public, hence in my personal opinion this bill is flawed. Lastly I’m not surprised that the Democrats are using this bill, to cash in the sympathy ahead of the upcoming elections, but I feel that US citizens are smart and they’ll not fall for such gimmicks.
Past hacks:
https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/12/police-data-hack/
https://www.nme.com/news/music/anonymous-hack-chicago-police-radios-to-play-nwas-fuck-tha-police-2680017
Past hacks:
https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/12/police-data-hack/
https://www.nme.com/news/music/anonymous-hack-chicago-police-radios-to-play-nwas-fuck-tha-police-2680017
That's because Squatz is a RINO poser. Things like qualified immunity, and civil asset forfeiture need to be removed, but it will never happen because Democrats will never refrain from tacking on all kinds of other unbelievable bullshit on to what would otherwise be a completely bipartisan popular bill. As usual, the response to these carefully curated events have nothing to do with justice, but are simply tools for Democrats to exploit for personal political gain.
Once I read through a the Democrat plan to reform the police, it does seem like there are some good ideas present there that will help policing. I'll list some of them out below, and explain my thoughts on it.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
@squatz1 I am surprised that you have failed to mention that this is another political move by the Democrats who very well know that this bill shall never be passed, and yet they’re playing with people’s sentiments for their own political gains. Also one of the reforms that you have mentioned can spectacularly backfire as hackers can hack into police body cam, and release sensitive information to the public, hence in my personal opinion this bill is flawed. Lastly I’m not surprised that the Democrats are using this bill, to cash in the sympathy ahead of the upcoming elections, but I feel that US citizens are smart and they’ll not fall for such gimmicks.
Past hacks:
https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/12/police-data-hack/
https://www.nme.com/news/music/anonymous-hack-chicago-police-radios-to-play-nwas-fuck-tha-police-2680017
democrats should be banned and locked up and not being allowed to participate in politics. they say black lives matter but not all lives.
Good thing that there is freedom of speech. If there weren't, you just might do something nasty to Democrats, and then Law Enforcement would have to ban you.
Once I read through a the Democrat plan to reform the police, it does seem like there are some good ideas present there that will help policing. I'll list some of them out below, and explain my thoughts on it.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
democrats should be banned and locked up and not being allowed to participate in politics. they say black lives matter but not all lives.
Once I read through a the Democrat plan to reform the police, it does seem like there are some good ideas present there that will help policing. I'll list some of them out below, and explain my thoughts on it.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
Require all uniformed federal police officers to wear body cameras - Nothing wrong here, helps good cops show that some complaints on them are bs and makes sure that bad cops are dealt with swiftly.
Create a National Registry to track police misconduct and use of force - Sounds fine with me, not sure who is going to be able to see this (the public, internal government watchdog, etc) but it sounds fine from an accountability standpoint.
Make it easier to prosecute police misconduct - Yet again, sounds fine, not sure on what the actually legalese ill be for this -- but on the surface it is fine.
I think a major roadblock that we're going to see here is that state and local governments have most of the control when it comes to the law enforcement officials that are typically scrutinized, mostly b/c of the fact that these are the officers that most people are going to interact with at some point. They could use federal funds to incentivize change, though I'm not sure if the constitution allows for the government to mandate the use of bodycams.
There is more to this bill --https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/08/us/politics/democrats-police-misconduct-bill-protests.html -- but I do want to hear what others think about it and what they think should be added, removed, etc.
Jump to: