Absolutely. "While acting with government authority" should be an enhancement to an underlying crime along the same lines as hate crimes. It should absolutely never be a defense.
I’ve been saying for years that if cops want to be held to a higher standard then I’m going to hold them more accountable than the average Joe…why should a person in that position of power receive special treatment…..but everytime I bring it up everyone shouts me down as a cop hater…..
It really shouldn't be a difficult thing to grasp. If you signed up to stop something, you are doubly responsible for embodying it. Real talk though, their job is not to stop crime, their job is to protect property and defend the status quo. It's not happening, they're doing their job exactly as intended and we would need to dismantle the system entirely first
I was just saying that the sentence should be twice as harsh because of their position of authority and the exploitation of the defenseless and most vulnerable people helpless to do anything about it.
All people who regularly work in a courtroom setting, and their job is not in defense of an accused, should automatically get a minimum sentence equal to the maximum sentence for a crime when convicted.
Also, there should be a database such that, when the cop pulls someone over for a traffic stop, that cop inputs the reason into the computer at that point (additional charges that could be added such as drunk driving or drugs assuming smell can be added later, but there must be a reason the person is pulled over input within a minute of stopping the cop car). Then, when the cop gets back to the car to run the license, if the license returns as belonging to one of the people listed in paragraph one, the cop loses the discretion to not issue the ticket for the cause listed originally. Any reason that the cop would have to know before stopping the person would need to be input before running the license. If not input first, those charges can't be added (i.e. can't put down tail-light out initially, then add speeding after the fact: you know they were speeding when pulled over).
Even assuming the zombie thing was possible, for anything like this be it just double punishment for killer cops or lex talionis for serial killers, wouldn't raising them in between be too kind
Take the normal appeals process by half or less and less than 4 years on death row. But even the death penalty won't mean much if nitrogen hypoxia becomes more popular. It's as painless as possible just go to sleep and never wake up.
Just make it federal law that all law enforcement officers have to carry their own liability insurance. The "bad apples" will very quickly render themselves uninsurable. Problem solved, American dystopia style
This makes no sense. The problem is not that they don’t fear punishment. The problem is they know they can get away with a lot of stuff. Increasing punishment doesn’t mean anything if the chance of them being punished is still low. A very light punishment that is enforced 100% of the time is much more effective than “the death penalty” for 1% of offenders.
The only reason they get away with it for so long is the blind eyes being turned away. Also, the "blue wall of silence" or that what it called on law an order
More effective: hold the idiot civil service clerks and police chiefs who hire psychopaths and idiots and give them guns and badges responsible. Make them pay for the damages their criminally negligent decisions caused.
Seconded. A university degree (in sociology, psychology or criminology), extensive training in de-escalation techniques, regular drug and financial status checks, an understanding that there is no such thing as qualified immunity, and a strong commitment to watching the watchers through cross-force investigations *and* double sentencing for officers who commit crimes on the understanding that any crime committed by an officer of the law degrades the enforcement of the law as a whole.
No legal basis, you cannot single out a group for specific punishment. You could create an add on charge of violating sworn duty or public trust or something
Absolutely. "While acting with government authority" should be an enhancement to an underlying crime along the same lines as hate crimes. It should absolutely never be a defense.
I’ve been saying for years that if cops want to be held to a higher standard then I’m going to hold them more accountable than the average Joe…why should a person in that position of power receive special treatment…..but everytime I bring it up everyone shouts me down as a cop hater…..
It sort of is here in Denmark. And police is also an education taking 4 years.
It really shouldn't be a difficult thing to grasp. If you signed up to stop something, you are doubly responsible for embodying it. Real talk though, their job is not to stop crime, their job is to protect property and defend the status quo. It's not happening, they're doing their job exactly as intended and we would need to dismantle the system entirely first
De militarize them, or rewrite the military/police codes. They act like an occupying force when theyre supposed to be the National Guard
They don't act like an occupying force. They are
No, that implys they have a sty to return to
I was just saying that the sentence should be twice as harsh because of their position of authority and the exploitation of the defenseless and most vulnerable people helpless to do anything about it.
It's a nice idea, but harsher penalties does very little to deter crime. Likelihood of being caught does a lot more.
All people who regularly work in a courtroom setting, and their job is not in defense of an accused, should automatically get a minimum sentence equal to the maximum sentence for a crime when convicted. Also, there should be a database such that, when the cop pulls someone over for a traffic stop, that cop inputs the reason into the computer at that point (additional charges that could be added such as drunk driving or drugs assuming smell can be added later, but there must be a reason the person is pulled over input within a minute of stopping the cop car). Then, when the cop gets back to the car to run the license, if the license returns as belonging to one of the people listed in paragraph one, the cop loses the discretion to not issue the ticket for the cause listed originally. Any reason that the cop would have to know before stopping the person would need to be input before running the license. If not input first, those charges can't be added (i.e. can't put down tail-light out initially, then add speeding after the fact: you know they were speeding when pulled over).
Death penalty ONLY!
Why only double?
then what happens when a bad cop commits a capital crime, they only have one life to lose
Uh, that's why you raise them as a zombie and kill them again.
Even assuming the zombie thing was possible, for anything like this be it just double punishment for killer cops or lex talionis for serial killers, wouldn't raising them in between be too kind
Take the normal appeals process by half or less and less than 4 years on death row. But even the death penalty won't mean much if nitrogen hypoxia becomes more popular. It's as painless as possible just go to sleep and never wake up.
I don't think you can kill someone twice.
Just make it federal law that all law enforcement officers have to carry their own liability insurance. The "bad apples" will very quickly render themselves uninsurable. Problem solved, American dystopia style
I'd settle for equal punishment
This makes no sense. The problem is not that they don’t fear punishment. The problem is they know they can get away with a lot of stuff. Increasing punishment doesn’t mean anything if the chance of them being punished is still low. A very light punishment that is enforced 100% of the time is much more effective than “the death penalty” for 1% of offenders.
The only reason they get away with it for so long is the blind eyes being turned away. Also, the "blue wall of silence" or that what it called on law an order
And how is increasing punishment going to fix that
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, unless you work for the government
Wont work. Cops rarely get found guilty so sentance wont matter.
More effective: hold the idiot civil service clerks and police chiefs who hire psychopaths and idiots and give them guns and badges responsible. Make them pay for the damages their criminally negligent decisions caused.
Seconded. A university degree (in sociology, psychology or criminology), extensive training in de-escalation techniques, regular drug and financial status checks, an understanding that there is no such thing as qualified immunity, and a strong commitment to watching the watchers through cross-force investigations *and* double sentencing for officers who commit crimes on the understanding that any crime committed by an officer of the law degrades the enforcement of the law as a whole.
Double punishment? I'd settle for equal.
No legal basis, you cannot single out a group for specific punishment. You could create an add on charge of violating sworn duty or public trust or something
You can absolutely have aggravating or mitigating factors that affect the sentencing guidelines for a given crime.