@Edgework wow excellent retort. You aren't a troll at all!

@JacksonNought
That’s all you’re worth. Expending actual thought on your canned talking points is a useless endeavor,

@JacksonNought How would ending #QualifiedImmunity change things? Are you suggesting ending all qualified immunity of public officials, specific immunities, or just for specific officials (e.g., police officers)?

@ZuzecaSape imagine you are a gun carrier. You are walking down the street and see what you think is someone breaking into a house. You pull your gun on them and shout for them to stop, hoping they will be afraid of your threat and run away. But in your haste, you accidentally fire the gun, and it hits and kills them. Maybe they were the homeowner just having trouble with their key. Maybe they didn't hear your warning. Maybe they really were a criminal trying to break in. In any case, do you think you will be given the benefit of the doubt? Will you be allowed to resign from your job or be put on paid leave as your only punishment? Or, as a regular citizen with no qualified immunity, will you get the same leniency as a cop would for the same mistake?

@Edgework coming from a Q-quack who still believes Trump will be sworn in as the president and Biden is on a sound stage, forgive me if it doesn't keep me up at night what you think is worthwhile.

@JacksonNought > do you think you will be given the benefit of the doubt? Will you be allowed to resign from your job or be put on paid leave as your only punishment? Or, as a regular citizen with no qualified immunity, will you get the same leniency as a cop would for the same mistake?

I would likely be arrested, fired from my job, and roasted over the coals at trial (both criminal and civil).

So we agree there's a difference in legal and civil liability, between police and private citizens, when committing the same act.

But how would ending qualified immunity be the solution, as you suggested? Also, point of clarification, what is the problem we're solving?

@ZuzecaSape doctors are required to have malpractice insurance. If a surgeon is operating on you and accidentally leaves a rubber glove inside you, you can sue for damages. Most of the time this is because of actual harm, and you need help paying off expenses accrued as a result.

If a cop sees you walking in your own backyard and thinks you are a trespasser and shoots you, you cannot sue. The officer may be suspended or fired, but you are shit out of luck. Maybe if police didn't have qualified immunity, and were required to have insurance, or even have it taken out of their pensions, they'd be less inclined to act with such carelessness.

Also we need to end civil asset forfeiture.

@JacksonNought That's not entirely true tho. The officer may not be held civilly liable, but the city / state can be. For instance, George Floyd's family received a $27M settlement as a result of his death. I'm not saying that's the way it should be (because the damages fall on the taxpayer, as opposed to the individual aggressor), I'm just saying, you're not exactly "shit out of luck".
[cnn.com]

I'll think about it some more. The argument >for< qualified immunity is that police have a job that demands making life-or-death decisions in a split-second; the only other job a firearm is required equipment is the military, and that's a job where you're supposed to kill people. If they were held personally liable for mistakes, they might be too indecisive to be effective, resulting in higher crime.

I absolutely agree on civil asset forfeiture tho.

@ZuzecaSape you make a key point there - the taxpayer will be penalized and have to foot the bill for the careless or potentially malicious actions of an individual.

@JacksonNought I don't know how to get around that tho. If a firefighter makes a mistake in judgment, during the course of performing their duties, that results in an unnecessary fatality, the city / state is still going to be the one on the hook for the lawsuit. If I get typhoid from an unsanitary McDonald's employee, it's going to be McDonald's Corp that I sue and will be forced to pay a settlement. If an Amazon hiring manager deliberately discriminates against a protected class, Amazon will be on the hook for compensation.

So qualified immunity for police doesn't seem much different than widespread business practice.

Lol.