Most jobs are very difficult and stressful but that does not give you the right to lash out at someone and greviously assault them. Every other profession leaves you open to a malpractice suit if you screw up. Police should be no exception.
As with many of the laws in the US, qualified immunity (QI) is based on racism and discrimination. Having been "invented by the courts" just after the passage of civil right legislation in 1965, as shown in the video, QI was first used to immunize police from lawsuits for the racially based arrest of 15 clergymen in 1967. Fast forwarding to present day, police have had a taste of unbridled power and they are now using that power against everyone. When it was only minorities being arrested, maimed and killed by police it wasn't much of an issue (that's them, they should have complied, they are all criminals) for the majority. Now that anyone can at anytime be killed by police, QI is a problem and police reform is necessary. People need to learn that letting atrocities/injustice happen to any one group of people will in time lead to the same atrocities/injustices happening to them.
Good Faith is what many schisters would claim in small claims court when, as example, you buy an engine at a scrap yard but the engine was trash. The seller could claim they acted in Good Faith. By 1970 we had legal protection against such logic. Except from the police.
Professional Liability Insurance for LEOs - their own PBAs can offer it and use their vast pension funds as a source of payouts when they are found liable - that will straighten the situation right out.
Qualified immunity is in a "legal doctrine" that goes against the 14th amendment that guarantees equal protection. Its not a an actual law. How funny is that?
It goes against the Ten Commandments from which Common Law in America derived and the Bill of Rights was penned. This is a Christian nation, or was , until the founding fathers died off. Our nation is slowly becoming an administrative nation where there's no individual liberty or property . Satan and his agents want everything, and it's funny because the agents of satan will get everything satan gets. Politicians, all politicians believe satan is Jesus who told them that with knowledge they will be as gods, because Lucifer means light bearer. Politicians today know about Jesus and the miracles he performed, they just don't believe the historical records where the miracles were witnessed.
This video is misleading because the seventh article in the Bill of Rights has always held accountable all men who do wrong actions. Including criminal charges at common law, but the administration would like people to believe a body politic has exclusive rights to punish wrongdoing. The reason: wealth and power! Power over the common man. Every judge, every president, every agent and every agency was created for the benefit of man, and each man and agency are public services administrated by public servants. It's important that the people at large know that a creation of man cannot be delegated rights; for example, I can't give my friends the right to rob another man , neither ca a man who's given hims a title of nobility and no right of action may originate from fraud. There goes qualified immunity.
Qualified immunity was never given to public officials that's the problem. Only federal officials & federal officers acting in compliance with the law itself have qualified immunity up to absolute immunity in carrying out diligence to the law itself & specifically morally what the law says. Somebody lied and misdirected information
Supreme Court Rulings - Constitutional rights must be interpreted in favor of the citizen Bryars v United States, 273 U. S. 28Harlow vs Fitzgerald 457 U.S. 800 - The US Supreme court stated: "government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."Officers of the court have no immunity from liability when violating constitutional rights Owen v. City Of Independence , 445 U.S. 622, and Maine v Thiboutot, 448 U.S.124An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office, it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed Norton v Shelby County 118 US 425
What Black Americans have been hating and calling “whyte supremacy” was considered just simply “whyte unity” by the Supreme Court and to this day there’s no grievances with that notion and rightfully so, but the system was successful at consistently disrupting Black unity even to this day. The insurrectionists even identified the BLM movement as a terrorist organization just for being pro Black and there’s no consequences for them…
@P N Police officers take an oath to support the constitution. Not sure where you got the "stripping of rights", that is irrelevant. Violating someone's constitutional rights is what makes oath takers of the constitution accountable. And the supremacy clause of the constitution supercedes ALL other laws. Qualified immunity is what protects police officers in cases where they've violated someone's constitutional rights. That is a well known fact and as you can see, I've already cited the case regarding qualified immunity. It's a very thin line. How can qualified immunity protect police officers if they're not considered government officials in law suits?
@P N The bottom line is qualified immunity Is not a doctrine addressed in the constitution and just because judges allow it as an argument does not mean it doesn't violate the supremacy clause. Oh wait...are you going to say there's no such thing as a supremacy clause either?
And the rest of society decends into anarchy. The rule of law for the most part is what is keeping you from being murdered by any idiot who decides your presence is a major crime and they pass a death sentence on you. You want that, go to Somalia or Afghanistan.
It initially depended on whether a constitutional law was broken. If that was a yes then you could look to see if a case had been established. If it had’t, as the constitutional Law had been broken they could proceed and make it a ‘first case’. In 2009 they decided the constitutional question wasn’t required for lower courts so they stopped asking this. So the courts started only asking the second question; and if didn’t have a past case or the constitution to refer to then the law isn’t ‘clearly defined’. As such they can just say it’s not clear a law has been broken.
Everyone has a difficult job.... if you are not trying to serve the people... you shouldnt wear any kind or disguise ,themselves as a saviors or first responders. "PUBLIC SAFTEY" in my opinion, has worked towards some of the harsh feelings towards it.
The Supreme Court refusing to hear Qualified Immunity cases, is bum-f__king-mind-boggling. The Literally have ONE JOBE!! You have ONE JOB BRO! Justice is in your life-time-appoint job title… Prove to us some more, that you don't deserve that position, and you were a mistake, as well as this supreme courts existence in general.
Remember, we aren't talking about criminal trials, but civil trials, where the burden of proof is just a preponderance of evidence. But for government officials, the burden of proof isn't even weighed, if you can't prove prior knowledge. Hence Qualified Immunity is an "Ignorance of the Law" defense.
Created by SCOTUS didn't realize they were elected legislators, what we also need is a law if judges want to play legislator then they also can be sued. That is another myth there job is neither hard nor dangerous recent study(dept. of labor) points to seventeen jobs that have higher rate of injury or death per 100,000 workers.
Qualified immunity is a problem but it's not the main problem Terry vs Ohio branches into a Supreme Court ruling of Officer safety and canines bark gives suspicion officer safety shoot-first-ask-questions-later stop resisting when you are not resisting
Sounds like a mens rea culpability matter but tied up with claims of no precedent but that creates a circular view. They are educated and work in law but ignorance is suppose to be no defense, it is therefore very egregious thw avwrage citizen is punished or found against in context where they couldnt have known the law even in non violwnt sutuations ans with how confusing law is front to back. Judges have immunity from an Indiana case where due peocess was passed over on a claim a young lady was mentally defective so she was basically surgically neutered no different than a dog and the Judge was given absolute immunity. That is not equality before the law. Like the slight difference between laying down and kneeling, Nazis have executed in a manner so it could be inferred by law to have happened before. Qualified immunity began with clerical errors and the like in administration.
Great whats the alternative that the public wants instead? If there is none, nobody who cares about their life and future will be a police officer. I'll vote for removal if there is an alternative thay could replace it and be more effective at keeping cops accountable.
For whatever reason, this video fails to talk about the events leading up to the shooting. The young man who was shot, showed up to his ex girlfriend’s house to get his dog. He noticed through a window two men (one was the father of a child his ex girlfriend had) inside the apartment. The ex girlfriend and the men “hid” in the bedroom and dialed 911 because Mason had a gun. The woman asked her roommate to send the dog out to Mason rather than allow him to come in. He pushed his way in anyway and banged on the bedroom door. When the ex girlfriend opened it, Mason used his gun to order the two men out of the apartment. They fled as ordered by Mason. So, a 21 year old man armed with a gun forces his way into an apartment, threatens to pistol whip two people and uses the threat of deadly force to eject them. He gets shot by responding police…but Mason is a sad, misunderstood victim. The officers knew they were responding to a distress call from a young woman hiding in a closet inside a locked bedroom. Yet, police are demonized for responding to a legitimate call for help with a man brandishing a firearm and breaking in to an apartment because he was jealous at his ex girlfriend hanging out with her child’s father. Mason’s family wants the government or the responding officer to give them a payout because their “beautiful son who could never hurt anyone” just wanted to be a police officer. I’m a political liberal, but this makes me side with conservatism.
As I don't know the facts to the case I will take them from you as accurate and agree that the young man was to be punished for his actions... but it does not mean that the officers get to play judge, jury and executioners at will without consequences.
The very nature of government is oppressive And it doesn't care what color you are. You need to do a little reading Makaveli the prince I'll give you a good idea in the nature of man and government
Most jobs are very difficult and stressful but that does not give you the right to lash out at someone and greviously assault them. Every other profession leaves you open to a malpractice suit if you screw up. Police should be no exception.
Qualified Immunity = Sovereign Citizen.
Qualified immunity is the hammer of the Tyrant
As with many of the laws in the US, qualified immunity (QI) is based on racism and discrimination. Having been "invented by the courts" just after the passage of civil right legislation in 1965, as shown in the video, QI was first used to immunize police from lawsuits for the racially based arrest of 15 clergymen in 1967. Fast forwarding to present day, police have had a taste of unbridled power and they are now using that power against everyone. When it was only minorities being arrested, maimed and killed by police it wasn't much of an issue (that's them, they should have complied, they are all criminals) for the majority. Now that anyone can at anytime be killed by police, QI is a problem and police reform is necessary. People need to learn that letting atrocities/injustice happen to any one group of people will in time lead to the same atrocities/injustices happening to them.
Good Faith is what many schisters would claim in small claims court when, as example, you buy an engine at a scrap yard but the engine was trash. The seller could claim they acted in Good Faith. By 1970 we had legal protection against such logic. Except from the police.
"it's a workplace scenario that's the issue and not a car accident?"
Professional Liability Insurance for LEOs - their own PBAs can offer it and use their vast pension funds as a source of payouts when they are found liable - that will straighten the situation right out.
Qualified immunity is in a "legal doctrine" that goes against the 14th amendment that guarantees equal protection. Its not a an actual law. How funny is that?
It goes against the Ten Commandments from which Common Law in America derived and the Bill of Rights was penned. This is a Christian nation, or was , until the founding fathers died off. Our nation is slowly becoming an administrative nation where there's no individual liberty or property . Satan and his agents want everything, and it's funny because the agents of satan will get everything satan gets. Politicians, all politicians believe satan is Jesus who told them that with knowledge they will be as gods, because Lucifer means light bearer. Politicians today know about Jesus and the miracles he performed, they just don't believe the historical records where the miracles were witnessed.
This video is misleading because the seventh article in the Bill of Rights has always held accountable all men who do wrong actions. Including criminal charges at common law, but the administration would like people to believe a body politic has exclusive rights to punish wrongdoing. The reason: wealth and power!
Power over the common man. Every judge, every president, every agent and every agency was created for the benefit of man, and each man and agency are public services administrated by public servants. It's important that the people at large know that a creation of man cannot be delegated rights; for example, I can't give my friends the right to rob another man , neither ca a man who's given hims a title of nobility and no right of action may originate from fraud. There goes qualified immunity.
Qualified immunity was never given to public officials that's the problem. Only federal officials & federal officers acting in compliance with the law itself have qualified immunity up to absolute immunity in carrying out diligence to the law itself & specifically morally what the law says. Somebody lied and misdirected information
That's a great point that can be used to reverse qualified immunity.
@@quincybirwood2629 you cant reverse something that's not law...you can stop using it.
Supreme Court Rulings - Constitutional rights must be interpreted in favor of the citizen Bryars v United States, 273 U. S. 28Harlow vs Fitzgerald 457 U.S. 800 - The US Supreme court stated: "government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known."Officers of the court have no immunity from liability when violating constitutional rights Owen v. City Of Independence , 445 U.S. 622, and Maine v Thiboutot, 448 U.S.124An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office, it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed Norton v Shelby County 118 US 425
What Black Americans have been hating and calling “whyte supremacy” was considered just simply “whyte unity” by the Supreme Court and to this day there’s no grievances with that notion and rightfully so, but the system was successful at consistently disrupting Black unity even to this day. The insurrectionists even identified the BLM movement as a terrorist organization just for being pro Black and there’s no consequences for them…
@P N Police officers take an oath to support the constitution. Not sure where you got the "stripping of rights", that is irrelevant. Violating someone's constitutional rights is what makes oath takers of the constitution accountable. And the supremacy clause of the constitution supercedes ALL other laws. Qualified immunity is what protects police officers in cases where they've violated someone's constitutional rights. That is a well known fact and as you can see, I've already cited the case regarding qualified immunity. It's a very thin line. How can qualified immunity protect police officers if they're not considered government officials in law suits?
@P N Where in the constitution are strawman referred to? You're referring to make believe concepts.
@P N The bottom line is qualified immunity Is not a doctrine addressed in the constitution and just because judges allow it as an argument does not mean it doesn't violate the supremacy clause. Oh wait...are you going to say there's no such thing as a supremacy clause either?
It's time to make your own justice...
And the rest of society decends into anarchy. The rule of law for the most part is what is keeping you from being murdered by any idiot who decides your presence is a major crime and they pass a death sentence on you. You want that, go to Somalia or Afghanistan.
👂❓How did the "VERY FIRST" Qualified Immunity Case Ever Become Sussefful❓without having Clearly Established Law❓❓❓❓❓
It initially depended on whether a constitutional law was broken. If that was a yes then you could look to see if a case had been established. If it had’t, as the constitutional Law had been broken they could proceed and make it a ‘first case’.
In 2009 they decided the constitutional question wasn’t required for lower courts so they stopped asking this.
So the courts started only asking the second question; and if didn’t have a past case or the constitution to refer to then the law isn’t ‘clearly defined’. As such they can just say it’s not clear a law has been broken.
End it! .....
Everyone has a difficult job.... if you are not trying to serve the people... you shouldnt wear any kind or disguise ,themselves as a saviors or first responders.
"PUBLIC SAFTEY" in my opinion, has worked towards some of the harsh feelings towards it.
Qualified immunity should be abolish It’s the law of the tyrant to get away with murder violation of the Constitution peoples civil rights
The Supreme Court refusing to hear Qualified Immunity cases, is bum-f__king-mind-boggling. The Literally have ONE JOBE!! You have ONE JOB BRO! Justice is in your life-time-appoint job title… Prove to us some more, that you don't deserve that position, and you were a mistake, as well as this supreme courts existence in general.
Remember, we aren't talking about criminal trials, but civil trials, where the burden of proof is just a preponderance of evidence. But for government officials, the burden of proof isn't even weighed, if you can't prove prior knowledge. Hence Qualified Immunity is an "Ignorance of the Law" defense.
Created by SCOTUS didn't realize they were elected legislators, what we also need is a law if judges want to play legislator then they also can be sued. That is another myth there job is neither hard nor dangerous recent study(dept. of labor) points to seventeen jobs that have higher rate of injury or death per 100,000 workers.
Change unconstitutional laws and they wouldn't need qualified immunity.
This Is Fubar....If Officer Of The Law Is Supposed To UpHold The Law...Why Don't They Have To Pass The BAR....
Her necklace looks like miltary bars but to what and of what rank
He had a gun? Did he really have one?
Where he live. At his house. Not walking the streets
Qualified immunity is a problem but it's not the main problem Terry vs Ohio branches into a Supreme Court ruling of Officer safety and canines bark gives suspicion officer safety shoot-first-ask-questions-later stop resisting when you are not resisting
"A police liability shield" aw shit people that's a totally twisted way to describe it
All those “justices*” should be listed as unintelligent and lacking integrity. 🤗
Listed officially or...
The problem is that there's no check on abuses of QI.
Totally not biased
Does video change qualified immunity?? When this doctrine was made there were no CEIL PHONES\BODYCAMS in everyone's hands. JUST SAYING.
How u goona bring up rayshard brooks? elijah mcclain would be a better example of a real victim.
Sounds like a mens rea culpability matter but tied up with claims of no precedent but that creates a circular view. They are educated and work in law but ignorance is suppose to be no defense, it is therefore very egregious thw avwrage citizen is punished or found against in context where they couldnt have known the law even in non violwnt sutuations ans with how confusing law is front to back. Judges have immunity from an Indiana case where due peocess was passed over on a claim a young lady was mentally defective so she was basically surgically neutered no different than a dog and the Judge was given absolute immunity. That is not equality before the law. Like the slight difference between laying down and kneeling, Nazis have executed in a manner so it could be inferred by law to have happened before. Qualified immunity began with clerical errors and the like in administration.
Great whats the alternative that the public wants instead? If there is none, nobody who cares about their life and future will be a police officer. I'll vote for removal if there is an alternative thay could replace it and be more effective at keeping cops accountable.
Muzak masked for your protection.
For whatever reason, this video fails to talk about the events leading up to the shooting. The young man who was shot, showed up to his ex girlfriend’s house to get his dog. He noticed through a window two men (one was the father of a child his ex girlfriend had) inside the apartment. The ex girlfriend and the men “hid” in the bedroom and dialed 911 because Mason had a gun. The woman asked her roommate to send the dog out to Mason rather than allow him to come in. He pushed his way in anyway and banged on the bedroom door. When the ex girlfriend opened it, Mason used his gun to order the two men out of the apartment. They fled as ordered by Mason. So, a 21 year old man armed with a gun forces his way into an apartment, threatens to pistol whip two people and uses the threat of deadly force to eject them. He gets shot by responding police…but Mason is a sad, misunderstood victim. The officers knew they were responding to a distress call from a young woman hiding in a closet inside a locked bedroom. Yet, police are demonized for responding to a legitimate call for help with a man brandishing a firearm and breaking in to an apartment because he was jealous at his ex girlfriend hanging out with her child’s father. Mason’s family wants the government or the responding officer to give them a payout because their “beautiful son who could never hurt anyone” just wanted to be a police officer. I’m a political liberal, but this makes me side with conservatism.
As I don't know the facts to the case I will take them from you as accurate and agree that the young man was to be punished for his actions... but it does not mean that the officers get to play judge, jury and executioners at will without consequences.
Wow! The facts certainly change things don't they
So if we end qualified immunity cops will quit. Good fucking riddance.
Love me too
💰💷🧮
The QUALIFIED IMMUNITY is just another evil racist law under the system of White supremacy.
The very nature of government is oppressive And it doesn't care what color you are. You need to do a little reading Makaveli the prince I'll give you a good idea in the nature of man and government
🤩💰🏧