• Shyanide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    While this is definitely needed, I don’t think it’s a starting point.

    IMO, a good place to start is instituting policies requiring LEOs/PDs carry liability insurance. Similar to doctors and other medical practices (in the US). An officer is found guilty or misconduct or violating a citizen’s right? Penalties are taken out of their insurance and their premium increases. Can’t afford the premium? Guess who’s looking for a new job?

    The way I see, the pigs can keep their criminal immunity, but civil matters will have a more direct financial incentive for them to behave like they have morals.

    • albert180@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s another “market economy” solution.

      Maybe start with the training. It’s ridiculously short in the US compared to European countries where the training takes usually multiple years, before you’re allowed to go on your own

        • albert180@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Of course is longer training going to help. Police school is like 3 Months in the US. Obviously that’s insufficient, when it’s 3 years in most European countries.

          In a longer time you can watch them more closely how they behave under pressure, and you have more time to sufficiently train de-escalation tactics, basic psychology etc…

          • Revan343@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Did you read the fucking post? No, longer training is not going to help

    • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Police have unions (They function as professional organizations, but legally they are labor unions) largely to block legal changes like this. To defeat them, you’d need to somehow pass legislation on the state and federal level that mortally undermines the power of all labor unions in the USA. This would have knock-on effects for all US workers, as unions fight for and uphold labor protections that benefit those outside their ranks. For instance, two day weekends and 40 hour work weeks.

      It seems clear to me that ending QE - Which is merely a judicial policy, it’s not even law - Is by far the more potent, simple, and safe avenue of attack. But I’m interested in your thoughts on the above proverbial gun that police unions hold to the head of every US laborer.

      • Natanael@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        No, you can have selective limits, tied to how much risk the job imposes on the surroundings (like universal regulation on any job requiring being armed). Unions are supposed to be about worker power against the employer, not against society.