Prior restraint but it’s a law. Everyone saw this coming. “Marsy’s Laws” began popping up all over the nation, written to prevent the naming of crime victims, especially whe…
LMFAO what about shooting sleeping civillians through a closed door at the wrong house
Not protected.
What about kneeling on someone’s neck as they slowly die screaming and gasping for air?
Not protected.
What about spraying naked detained elderly women with scalding water until they burn to death
Not protected.
What about shooting more dogs every day than an average person will even even meet in their lives?
Not protected.
This bill does not protect officers in any of the scenarios you describe. None of these scenarios describe self defense or defense of others. None of these uses of force are justifiable.
Also not protected is an officer mistaking an acorn for a gunshot and unloading his weapon into the back of his own cruiser, with a handcuffed suspect in the back.
In every case you described, officers were charged and prosecuted. Some were convicted, some were acquitted. None of them would have been protected under Marsy’s law.
Not to mention that even when charged police officers are almost never found guilty even when the evidence is overwhelming due to the various additional protections they have. At best someone can sue the city and obtain a financial remedy while the police department is completely unscathed and unaffected by the poor and criminal behaviour of their officers.
It’s obvious that you’re not arguing in good faith so you can respond how you like I’m done talking to you.
Edit: just looked up the prison slang you were using in your comment. Obviously you’re not a boot licker, you are the boot. It’s clear now why you support a law that would hide your identity when you murder people. Cops HATE accountability, that’s why nobody trusts them anymore. Fascists gonna fash!
The “elderly woman” you’re talking about was a 50-year-old man, and the situation does not qualify for protection under the bill. The man posed no credible, criminal, imminent, threat of death or grievous bodily harm. Their act of locking him in the shower had lethal results, but it was not a “use of lethal force” under self defense laws, and would not qualify the officers for protection under the bill.
Dogs are legally considered property, not people. Killing a dog is not considered a use of lethal force. Marsy’s law does not protect officers for killing dogs.
In both scenarios you cited, the law would not hide their identities.
Not protected.
Not protected.
Not protected.
Not protected.
This bill does not protect officers in any of the scenarios you describe. None of these scenarios describe self defense or defense of others. None of these uses of force are justifiable.
Also not protected is an officer mistaking an acorn for a gunshot and unloading his weapon into the back of his own cruiser, with a handcuffed suspect in the back.
ALL OF THESE USES OF FORCE HAVE ALREADY BEEN FOUND JUSTIFIABLE YOU ABSOLUTE BOOT LICKING MORON.
In every case you described, officers were charged and prosecuted. Some were convicted, some were acquitted. None of them would have been protected under Marsy’s law.
Stop holding pockets.
Hmmm let’s see The elderly woman scalded to death, no officers charged: https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/katherine-fernandez-rundle-criticized-for-darren-rainey-florida-prison-death-11657307
Shooting dogs, I’m sure all these thousands of cases per year are either justified or prosecuted: https://qz.com/870601/police-killing-dogs-is-an-epidemic-according-to-the-justice-department
Not to mention that even when charged police officers are almost never found guilty even when the evidence is overwhelming due to the various additional protections they have. At best someone can sue the city and obtain a financial remedy while the police department is completely unscathed and unaffected by the poor and criminal behaviour of their officers.
It’s obvious that you’re not arguing in good faith so you can respond how you like I’m done talking to you.
Edit: just looked up the prison slang you were using in your comment. Obviously you’re not a boot licker, you are the boot. It’s clear now why you support a law that would hide your identity when you murder people. Cops HATE accountability, that’s why nobody trusts them anymore. Fascists gonna fash!
The “elderly woman” you’re talking about was a 50-year-old man, and the situation does not qualify for protection under the bill. The man posed no credible, criminal, imminent, threat of death or grievous bodily harm. Their act of locking him in the shower had lethal results, but it was not a “use of lethal force” under self defense laws, and would not qualify the officers for protection under the bill.
Dogs are legally considered property, not people. Killing a dog is not considered a use of lethal force. Marsy’s law does not protect officers for killing dogs.
In both scenarios you cited, the law would not hide their identities.