Law enforcers (government employees) should have insurance, not {qualified} immunity.
A law enforcer who cant maintain private insurance should not be employed as either a corrections officer, police, sheriff, or any other enforcement entity [like judges].
It is the simplest way to truly deter improper behavior while still ensuring good justice system employees can do their job without worry, and in the event of errors and suit, rates increase until an enforcer (they) either cant afford to or cant find insurance.
Simple as that, and the practice [started in 1967 Pierson v. Ray] of denying compensation for injury and damages done by enforcers and entities will be corrected, hopefully reducing the hatred and disgust that is ever growing.. if not only for this reason..
Does it require legislation, an employing entity rule, willing insurers (if the employing government entity does not create an insurance plan for the employed individuals) , likely all, so if you have the resources or time to begin encouraging change use the contact info, but consider first (or dont) statements like the stated and the following create animosity, but if your interested in helping, use the contact info ...)
Lastly, If this doesnt fit in here.. I know where it goes.. Do you know if a person owing restitution for an injury or damage is 1. Required to pay in total, 2. If thfigey only pay a percent for a length of time, 3. If the time starts at conviction or if it starts upon release from incarceration. 4. Can be avoided by filing bankrupcy.
What Id like you to consider, is do you know a person who was owed restitution (or civil judgment) who was never compensated by the victimizer? (of course insurance pays, but that raises rates, medical and property bills are covered but what about opportunity and comfort lost?)
Acts of injury and damage should be repaid without consideration for who the person in error is. Unless that's a liberty you wish to sacrifice, then Id be interested to hear from you.
Commentaires