Police Corruption: End "Qualified Immunity"

@redredred You get more clueless by the day.

@Northwest there’s not a single falsehood in what I wrote. By now I would have though you’d be used to not understanding the truth.

@redredred We know you only want police to protect your precious property rights

@redredred
And yet, it is on every police cruiser.


And serve the people. An oath they take.


Read the above.


Oh, you accidentally discovered what Qualified Immunity is.


Yes, driven by their own extremist political views.


We absolutely did, but not in the way your closed mind thinks. You should look up the videos of cops in Wisconsin, giving high five's to the killer of protesters.


Not surprising, coming from a MAGA.

@redredred if they have no obligation to serve, protect, reserve order or solve crime, which is in the job description, then what is the point of them?

@basilfawlty89 Careful reading is a valuable life skill, look into it. I said they have no obligation to serve or protect. They do have an obligation to preserve order and investigate crime. They just don’t have to be good at it.

@redredred If that truly is the case the police institution should have no right to exist. If they don't have an obligation to help why the fuck do they even exist...
Preserving order as in crush any protest that goes against the status quo?

@Gloomy look it up. The courts have long denied any action brought by crime victims seeking redress against the police.

@redredred Yes it's fucked up

@redredred cool, insult aside, you just proved that the police is a bloated, top down hierarchical institution that doesn't do half their jobs, and the other hand fuck it up. So why not defund or abolish it?

@basilfawlty89 Works for me, just let me own the weapons I need to protect myself.

@redredred
... and once more, you define "Qualified Immunity". Reading comprehension, I suppose, as you still don't have a fucking clue what this thread is about. Hint: read the subject line.

@Northwest I’m free to add any comment, even remotely related to the subject. It’s called free speech. You needn’t try to read these threads as if they must follow in a neat, single file order.

@redredred well, I'm all for that. I'm not against firearm ownership. Liberals are against guns. Leftists aren't. I'd advocate for personal and grassroots community defense that has direct democratic control by the residents of the community.

@basilfawlty89 I’m for individual control. My community has no right to limit my protection of my person or property. So long as I don’t violate the rights of others, I see no reason for those others to be involved.

@redredred perhaps not, but unless you live in a shack in the middle of nowhere, you need a community. As long as you're harming no one, no one would say you can't have self defense. However, most people live in urban and suburban areas. A threat to the community must be engaged with as a community.

@basilfawlty89 then let those people deal with their issues as they will. FYI, I live in a very nice custom built home on six acres of meadow in a very small rural town with no police. My nearest neighbor is a quarter mile away.