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…
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.
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.