Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 143

Thread: House and Senate reintroduce ‘Ending Qualified Immunity Act’

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    33,884
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by C-grunt View Post
    You know local LE doesnt enforce federal law right?
    That is NOT accurate.

    So during the Clinton AW Ban, my father was still party to an ongoing divorce. One day the Sheriff's Office showed up to inventory property as directed by a judge, in the course of cataloging the contents of the safe they looked at a bunch of black rifles and thinking "aren't these illegal?" took temporary possession of them until the local ATF guy could check them out and verify they were good.

    The rifles eventually passed inspection, although the local PD did monkey around with the cool new "night vision" and pretty much f'ed it over not knowing that light can damage it. But if the ATF guy found something that was in AW configuration that was clearly post 94 production that would have been that.

    So in all kinds of scenarios, local law enforcement does enforce federal laws.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    ME
    Posts
    459
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    That is NOT accurate.

    So during the Clinton AW Ban, my father was still party to an ongoing divorce. One day the Sheriff's Office showed up to inventory property as directed by a judge, in the course of cataloging the contents of the safe they looked at a bunch of black rifles and thinking "aren't these illegal?" took temporary possession of them until the local ATF guy could check them out and verify they were good.

    The rifles eventually passed inspection, although the local PD did monkey around with the cool new "night vision" and pretty much f'ed it over not knowing that light can damage it. But if the ATF guy found something that was in AW configuration that was clearly post 94 production that would have been that.

    So in all kinds of scenarios, local law enforcement does enforce federal laws.
    But that’s a little different than enforcing Federal law...

    If there was something wrong, ATF is the one handling it. Their report will likely say “local PD found X, and made contact,” but the only thing the local guys get is grief if the search was not justified. If it gets prosecuted, it goes to Federal court. And if convicted with jail time... Federal prison. ATF could say... “hey, we are busy and it is probably nothing.” Local PD have no choice other than return the firearms.

    That being said, we see state/local being handed more stuff at our port (CBP) than the other way around. Booze in the cab of a commercial truck... is a Federal statue. CBP does handle a lot of DOT’s reach... but we are not justified to write tickets/put drivers out of service. So, due to our zero tolerance stance, we have to call state police... who likely won’t write a ticket, seize the booze, and escort the truck to the next truck stop to sit for a day.

    Same goes with DUI... since again, we have zero jurisdiction in those matters. But if we can’t get someone to come out, we technically cannot detain a US citizen for being drunk. Forced to let him go, and if he gets into an accident... we are the bad guys. Just like being claimed that we separate families and put kids in cages. Best one I heard is we separate unaccompanied minors from their families... even though unaccompanied sort of means they weren’t with said family, right?

    I’d have to see if those who have peace officer status can do anything in regards to that, but for the most part, we get yelled at for even mentioning state/local laws (I still tell people when they have a light out, which likely is against the muster I received... but I do it for their safety and not to enforce state MV law).

    Qualified immunity is something that keeps a family of some shady individual, who I might have to shoot/kill, from suing me after a justified shooting. I mean, if I do my job right, I’d think I shouldn’t have to face civil liability because some family wants to say “little Johnny” should have lived, even though he pulled out a firearm he shouldn’t have been in possession of, and tried to kill me. Yep... they should have my house, truck, and all of my possessions... because it’s SO terrible that I dare to do my job. I’m disgusted that law makers even consider this garbage.

    Profession liability insurance... if that passes. I’ll also love to see my union representative if it does... “vote for Biden, he has our best interests in mind.” Yea, wonder how much of my dues went towards his campaign.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    743
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    This is just one more step to getting rid of local law enforcement and having only fed LEOs. Remember all those sheriffs who said they would refuse to enforce unconstitutional gun laws? This is a way to remove them.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Herndon,VA
    Posts
    1,096
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jsbhike View Post
    From the article that looks like a screwed up situation and an officer I wouldn't want to work with BUT the officer did go through a hearing in a courtroom and loose his case for qualified immunity. Then in a second court proceeding the original ruling was overturned on appeal. That's what "qualified" immunity is. Every decision an officer makes can be reviewed in a judicial proceeding. I was not on the scene and I may not agree with it based on the overturned ruling but you can't get much more oversight than that. Nothing I can find online states whether the Deputy was fired or not.

    What I want to see is Lawyers and Judges possibly held civilly liable for their decisions just like the officer on the street is. David
    Last edited by dwhitehorne; 03-05-21 at 07:20.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    AR
    Posts
    534
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    That is NOT accurate.

    So during the Clinton AW Ban, my father was still party to an ongoing divorce. One day the Sheriff's Office showed up to inventory property as directed by a judge, in the course of cataloging the contents of the safe they looked at a bunch of black rifles and thinking "aren't these illegal?" took temporary possession of them until the local ATF guy could check them out and verify they were good.

    The rifles eventually passed inspection, although the local PD did monkey around with the cool new "night vision" and pretty much f'ed it over not knowing that light can damage it. But if the ATF guy found something that was in AW configuration that was clearly post 94 production that would have been that.

    So in all kinds of scenarios, local law enforcement does enforce federal laws.
    No, it's 100% accurate. Local/state officers CANNOT arrest on a federal statute. Period. THAT is why the ATF was called in the example above. It's also why SO many states enact "mirror statutes". I learned and enforced the AR Criminal Code, NOT the Federal criminal code.
    Last edited by Entryteam; 03-05-21 at 09:19.
    "It is only the warrior who chooses pacifism. All others are condemned to it."

    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
    Dangerous Freedom over Peaceful Slavery.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    5,149
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    I know many who would choose to not walk into a firing squad which they know something like gun confiscation would be and would just take their talents and experience to the private sector.

    Some will, some won't and again very zip code dependent. In NJ I assume most would be "sorry gotta follow orders" but in parts of Kentucky it would be "well...looks like I'll be delivering pizzas for a living." That assuming that local PDs in Ky don't simply issue "stand down" orders regarding any across the board gun grab. They've all seen knob creek, they know what some people have.
    This is true. It would vary by jurisdiction for sure. I don't live in town limits, so I'm under the jurisdiction of the county sheriff who seems to be a good dude. At least he said he wont enforce mask mandates, but what if I need to drive through Raleigh? You can't just stay in your little safe space forever.

    Quote Originally Posted by C-grunt View Post
    You know local LE doesnt enforce federal law right?

    Plus if you think that not taking enforcement actions results in you losing your job you dont understand how modern policing works. I havent written a speeding ticket in over 12 years. Havent heard a peep about it. I have more important things to worry about.
    It could be my overactive imagination, but I am pretty sure if there is a federal ban on all mags over 10rds and I get pulled over with a G19 and 15rd mag, at best there is a 50/50 chance of be getting effed on. Why would I be friendly a group which has me facing those odds?

    I think the nature of my jaded world view is that I got into the world of firearms in a non-permissive environment like NJ. A world were cops think JHP ammo is illegal to own by civilians despite the NJSP website having a disclaimer saying it isn't. Where you risk going to jail if you stop to pee on your way to the range. In NJ, if you are a gun owner, every cop is a potential problem. I openly admit that my views may be skewed because of that.

    The reason for my original post is that this law could discourage "taking enforcement action" even further.
    I am part of that power which eternally wills evil, and eternally works good.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    AR
    Posts
    534
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex V View Post
    This is true. It would vary by jurisdiction for sure. I don't live in town limits, so I'm under the jurisdiction of the county sheriff who seems to be a good dude. At least he said he wont enforce mask mandates, but what if I need to drive through Raleigh? You can't just stay in your little safe space forever.



    It could be my overactive imagination, but I am pretty sure if there is a federal ban on all mags over 10rds and I get pulled over with a G19 and 15rd mag, at best there is a 50/50 chance of be getting effed on. Why would I be friendly a group which has me facing those odds?

    I think the nature of my jaded world view is that I got into the world of firearms in a non-permissive environment like NJ. A world were cops think JHP ammo is illegal to own by civilians despite the NJSP website having a disclaimer saying it isn't. Where you risk going to jail if you stop to pee on your way to the range. In NJ, if you are a gun owner, every cop is a potential problem. I openly admit that my views may be skewed because of that.

    The reason for my original post is that this law could discourage "taking enforcement action" even further.
    umm...there's no federal mag ban.
    "It is only the warrior who chooses pacifism. All others are condemned to it."

    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
    Dangerous Freedom over Peaceful Slavery.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Az
    Posts
    4,374
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex V View Post
    This is true. It would vary by jurisdiction for sure. I don't live in town limits, so I'm under the jurisdiction of the county sheriff who seems to be a good dude. At least he said he wont enforce mask mandates, but what if I need to drive through Raleigh? You can't just stay in your little safe space forever.



    It could be my overactive imagination, but I am pretty sure if there is a federal ban on all mags over 10rds and I get pulled over with a G19 and 15rd mag, at best there is a 50/50 chance of be getting effed on. Why would I be friendly a group which has me facing those odds?

    I think the nature of my jaded world view is that I got into the world of firearms in a non-permissive environment like NJ. A world were cops think JHP ammo is illegal to own by civilians despite the NJSP website having a disclaimer saying it isn't. Where you risk going to jail if you stop to pee on your way to the range. In NJ, if you are a gun owner, every cop is a potential problem. I openly admit that my views may be skewed because of that.

    The reason for my original post is that this law could discourage "taking enforcement action" even further.
    I can definitely see where you are coming from. Also LEOs are recruited from the local population so you are going to have more anti 2A cops in NJ vs those in say Az or Tx.

    It might seem cool to have less anti 2a enforcement taking place but this law will stop pretty much all police work. I sure as hell am not going to chase after a criminal anymore if it happens, even if I see the crime take place. Example taken from actual events. I see an armed robbery taking place. the bad guy starts running away on foot and I start chasing him. He runs into the road and gets hit by a car. I then get sued for causing him to get hit by a car.

    Or I am chasing a burglar who was caught in someone's house. I tackle them and they break their arm as we go to the ground. I get sued for the injury.

    A bank robbery happens and the clerk calls in the suspect as a middle aged man in a blue F150 leaving the parking lot now. I am driving by the shopping center and see the middle aged man in the blue F150. We conduct a felony stop and detain the man in handcuffs. A squad mate goes to the bank and looks at the surveillance footage. Since a majority of people dont know cars very well he radios that the suspect was clearly in a Chevy truck and we got the wrong guy. We let the guy go and he sues me for unlawful detention.
    C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
    3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
    2002-2006
    OIF 1 and 3

    IraqGunz:
    No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, Az
    Posts
    4,374
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex V View Post
    This is true. It would vary by jurisdiction for sure. I don't live in town limits, so I'm under the jurisdiction of the county sheriff who seems to be a good dude. At least he said he wont enforce mask mandates, but what if I need to drive through Raleigh? You can't just stay in your little safe space forever.



    It could be my overactive imagination, but I am pretty sure if there is a federal ban on all mags over 10rds and I get pulled over with a G19 and 15rd mag, at best there is a 50/50 chance of be getting effed on. Why would I be friendly a group which has me facing those odds?

    I think the nature of my jaded world view is that I got into the world of firearms in a non-permissive environment like NJ. A world were cops think JHP ammo is illegal to own by civilians despite the NJSP website having a disclaimer saying it isn't. Where you risk going to jail if you stop to pee on your way to the range. In NJ, if you are a gun owner, every cop is a potential problem. I openly admit that my views may be skewed because of that.

    The reason for my original post is that this law could discourage "taking enforcement action" even further.
    On a related note. In 14 years on the street Ive seen the NFA come up on 3 occasions. 1 was when a couple guys recovered a stolen Q Honey Badger, 1 was a murder done with a sawed off short barrel shotgun, and the other was when I caught a burglar who murdered the home owner and he had a sawed off short barrel shotgun in his backpack. And when I went to court on the two murders, the NFA status of the shotguns wasn't even mentioned.
    C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
    3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
    2002-2006
    OIF 1 and 3

    IraqGunz:
    No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    6,824
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dwhitehorne View Post
    From the article that looks like a screwed up situation and an officer I wouldn't want to work with BUT the officer did go through a hearing in a courtroom and loose his case for qualified immunity. Then in a second court proceeding the original ruling was overturned on appeal. That's what "qualified" immunity is. Every decision an officer makes can be reviewed in a judicial proceeding. I was not on the scene and I may not agree with it based on the overturned ruling but you can't get much more oversight than that. Nothing I can find online states whether the Deputy was fired or not.

    What I want to see is Lawyers and Judges possibly held civilly liable for their decisions just like the officer on the street is. David
    That's why I mentioned ditching immunity across the board. There is a reasonable chance the officers of the court that steered that outcome are a moral/functional equivalent of the deputy that did the shooting.

    Without assuming, here was Electra City, Texas city attorney Todd Greenwood expounding on the virtues of police officers committing perjury.



    I don't want Joe the cop sued in to oblivion for breaking someone's ribs during the Heimlich maneuver, but I don't want Joe the janitor, Joe the CPA, or Joe the retiree to get sued for the same either. In other words, I don't want a legal caste system.

    If anything, police, prosecutors, judges, legislators, and executives should get enhanced penalties for violations instead of exemptions.

Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •