Thanks for the clarification, it is appreciated to have someone who knows more about these things around.
Question for you, Huffy: If you have looked at any of it, what do you think of the bill that the House Dems have put together on police reform? As far as I can tell, it doesn't disarm or defund police, but does make changes to the way qualified immunity can be used and such. It seemed very reasonable to me, but I would appreciate your perspective.
There isn’t a lot of innovative ideas in it. Most of it is off the shelf give aways or what is called “logrolling”. In pioneer days everyone in the area agreed to help you roll logs to build your house and once built you agreed to help them. Same principle in Congress. Everyone votes for everyone else’s spending because they got spent on in the past.
Much like the stimulus where we’ve seen hidden giveaways to constituencies this has them too because without them it wouldn’t pass.
The solution to this problem isn’t making it easier to sue cops. That’s just a give away to the trial lawyers who donate millions to the Dems pushing the bill.
So they give up a lot of credibility quick.
Abolishing no-knock warrants will get cops killed until they change it back because cops have been killed.
Essentially pre-emoting State laws that don’t require independent police shooting investigations is a good idea as long as it’s done by the feds or a statewide credentialed law enforcement body and not some citizen’s counsel where we have a pizza shop owner, a realtor and a retiree deciding who loses their badge.
The police misconduct registry is a GIGANTIC boondoggle. It will start out small, probably in DOJ, then eventually employ approximately one thousand rich upper class mostly ivy or Georgetown educated bureaucrats, who will do nothing but send memos around about how the system doesn’t work. The crime statistics registry is a good example of bad government. This will be a repeat. You might think you are getting a database like sex offenders or the National crime information center service, but what you’ll really get is a bunch of people arguing endless if words cause injury or whether an arm bar is serious injury. Police misconduct in Maine looks a lot different than in Alabama. But they have to be coded and entered the same. There’s no way. And every guilty defendant in America will file a claim. So we have to have skilled analysts, mostly lawyers at $114,000 a pop, read those and determine if they should be uploaded. It’s a cluster waiting to happen. It also wants to break data down by race and for a variety of reasons, that isn’t permitted by existing US law.
The community policing and racial bias training is a good idea and over due. But that should be grants to the states, again not a “let’s take advantage of this chance to create more over priced and inefficient bureaucracy in DC” to set the program up, take ten years and ten times the cost to do it, and not have it taken seriously in big parts of the country because it isn’t produced locally.
Lynching as a federal crime is ok though I oppose the expansion of federal criminal vehemently. As discussed previously, federal civil rights laws are likely sufficient and this is basically symbolic.
Most of this stuff was put together or re-hashed by the Obama people after Ferguson. House leadership was too busy talking about banning air travel and impeaching the President for nothing to really do anything on it until now. That should tell you what you need to know about whether Joe and Nancy truly are interested in this issue and whether AOC cared at all until it got her on TV talking about calling 911 is white privilege.
Which tells you their voters really don’t care so long as they don’t see it. Which is sad.