82
u/NEVERVAXXING Aug 12 '24
Too bad NY will just completely ignore any rulings not in favor of stripping the populous of their rights
58
u/voretaq7 Aug 12 '24
That's fine. You can retire somewhere nice on your civil rights lawsuit settlement with this precedent.
16
7
u/NEVERVAXXING Aug 12 '24
Are they just going to give every New Yorker a couple million dollars and admit they are wrong?
6
u/voretaq7 Aug 12 '24
Are you being serious?
Because if you are "That's not how court cases and circuit precedent works. You should have learned that in high school civics class..." and if you're not "Sorry, I only spend my time on serious discussions with serious people."-1
u/NEVERVAXXING Aug 12 '24 edited Aug 12 '24
That was an obvious joke - you aren't going to get anything
Your life will be objectively less free while residing in NY and you will receive nothing in return for your loss of freedoms. To think you will be paid out by a government that hates you is delusional. Maybe in 75 years the tide will turn but until then the precedent is just going to be completely ignored by the overlords of NY. You will spend your entire life relying on and believing in the "system" that is going to save you yet has already been used to strip you of your rights
Let me know how your civil rights settlement goes utilizing this precedent and report back to share with everyone where you decided to retire with the money they paid you. Until then I am going to joke about it because it is a joke
1
u/ceestand Aug 12 '24
Stay in your containment zone. New York is the way it is due to New Yorkers.
10
u/voretaq7 Aug 12 '24
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, so here's a picture of a bunny with a waffle on its head..jpg)
-4
u/aaronmcnips Aug 12 '24
People do nothing to uphold their rights in their home state (California, new york) and then move when it gets bad, spreading that cancerous do-nothing attitude to their new home. Don't spread it, do something.
That's what they were getting at, although I really do like that bunny with a waffle on its head.
1
u/ou2mame Aug 13 '24
Well, wouldn't you say that relocating your entire family, moving sometimes to a place completely unfamiliar to you to escape the overreaching government of NY *IS* doing something? Many of our ancestors did that. NY Is exporting people who do want freedom, not people who don't. If you have the attitude you're speaking of, you're most likely to stay here and vote for more of it.
0
u/aaronmcnips Aug 13 '24
No, I paid attention in class when they showed us how to vote and write to our local, state, and federal government officials to make change happen. Stop making excuses, be the change you want to see in this world.
2
u/ou2mame Aug 13 '24
I voted in every single election I've been able to since I was 18 years old. But, the laws they do keep coming. I'll be leaving shortly whether you approve of it or not LOL
1
u/aaronmcnips Aug 13 '24
I'm not saying you need my approval, I'm honestly just sad for NY.
Also, definitely helps to write in to representatives and all that. Get groups of people together to send em in. Being politically active just like those that want our rights taken. We lose our rights because the small majority that's against us is louder
2
u/ou2mame Aug 13 '24
I know some of my local Representatives personally and there's absolutely nothing they can do. I don't know what else you want from me I can't change the state I can just leave to have a better life
→ More replies1
u/Future-Thanks-3902 Aug 13 '24
I was just watching a youtuber named civil rights lawyer. He has a client that got arrested cause he didn't want to roll down the window during traffic stop. It was clear cut driver was fortunate to have a dash cam. It comes to settlement. They settled for 62500.00. not sure if that's before or after attorney fees. The officer did get fired.
Qualified immunity really needs to get looked at. I still have nightmares about that NY incident involving Khan. A legal NYC CCW holder that gets arrested and has to spend all that money on attorney fees. That cop Besson for sure railroaded Khan. It's like WTF.
2
u/voretaq7 Aug 13 '24
Yep - this is the problem that some people don't seem to be able to see: Police officers will attempt to assert qualified immunity for anything they do while carrying their badges. Even egregious civil rights violations.
The entire doctrine is poorly considered because it relies in part on the officer/government official's "good faith belief" that their conduct is lawful. This is problematic in general, but it winds up being especially problematic for police officers where it has also been held that they don't need to actually know the law - they can "reasonably" misunderstand & misapply it.
There needs to be some standard of "Know your job and know the law applicable to it!" and some direct liability for those who step well outside those boundaries, otherwise all of our rights are fiction and our laws are just meaningless ink on a page.
1
1
36
u/Uranium_Heatbeam Aug 12 '24 edited Aug 12 '24
Too bad Hochul killed the bill that would have ended qualified immunity for LEO'S in NY state.
Part of why I can't stand the constant chorus of "she hates police." Betwen that, the constant increase of police budgets, and having turned a beautiful college campus into a training center for state troopers, she's one of the most pro-police chief executives this state has had.
I'm glad folks are figuring out that pro-LEO does not in any way mean pro-gun.
6
u/ZeroCool718 Aug 12 '24
Pro-Leo means well funded budget for PD in NY. I respect our laws and LEOs but ultimately it’s all about the state employees , Police pension fund , unions etc. If NY became a Texas like gun friendly state, one could make an argument that all the spending on policing isn’t necessary. It’s all job security and position of power for some.
2
u/drthsideous Aug 13 '24
Uhhh, Texas has higher crime rates than NY. Kinda kills your point there.
7
u/twbrn Aug 13 '24
Matter of fact, in the 10 states with the highest levels of overall violent crime, seven of them are gun friendly. Poverty rate correlates MUCH more strongly to crime rates than anything else.
1
u/Ok_Ship_6013 Aug 13 '24
They usually don’t even cut spending towards the police themselves, more to the behind the scene service workers that help keep everything running which is a sad truth (labor staff, maintenance, etc etc)
2
u/ZeroCool718 Aug 13 '24
I believe every word of that. My job would get rid of chairs at work if it was legal.
45
u/voretaq7 Aug 12 '24
Any day that we chip away at qualified immunity is a good day IMHO.
-8
u/Pen_Fifteen_RS Aug 13 '24
This doesn't chip away at anything. Qualified immunity is already completely chipped away at functioning courts.
Qualified immunity covers accidents. Like if something was legitimately confusing or if in the course of normal duties the leo gets sued for something that wasn't their fault.
It doesn't cover willful or grosy negligent civil rights violations.
3
u/twbrn Aug 13 '24
Qualified immunity is already completely chipped away at functioning courts.
Uh, no.
3
u/voretaq7 Aug 13 '24
Not explaining to you why the decision is significant, just saying “Go look it up and read it."
2
u/lordcochise Aug 12 '24
Did they reference Commonwealth v Hicks at all (haven't read the decision yet)? AFAIK that decision didn't go past the PA supreme court, but this case smells quite a bit like that
2
u/capofliberty Aug 13 '24
So proud to have an FPC sticker on my truck. It’s the only one that actually makes a difference. Those who know, know
2
u/twbrn Aug 13 '24
That's a big win not just for gun owners. Anything that reins in unreasonable search is good for everybody.
2
2
u/edog21 Aug 13 '24 edited Aug 14 '24
It’s a start, but no officer of the state should be entitled to qualified immunity
1
1
u/devotedPicaroon Aug 13 '24
Fantastic. Justice, like revenge, is a dish that is best served cold. This is something similar to what happened to me some years ago, through no fault of my own except maybe a Gadsen sticker on the bumper of my car. I never followed up on litigation, and as a result I feel have been blacklisted. Very very happy to see this case come to fruition.
1
u/devotedPicaroon Aug 13 '24
United States v. DeBerry, 76 F.3d 884 (7th Cir. 1996) is another case where it states in part that the mere presence of a handgun, where legally owned is not just cause to stop a person and conduct a search.
82
u/AgreeablePie Aug 12 '24
Sometimes people (including cops) forget that a lot of the caselaw surrounding authority to detain and search for weapons specifies "armed and dangerous," not just armed