Why should the taxpayers have to pay for these retards actions?
No the “city” shouldn’t pay, the fuckin dipshits in charge of the operation should pay, either monetary or fucking sweat, are you the type if your kid stole something from the store you would just apologize and pay for said item, or would you beat your kids ass and offer up their free time to work off their fuck up.
this right here, make the cops pay.
I don’t think you’re quite grasping the concept of what I’m trying to say here. So try reading this slow, the fact that government agency’s and personnel have exactly zero accountability for their actions is bullshit, at the end of the day they are still human and should be treated as such. And you’re opinions are a little suspect anyways, cause you think the cattleman’s is a good steakhouse!
Can you please explain to me just exactly how the "city" pays for anything.
There is confusion on whom the "retards" are in this case. The "retards" are not the people living in the house, the inference is that the "retards" are the cops.
I sure hope most people do not feel that way about others property, especially in cases like this. If your approach was the norm then people would hate the cops even more.
There are a TON of ways to handle a situation like this without getting an office killed or trashing a house. What those cops did should NEVER be allowed to happen to private property unless there were ZERO options.
NO one disputes that. The real question was who will pay? And was destroying the house really necessary or just done 'Because we could and could get away with it.'
Actually, Id say, lets just wait. He'll get hungry and tired soon enough. No need to destroy a multi hunderd thousand dollar house "Just because we want to."
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out you dont need to destroy a house because of one guy. Jeez.
Without being there, and knowing time lines, Tac. Ops. could of probably been handled better.
I would argue that not exhausting all possible peaceful outcomes warrants negligence
Which is why I posted this almost as soon as this thread opened up
ij.org
that is so wrong on so many levels. I swear, I will not be surprised if a group forms to start targeting these cops, judges etc. at some point, people will have had enough.Found it.
Relevant case:
Lech v. City of Greenwood Village - Institute for Justice
Police destroyed the home of Leo and Alfonsina Lech while pursuing a fugitive and refused to pay for the damage that was caused. While the Supreme Court declined to hear the Lechs’ case, IJ is committed to ensuring the government pays when it must violate a person’s property rights.
Summary:
Shoplifter runs from cops into a random home and barricades himself inside. Police use armored vehicles to extricate the shoplifter and demolish the home in the process.
Court finds immunity for the City of Greenwood for damages.
Appeals finds the same.
10th Circuit concurs.
Supreme Court declines to review and allows the decision to stand as is.
The incident happened in 2015 but the Supreme Court decision to deny review is from June, 2020.
Result:
Police pursuit and attempted apprehension has no limits on the destruction involved to private property.
"We do not disagree that the defendants’ actions benefited the public. But as the Court explained in Mugler, when the state acts to preserve the “safety of the public,” the state “is not, and, consistent[] with the existence and safety of organized society, cannot be, burdened with the condition that the state must compensate [affected property owners] for pecuniary losses they may sustain” in the process. 123 U.S. at 669. Thus, “[a]s unfair as it may seem,” the Takings Clause simply “does not entitle all aggrieved owners to recompense.” AmeriSource Corp., 525 F.3d at 1152, 1154. "
As it stands now, until either this is further challenged in court or additional laws are passed, if someone goes pole vaulting through residential backyards, a police officer could chase him in a tank, destroying everything in its path just to catch him.
