posted by QuakerOats
I was not advocating for jail time. I was pondering the notion that he could be liable, perhaps in a civil suit, for damages to family members of the slain for failing to do his duty.
Oh, I see. Eh, maybe. It still seems like a hard pill to swallow, because it's still basically saying he is being penalized for not risking his life.
Certainly more reasonable than jail time, though. At least as far as I can reason.
posted by gutIf a cop can be convicted of manslaughter for gross negligence in use of force....then wouldn't it stand to reason that a cop could be criminally negligent for failing to engage an active shooter?
While I understand linking the two, I see a difference. A difference we acknowledge on a civilian basis.
If I, a non-officer, refrain from saving someone I might be able to save because I wasn't willing to put my life on the line, that's not a crime.
On the other hand, if I hastily shoot someone without sufficient cause (as determined by a box of jurors), that is a crime.
I can see a parallel with officers there.
As for the slippery slope notion ... it's possible. There's nothing to suggest it HAS to go there, but those are examples worth considering if and when someone actually decides to define the letter of the law as it pertains to 'negligence' in law enforcement.