[hmcdona1]

There is definitely a video from a day or two ago of a cop on top of a protestor with his hand pinned to the ground the cop then moves his baton under the hand of the protester and keeps it pinned on top. He proceeds to then punch his hand trying to appear as if he wants him to let go.

Also who gives a shit if they just got verbally harassed for an hour. I don’t get to lose my shit and delete a project because someone keeps submitting bad code. Why do cops get to lose their temper when their job is to keep the peace and enforce the law. Learn to control yourself and do your job or find another profession.

[linsomniac]

Nurses get verbally abused and harassed far more commonly than you might imagine, in extremely stressful, typically 12 hour shifts, and you just don't hear about them responding with brutality. Source: My wife and many of her friends are nurses.

[at-fates-hands]

>> Why do cops get to lose their temper when their job is to keep the peace and enforce the law. Learn to control yourself and do your job or find another profession.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242 DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW

Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

This means Chauvin could say he was acting under the "color of law" when he attempted to restrain George Floyd and during his restraint is when Floyd died. Because Chauvin was acting as a police officer and not a legal citizen, it was within his official duty as a police officer to apprehend someone who is breaking the law.

However, in the initial part of the statue, it clearly states:

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

This also means the prosecution can simply say that Chauvin was a known racist and violent around black people and his restraint was not an approved technique for restraining or arresting someone, therefore, based on those facts, the prosecution can make a compelling case that Chauvin attempted to use "color of law" to cover his willful infliction and in doing so, deprived George Floyd of his civil rights while doing so.

The shorter answer is yes, they can lose their temper because it might be required in the application of their duties as a police officer and officer of the government for which they serve. No, in that they cannot abuse that power and use "color of law" to deprive someone of their civil rights under the constitution.

[FpUser]

>the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties

This is probably the most disturbing thing I read about law enforcement. To me it translates into following: as an officer acting under "color of law" I am free to loose my temper and kill whoever the f..k I want for any reason as long as I am not doing it based on color/race/whatever. All I have to do is to "pretend to act in the performance of my duties".

Can somebody correct me if I am wrong (I sincerely hope I am).

[jcranmer]

My understanding is that "color of law" merely refers to the state of being where a person is acting in an official capacity. It imparts no legality or illegality of actions per se, but statutes might criminalize or decriminalize activity based on whether or not a person is acting under color of law.

What GP is referring to is a provision in the federal law that specifically criminalizes police activity undertaken under color of law. (Reading the statute, in this scenario, the police officer can be charged up to and including the death penalty).

As far as I'm aware, states' statutes for murder or manslaughter do not protect people acting under color of law.

[FpUser]

>*As far as I'm aware, states' statutes for murder or manslaughter do not protect people acting under color of law.

Phew. thank you. Hopefully maiming is not protected as well.

[DaniloDias]

>> Also who gives a shit if they just got verbally harassed for an hour.

This statement is emblematic of the fundamental problem affecting our culture.

I hate excessive violence. I hate excessive force. I can’t take anyone seriously if they argue that bad behavior doesn’t matter. Your 8 hour day in retail or at the office is not the same as working law enforcement during a riot.

It is entitlement or stupidity.

[kevinmgranger]

If an officer is going to respond to hurt feelings with violence after some hour-mark, then:

1. police forces need to limit their time, and forces that do not need to held accountable

2. they need to not be police

They _need_ to be held to a higher standard than everyone else.

[DaniloDias]

No disagreement

[Mouse47]

Then what was your point? You might as well delete your comment.

[DaniloDias]

My point is there is not enough empathy going around and it still stands.