Non politics

[MountaineerWV]

I can see this being a long, drawn out battle.....the insurance is going to not want to pay, and the police have already said (with court backing) that they do not have to pay......BUT....someone has to pay. My opinion: The city/police are responsible, technically. They should have to pay for the damages.

This reminds me of an event that took place around where I live. The DEA raided a man's businesses looking for drugs from a tip from an informant. They ripped his business apart, tearing through ceilings and walls. Found nothing. Turned out to be bad intel. In the end, the man got a large settlement from the local police and DEA for the damages.

 

[MountaineerWV]

Criminal didn't cause that damage. Police blowing out his walls to get him did.

I agree. Aren't police told in high speed chases to back off if it becomes dangerous for other pedestrians or drivers? No doubt it is for safety, but also because of liability potential. Well, what about in a situation like this?

 

[Gunny46]

Criminal didn't cause that damage. Police blowing out his walls to get him did.

So the bad guy who was shooting at cops was actually a deepstate cop undercover ? It's an emotional argument that I can empathise with. Just keep this in mind. Whatever you pay in property tax now do x 10 or more.

 

[Mntneer]

So the bad guy who was shooting at cops was actually a deepstate cop undercover ? It's an emotional argument that I can empathise with. Just keep this in mind. Whatever you pay in property tax now do x 10 or more.

Did the bad guy drive an Armored Vehicle through this man's house? Did he blow out walls and launch tear gas?

If the Police are going to take the position that they need to respond to a shoplifter in such a manner, then they need to be prepared to have a liability policy that will cover all damages. You know that it is patently unfair and unjust to place the financial burden on the innocent man (who pays taxes too), and if it you or anyone else on this board, you know damn well you'd be seeking some form of proper financial restitution.

 

[Gunny46]

Did the bad guy drive an Armored Vehicle through this man's house? Did he blow out walls and launch tear gas?

If the Police are going to take the position that they need to respond to a shoplifter in such a manner, then they need to be prepared to have a liability policy that will cover all damages. You know that it is patently unfair and unjust to place the financial burden on the innocent man (who pays taxes too), and if it you or anyone else on this board, you know damn well you'd be seeking some form of proper financial restitution.

Shoplifter than turned into someone shooting at cops. Was it a water pistol or did it fire real bullets? If real bullets he graduated from shoplifter to attempted cop killer. One more time. You are making an emotional argument that I have empathy with. Now do you want to pay property taxes that will go up 10 x or we make private insurance pay for it.

 

[dave]

The city should have a policy to cover that. You can't put the liability and responsibility on the owner who was at no fault.

Even if this dude could have "repaired" his house, and have his insurance cover it, it's only going to jack up his premiums and be an undue burden on him.

Homeowners policies are prettymuch designed to protect you from things unforeseen. I agree about his premiums.

In a perfect world the criminal would be liable for damages but that goes nowhere.

 

[30CAT]

Dipshit bifftards doing dipshit bifftard stuff