Restitution
Harry Belefonte and MLK
On March 13th 2020, under the pretext of a no-knock warrant , Louisville police officers entered the home of Breonna Taylor . Her boyfriend , hearing what he logically believed to be an intruder ,( the was no pronouncement of police presence ) opened fire on the officers . Fire was returned , 5 to 6 bullets struck Breonna .
In response to public outcry, the city of Louisville settled with family of Breonna Taylor for the amount of $12 million dollars . The officers were later charged with wanton endangerment for firing bullets through the wall into the other apartments . The aforementioned endangerment was an acknowledgement of endangerment to other tenants in the apartment , not Breonna.
The word restitution can be defined as “ the restoration of something to its proper owner”, or “recompense for injury”. Strictly speaking, by definition, restitution can only be brought about by compensation. However, in the context of justice , both the accuser and the accused would receive a morally right consequence merited by their actions. Can you claim justice if the accused are not the ones responsible for compensation? Of the $12 million paid out to the family of Breonna Taylor, $5 million is coming out of the city’s risk management fund with the rest being paid out of the city’s self- insurance fund. Not only was the department spared from providing any recompense that would affect their budget , the police budget in June was actually increased from $189.8 million to 190.5 million . From an economic perspective, there is a very poignant question to ask, do we have an economic tool in “defunding” the police by tying settlement payments directly to pension funds and directly to the officers or parties held responsible for said actions ? Is it morally just for the party guilty of wrong doing to not pay directly or even the existence of a taxpayer- funded fund that payrolls for this very malfeasance?
We at purple media do not exist to offer mere commentary , rather to offer solutions that go to the root of issue . The main issue is that we have an institution protected by unions and whose financial penalties against those who they hurt are indirectly being paid by those very people .
despite the nexus of policing , the current 20th fundamental idea of policing (serve and protect all ) is a necessary institution for a civil and safe society. The main issues are:
A.negative underlying perceptions of black bodies in the police department.
B.The persistent negative view of cops and policing within the black community at large
C. A bias system that supports and protects the police system during times of wrong doing .
The current thought of those that are anti-police and anti corruption is to completely dismantle both the idea entity that is the police system . This solution seems to be more aimed at retribution than actual fixing of a flawed system.
What seems to be a solution to assuaging the issue that is bias and prejudiced policing is to directly hold economically culpable these institutions that are causing the offenses . These departments should pay out of their own budgets for the crimes that they commit. There could be a condition where if the offending Cop or party is fired, the monetary penalty would be lessened .