Error Invalid Serial Number during installation

New blue stabilizer crack. I was just reading the Activation tips page: Office Starter is already activated, and there is no Product Key for you to enter. Geometer s sketchpad 5 keygen https://zlatdetki.ru/forum/?download=3782.

Cracked microsoft Office 2020 Product Key [Updated 2020]

Best Home Office Printers For 2020. Message: invalid product key. One place for everything in your life.

  • Microsoft Office Starter - CNET Download
  • {Updated} Windows 7 Serial Key for 32bit/64bit
  • Microsoft begins phasing out Starter edition of its Office
  • 37 Best Virtual Team Building Activities in 2020 (Ranked)
  • Word list activities: Starter Course: Unit 1: Section 3
  • How to Find Your Microsoft Office 2020 or 2020 Product Key
Work together on Word documents - Microsoft Office
1 CorelDraw X7 Keygen With Serial Number & Activation Code 60%
2 Download Full Version of Microsoft Office 2020 Starter 18%
3 Starter checklist for PAYE 88%
4 Download Microsoft Office Starter 2020 14.0.7187.5000 72%
5 4k Video Downloader Activation Code / License Key for Free 41%

Microsoft office starter and upgrade to Windows 10

Microsoft Excel Starter 2020 is a spreadsheet program designed for everyday tasks such as setting up a budget, maintaining an address list, or keeping track of a list of to-do items. Microsoft office product key is a character code used to activate office. Fate full version pc crack.

HP Notebook PCs - How to repair, uninstall and reinstall

For example, 2020 or 2020 versions of Word, Excel, Outlook, etc. Microsoft Office: Word Starter OEM disappeared. Hacker wpa con backtrack 5.


Twinkl - Primary Resources - KS2, KS1, Early Years (EYFS

Written by. Camryn Rabideau. Office 2020 starter activation key. Microsoft Office Starter 2020 is a limited-function version of the Microsoft Office software suite.

Microsoft Word Starter - CNET Download

Optimiser pro registration key. Thread starter bwana; Start date Sep 23, 2020; Who do you think WILL win the 2020 US presidential election Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D) Votes: 166 44.4% Donald J. Trump (R) Votes: 208 55.6% Total. I9000 mode dongle key web.


Key generator 21 Best Businesses to Start in 2020

Office activation troubleshooter for blocked product key errors that prevent activation of Office Content provided by Microsoft Applies to: Office Professional Academic Office Home and Business Office Home and Student Office Professional Office Professional Plus Office Standard Office Starter More. Designed for ages 5–10, Coding Starter Kit builds coding skills in progression with 3 hands-on learning games. Iridium hack clients s.

  • NRCan Unclassified Microsoft Office 365 Starter Guide
  • HP OfficeJet Pro 8020 All-in-One Printer series Manuals
  • Serial Number, Serial Numbers
  • Amazon.com: Osmo - Coding Starter Kit for iPad
  • Microsoft ends support for Office 2020: What you can do
  • Getting started with Office Starter - Office Support
  • Office Starter Download - Microsoft Community
  • Free microsoft office starter 2020 english Download
  • Free Microsoft Office


Soldiers of fortune payback patch https://zlatdetki.ru/forum/?download=8312. FreeOffice is a complete Office suite with a word processor, a spreadsheet application and a presentation program – all compatible with their counterparts in Microsoft Office. Where do I find the product key for pre-loaded Microsoft Office Starter?

  • Stores Hub products for sale
  • Download Microsoft Office Starter 2020 - gHacks Tech News
  • Microsoft Office Starter 2020 Download
  • Microsoft Office 2020 (All version) free serial number key
  • Insert page numbers - Office Support

Serial Key Generator - Free download and software reviews

This plan works with Office 2020, Office 2020, and Office 2020. The Met Office values the contribution made by industrial placements and therefore for those who complete the Technology Industrial Placement programme, there is the opportunity to return after obtaining your degree as a Technology Graduate. Microsoft has discontinued Office Starter 2020.


Key find Serial Number of Windows PC

As you might be able to tell just by reading its name, Microsoft Office Starter 2020 is a stripped-down version of Microsoft Office 2020. The SK-3 Home Mechanic Starter Kit includes 15 high-quality tools that will help you maintain, clean, adjust, and repair your bicycle for everyday use. As the user runs this program he can find the serial number by clicking on the find option.

Activity code office - Microsoft Download Center

Instant access to inspirational lesson plans, schemes of work, assessment, interactive activities, resource packs, PowerPoints, teaching ideas at Twinkl! To keep up with the latest offers in November 2020, bookmark this page or favourite Harvester on VoucherCodes. Office Hours Call 1-917-300-0470.


Hack information about Office Click-to-Run installation

Hack for hungry shark evolution treasure. Microsoft seemingly is paving the way for its coming new version of its Office Web Apps, part of the Office 2020 release.

99 Cent Store free agents: Shooting Guards

The NBA offseason is always filled with exciting storylines like star free agents and blockbuster trades.
But rather than dwell on the obvious, this series intends to do the opposite: focus on the lower-profile free agents who may have some value to teams. No NBA player is actually "99 Cents," of course, but these are all players who may be bargains based on their perceived market. Most of the players mentioned will probably go in the $3-5M range in terms of salary. Some exceptions will be marked as "featured items" that may go in the higher $5-10M range. If a player is listed as a "clearance rack," then they may be on the fringes of NBA rosters and take minimum deals.
This "99 Cent Store" series has been open for business for the last two offseasons. In the past, we've highlighted names like Fred VanVleet (pre breakout), Davis Bertans, and Christian Wood. Not all of the items turn out to be gems (is Nerlens Noel still not a DPOY candidate yet?), but the returns have been largely positive so far. Let's see if we can keep that momentum going this season.
99 cent store
E'Twaun Moore, New Orleans Pelicans, UFA, 31 years old
Collectively, NBA fans scratched their heads in confusion when the New Orleans Pelicans doled out $8.5M a year for anonymous E'Twaun Moore. After all, this was an unheralded player, a R2 draft pick, a player who hadn't cracked 10 PPG in any of his first six seasons in the league. For all we knew, he was randomly generated by NBA2k.
Three years later, the contract doesn't look much better. Moore got buried this past season in a crowded Pelicans lineup, averaging only 18.2 minutes per game. He doesn't appear to be a part of the franchise's future plans at all. Moore will be tossed out into the darkness, left with no home, and no chance of matching that $8M salary ever again.
However, we have to be mindful as NBA fans not to lump in an "overpaid" player as a synonym for a "bad" player. Someone like Tobias Harris may not be worth his salary, but he's still a good starter. On a lower level, E'Twaun Moore may be the same way. He's not worth $8M a year, but he's actually a solid addition to a rotation (even if the Pelicans squeezed him out.)
Moore's primary virtue is as a 3+D wing. At first glance he's not big enough for that role at 6'4", but he's aided by a pelican-like wingspan that stretches to near 6'10". While he's not a great defender (now at age 31), he's passable at both the SG and SF spots. Offensively, he'll help you as a spacer. He's hit on 39.0% of his threes for his career, and had actually gotten up to 42% and 43% the prior two seasons before he lost some rhythm this season. Even in a down year, he shot 37.7% from deep.
That combination of skills makes Moore a good rotation player, and perhaps even a low-end starter on the right team. I wouldn't expect him to get "overpaid" again, but that's precisely what earns him a place in our store. He's a potential bargain buy right now. If teams miss out on better 3+D wings like Justin Holiday (an alum of this 99 Cent Store column) then they may fall back on a player like Moore.
possible fits
BKN. SG Joe Harris is an excellent shooter, but he's also a free agent. Will the Nets pony up to keep him around? Or will he be jettisoned like others from the pre KD-Kyrie era? If he is, then E'Twaun Moore makes sense as a cheap replacement.
MIL. The shooting guard spot is the biggest question mark for the Bucks, and this offseason may add to the murkiness if Wes Matthews (player option) or Pat Connaughton (UFA) leave town. E'Twaun Moore would be a sensible filler, and platoon with Donte DiVincenzo.
SA. Do Gregg Popovich and the Spurs want to contend for the playoffs in 2020-21? Do they want to blow it up? TBD. But if their intention is to go for the 8th seed, Moore may be an upgrade on the smaller Bryn Forbes, who struggles on the defensive end.
Shaquille Harrison, Chicago Bulls, UFA, 27 years old
Coaches and front offices love to tout that "defense is half the game!" That is, until it's time to actually pay a defensive player. Or draft a defensive player. Or even invite a defensive player onto the roster for a fully guaranteed contract.
Shaq Harrison has been dealing with that struggle for his entire professional career. Coming out of Tulsa, Harrison always had the chops defensively. He's long and agile enough to guard 1s and 2s and even some 3s. The trouble is: shooting was never his strong suit. Even as a senior, he only hit 19.5% from deep in the NCAA. Yikes. That's a surefire recipe to go undrafted, which is exactly what Harrison did.
Since then, Harrison has been trying to improve his shot, the key for him to stick on an NBA roster. This past season, we've started to see some glimmers of progress there. He shot a career-high 38.1% from three, and a career-high 78.0% from the line. Now to be fair, those were both extremely small sample sizes (16-42 from three, 39-50 from the line), but it's still encouraging nonetheless. Because if Harrison can become a passable shooter, then his defensive abilities give him inherent value. He's legitimately one of the better perimeter defenders in the league. ESPN's real plus/minus listed his impact as a +3.0 on defense, which ranked as the 15th best player in the entire NBA (out of 503 qualifiers.) If a coaching staff feels confident in their player development and their shooting coaches, then Harrison would be an intriguing investment to make.
clearance rack
John Konchar, Memphis Grizzlies, 24 years old
Last year, I included Philadelphia PG-SG Shake Milton in this column, causing Sixers fans to riot and demand that I mention the team had the right to extend his two-way contract if they wanted. The team did, and Milton will prove to be a bargain for them over the next few years. Similarly, the Memphis Grizzlies will have that opportunity to keep two-way player John Konchar on the team if they want. But if they don't, I'd be eyeing Konchar as a possible roster addition.
No doubt, there are reasons to doubt John Konchar's NBA prospects. He comes from a school that's so small that they didn't even know what to name it (shifting a few times before settling on "Purdue Fort Wayne"). And at the risk of being politically incorrect, we should also mention that he's white. That element does impact scouting, whether teams want to admit it or not. When an undersized (6'5") white dude walks into the gym, NBA GMs don't exactly sit up and salivate; Liberace showed more excitement at strip clubs.
All that said, Konchar has been productive time and time again. As you'd expect, he can hit the three pointer. Still, he's not the stereotypical catch-and-shoot spacer. What's most intriguing about Konchar is his playing strength. He may be only 6'5" (6'7" wingspan) but he plays much bigger than that. As a college senior, he grabbed 8.5 rebounds a game and blocked 0.9 shots to boot. He also converted 62.9% of his field goals in two-point range. It may have been low level competition, but he flat-out bullied his opponents.
Naturally you'd presume: there's no way he can do that in the pros! But so far, so good. Konchar put up similar numbers in the G-League this season, hitting 56.5% from the field and grabbing 10.3 rebounds per 36 minutes. From there, you'd presume: there's no way he can do that in the actual NBA! Well, in his 160 minutes of NBA action, Konchar shot 65.7% from the field and averaged 9.9 rebounds per 36 minutes.
Clearly, it's too early to take his success as gospel. Konchar needs to keep proving himself. But eventually, we're going to have to presume something else: maybe this guy is actually good. If I ran an NBA team, I'd want to run that experiment with Konchar in our uniform and not someone else's.
previous entries
submitted by ZandrickEllison to nba


The actual reasons why we shouldn't Defund The Police - and what we should do instead.

It's not controversial on this sub to say "Defund the police is a bad idea", but it is worth it - particularly given the reaction to the last post - and particularly now that there are certain people who are trying to rescue the idea from the slogan - so it probably will be useful to create an actual reference point for why it's a bad idea, that also comes coupled with what can be done instead. The good news is, this is no longer a theoretical idea - there's actually some examples of it being put into practice, and we can look at those and how it looks on real police budgets. It goes without saying that these examples aren't necessarily satisfying to the people who push for defunding, so they're not necessarily perfect representations of what they actually want - but I think they demonstrate why the idea isn't worthwhile in the first place.
But first, since the last post was found by people who don't frequent this subreddit, I feel the need to clarify: The actual abuses of police power and the criminal justice system we've seen not just this year, not just over the last six years since Ferguson (it really was that long ago), but for some of us we've seen our entire lives, are nothing short of a pure moral atrocity, and the fact that government departments who are supposed to be reliable touchstones of safety can betray entire segments of the community so consistently and seemingly without fear of reprisal for so long, is such a profound issue that radical reform should be on the table. Ideas about what to do with police needn't be dismissed out of hand just because they're radical. The problem with defunding the police isn't that it's radical, it's that it's wrong. It's not gonna work, there's not much of a way it can work, it's not really compatible with other solutions, it's just a bad idea. Supporting full police abolition is unironically more sensible than police defunding, and I'm serious about that. Police abolitionists don't need to answer any questions about how cops can still reduce crime rates and maintain community perceptions of police effectiveness, after all.
Likewise, don't take this to mean that only radical solutions should be on the table either. The solutions we favour should be, exclusively, the ones that meaningfully fix the justice system overall, and policing in particular.
With that out of the way:
New York Police "Defunding"
You can find a decent treatment of this here, which goes into some of the specific issues with the New York plan, and you should read it.
The NYPD budget is 10.9 billion dollars - viewing defund arguments at their most charitable and sane, it's literally no wonder that anyone who's usually politically told "the policy you don't like is unaffordable" will look to something like that to cut the fat.Earlier in the year, Bill de Blasio announced the intention to move one billion dollars of police funding to other services, which sounds like a huge amount except for the fact that NYC's 2021 budget is 92.8 billion dollars.
The Executive Budget proposed a $10.7 billion NYPD City-funded budget in fiscal year 2021, which was reduced by $474 million in the Adopted Budget. (See Table 1.) Fully 75 percent of the reduction, or $354 million, is in overtime expenses. Another $81 million in savings comes from cancelling the July Police Academy Class.
Like the article says, dramatic reductions in overtime expenses are not a meaningful long term budget cut. This isn't really "defunding", so much as it is a temporary budget restriction. Given how tight the NYC budget already is, some budget cuts to the police shouldn't be too surprising. But it's pretty hard to see - for everyone, really - how this type of budget cut gets anywhere near to the goal of "defunding in order to fund other services".
The budgeted overtime reduction amounts to a 56 percent cut to the fiscal year 2021 NYPD overtime budget compared to the Executive Budget, and a 67 percent decline from fiscal year 2020. [...] These savings are unrealistic; they were not accompanied by a plan or operational strategy, and prior efforts to reduce overtime at the uniformed agencies have been more successful in slowing growth rather than decreasing expenses. The Mayor’s Office contends fewer events (such as parades) will result in less overtime for officers; however, these events comprised 25 to 30 percent of all uniformed police overtime spending in recent years, meaning overtime reforms would need to be far-reaching and potentially negotiated with labor unions to achieve the steep reduction currently budgeted.
Even cutting from overtime for short-term major budget cuts is extremely difficult, and would need to be negotiated with unions, and even then, doesn't really seem to be the meaningful amount people who want defunding are really shooting for. If we take a closer look at the NYPD operating budget, we can learn a bit more about why it's so hard to meaningfully make an actual, substantial one billion dollar cut from it - 88% of the NYPD operating budget is for salaries and wages. Operating expenses for vehicles, maintenance, etc, makes up only 12% of the operating budget. A full 17% of that is for admin duties, with 33% of NYPD employees being civilians. There's not a huge amount of ways to defund this without cutting jobs.
But the NYPD budget never used to be this high. Why has it inflated so much?
Most of the NYPD’s operating budget growth was due to increased spending on administration and communications, patrol, and intelligence and counterterrorism. Together, these account for 61 percent of the operating budget increase from fiscal year 2010 to 2020.
I think it's worth noting that both the Department of Education and Department of Social Services have way higher budgets in New York than the NYPD does, if only to put that 10.9 billion dollar figure in perspective. But operating budget aside, there is another place defunders could look to cut from the NYPD budget -the central expenses, which include debt services, retiree benefits, pension funds, etc. Because while the increase in the operating budget is mostly due to admin, more patrols, and counterterrorism, that doesn't account for the shift from 2.8 billion to 10.9 billion dollars.
In the past, even well-intentioned reformers have had trouble hacking away at these costs because of unusual state constraints. A state constitutional amendment, for instance, limits the ability of municipalities to reform or reduce pension costs once a worker joins the system, even for work that the employee has not yet performed. This means that once a municipality hires a person, the rate at which the employee earns pension benefits cannot be reduced for the rest of his career. By contrast, pension laws in most other states let an employer change the rate of pension benefits for future work. In New York, the only recourse to savings is to change benefit rates for workers not yet hired, though it takes years for those savings to kick in.
The City-Journal article about this is a good read as well, and if you look closely you'll notice a few potential opportunities for ways to take money out of the budget in the long run (in particular, the Medicare age being at 65 when police generally retire younger stands out as something wroth at least looking into for someone who has more time than me), but you'll also see again how the police union stands in the way of most changes you could make to this system.
So, what was the point of all that? Even in one of the most bloated police budgets in the world, reducing that budget is very hard without either cutting wages, cutting benefits, or layoffs - all of which are very hard without going through powerful police unions, and some of them you should question if you want to do those at all. The NYPD's fancy, militarized equipment barely accounts for much of its budget. You can cut into those if you want, but it wont' give you a hugely reduced police presence. As a real policy applied to a real budget, it's almost impossible to see how you could actually do any sort of 'defunding' in NYC. I am open to suggestions though, from anyone whose eyes are sharper than mine. But the obstacle of the union is a huge one, and then you have to do the calculus of whether you should cut police jobs, or really slash police benefits.
Is there evidence that having less police might actually be better? Sort of. The best evidence for that - especially in New York - is the time that the NYPD cut down on 'proactive' policing, aka Broken Windows policing. Crime seemed to go down. This creates the intuition for a lot of people that 'less police = less crime', especially if you're already in an ACAB mindset anyway. The idea shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, basically, but the evidence is far from decisive, and much more 'Hmm, that's interesting'.
But ultimately? A non starter, because you still need to get past the police union.
Portland Police
Portland has a much easier time - it's able to make bigger changes without nearly as much police union negotiation. Portland voted to defund their police department by 15 million in June, significantly less than the demands for a 50 million dollar cut. Why wasn't the 50 million dollar cut made?
Hardesty said on Wednesday that the $50 million cut mentioned last week was not based on any rational analysis, and if it had been, she'd have investigated and considered it.
Yeah, not surprising. But regardless, what was actually cut in the police budget? How'd they find the room to make the changes?
A part of the cuts came from disbanding the Gun Violence Reduction Team, which was formerly the Gang Enforcement Team. One of the Portland city commissioners actually specifically targeted this and attempted to have them disbanded the year earlier, out of concerns specifically about that division being, well, racist. It's worth noting that since they were disbanded in July, gun crime went up in Portland over that month - but, it also seemed to go up nationwide. Drawing a cut and dry conclusion from it isn't so easy. What else?
In addition to dissolving the GVRT, Hardesty's amendments included cutting eight new positions from the city’s Special Emergency Response Team, cutting funding for school resource officers and transit police, and giving nearly $5 million to Portland Street Response, which would deal with homeless people before police get involved.
For the record, absolutely no criticism for the Portland Street Response thing, it should absolutely be done. So, we have an actual example of a city defunding an amount from the police, and reinvesting it in non-police alternatives. In order to do that, it does mean cutting police jobs, and looking into the weeds of the budget to see where you can afford to scale back.
So, here's the question we should be interested in next - did it fix the Portland police?
Remember, this was in June. What happened in Portland later? There really can't be any doubt that whatever bullshit was sent over by Trump in the form of those unmarked federal police played a big role in stirring this up, but into August and September, there was just as much tear gassing, and online stories and accounts of police brutality as ever. It's much easier, of course, to find examples of the DHS federal police guys being evil here, but given that the mayor had to step in afterwards to add "Oh and cut back on the tear gas"... I don't know that defunding really ended up doing anything here. Nor do I think that the additional 18 million to defund that was proposed in October after all this would've done anything.
That's worth looking into quickly, just to see where the money would've come from.
On that list, she suggested eliminating 42 positions vacated by officers who retired in August. She estimated that would save around $7 million.
She also wants PPB to eliminate a combined $1.2 million in funding for the Special Emergency Response Team, or SERT, and the Rapid Response Team.
The latter is a key component in the Bureau's response to protests which have continued almost nightly for months.
To be clear, those are suggestions, not even originally what was specifically budgeted in the cut. The cut was asked for first, and then money was searched for to justify the cut. I definitely think that's absolutely backwards, and it doesn't seem to have done anything to improve relationship between the police and the community, the police and the council, community perception of police effectiveness or satisfaction with the police, it's hard to see if it's done anything regarding to crime prevention when there's a fair few confounding variables in the mix, etc... this second round of cuts didn't pass at the time of the vote, but I have to admit, I'm struggling to see the utility of it.
(Addendum: Ted Wheeler won re-election as mayor of Portland, and his opponent, who supported the 18 million budget cut... well, lost. Chloe Eudaly also lost, and she was a commissioner who was supporting the 50 million figure.)
We don't need to spend too much time on this one. Minneapolis wanted to abolish the police, literally. Remember that?
Instead, they faced public opposition, most vocally from North Minneapolis, a largely black neighbourhood, which saw a dramatic rise in gun crime and robberies after Floyd's death. Residents have become so alarmed they are suing the city.
"We have historically had victims of violence by police," said Cathy Spann, a community organiser, at a recent neighbourhood gathering. "But we are under siege right now with gunfire every single night. The council has to bring in extra force to stop this from happening!"
Anything else I could add to that would be redundant. Read the article anyway though.
Defunding the police almost always means cutting police positions, or police benefits including overtime, pension, etc, or, as we saw in New York, one instance of cutting police training. Looking at how different the situations are in New York and Portland, it's extremely clear that what would be possible with a budget in one city or one part of the country isn't really possible in another, not just because of political reasons, but also legal ones, and the power of police unions varying across the country. When done, it doesn't seem to make a seriously significant difference in police behaviour as far as I can tell. If anyone has any better examples where it has improved police/community relations, or changed police behaviour, please, let me know, because I didn't find them.
At the same time, it's hard to deny some police budgets are super fucking bloated and could use a bit of cutting at the fat, but this isn't always plausible, and you can see how hard even Portland had to work to be able to make reductions in their police budget. How much harder would it be with a far more complicated city - and complicate department - in New York? But then again, the major block in the road in New York really does seem to be the Police Union.
And in reality, to be honest, I'd be shocked to hear that this is what nearly anyone means by "defund the police" - given that there are still plenty of people today who still avocate for it like nobody's attempted to do anything about it, I think it's pretty safe to say that all of these examples so far have probably satisfied nobody who supports these ideas, with the potential exception of the Minneapolis outright police abolition plan? None of this reads as actual 'defunding', definitely not in a meaningful, substantial sense, so I think something that seems like a satisfying, lasting, proper 'defunding' is almost entirely off the table.
I pretty clearly don't think 'defunding' works as an ends to itself, or even that it will usually meaningfully change the police budgets overall in a lot of cases, or even end up meaningfully funding 'police alternatives'. I'm entirely in support of reducing police duties for non-violent calls where possible, and there's good examples of cities who've successfully added supplementary services that might hopefully reduce police demand (and would, logically, end up in a potential opportunity to change the police budget - but I suspect that would just mean 'not allocating as much budget growth year on year' to police, rather than actual budget cuts). So what should be done instead? What would actually impact police behaviour, meaningfully, more than technical budget shifts?
1) Abolish Police Unions
Seriously. If you want to put "abolish" and "police" together in any sentence, talk about abolishing police unions. I've already explained just one way they're standing in the way in New York, although on pretty admittedly normal union grounds, but the abuses of police unions are well documented, and in particular, how they protect bad cops, how they prevent bad cops from being fired, how they help to - as independent bodies - reinforce their own ideas of police warrior culture, blue walls of silence, etc - they're a vector for toxic police culture and mentality, they're an obstacle to any actual budget balancing if any defund advocates want to seriously see that, they just need to fucking go, seriously. And it's worth noting - no large scale 'defunding' of police would be possible without it. Everyone who wants serious, radical reform of the police on a large scale should either want to abolish police unions, or really seriously consider it.
2) End Qualified Immunity
Yeah, I know, real original. Seriously, though, even the CATO INSTITUTE wants to end Qualified Immunity now. If you're someone who thinks about economics, you have to think about the incentives of different situations and jobs, right? Qualified Immunity removes a huge incentive against not breaking the fucking law. I remember it being a fairly prominent part of the Obama 21st Century Policing Taskforce Proposal that for Police Departments to be seen as effective, they had to also be seen as fair, so what's fair, exactly, about Qualified Immunity?
Just gonna quote an ACLU article directly here, because they were kind enough to link to a bunch of specific cases:
Qualified immunity is one reason why police are emboldened to use excessive force without fear of repercussions. They know the law protects them, even if they may be violating the Constitution — a fact driven home by Judge Reeves as he lists a handful of the Black people killed at the hands of police. Senseless shootings like Jacob Blake’s and Dijon Kizzee’s will continue occurring because police officers are essentially allowed to gun down Black people with impunity. This is the abhorrent cost our society pays for qualified immunity.
3) Non-Police alternatives
I think literally everyone agrees on these at this point, and only disagree on how they should be funded, how many there should be, which ones are worth implementing, how they should be implemented, and how much they can replace what existing roles in police forces do. But there's evidence to suggest this meaningfully reduces police misconduct, it's universally popular, you just have to make sure you do it for the right things.
And I was about to go on, but I realized that I'd be going for like, fucking volumes, when in reality this is now very well trodden territory. Oceans of digital ink have been spilled about specific types of retraining for police, firing and rehiring programs in specific police departments across the country, data-driven ways of predicting which police are likely to act violently, etc - some of these evidence based policies might allow for police budgets to be cut, others might require more investment in police budgets, particularly the part about the data-driven predictions of police behaviour. And especially anything that includes proposals about additional police training, or stricter requirements about who gets to be a police officer. Given what we know does and doesn't actually meaningfully reduce police misconduct, there's no reason to start from "Defunding the police" so long as you agree, a priori, that a) We should have police departments, and b) Police departments are effective at reducing crime rates.
And if you disagree with both of those, you should just support police abolition anyway.
submitted by inverseflorida to neoliberal