Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
Your opinion apparently is that, at present, they're equally detrimental to the punishment levied to police officers who are guilty of malpractice. Fine. Others hold a different opinion. Also fine.
|
But that's not what the tweet is saying. The tweet is, simply and directly, saying, "hey, when doctors get a malpractice suit against them, they lose their license and their career is over - why isn't that what happens to police officers when they get a claim against them in their job"?
The correct response to that question is, "you're wrong; most of the time that doesn't happen to doctors who get a malpractice suit against them. What happens to them when they commit malpractice depends on the nature of the malpractice. That's true of police malpractice, too. So the difference you're seeing is actually just a result of your ignorance about how malpractice suits play out in the real world."
The point is, on its face, incorrect. It isn't making some nuanced claim about how rigorous medical review boards are in examining the conduct of doctors, and then comparing that to the way police internal investigations are conducted. You don't even need to get into the inherent differences in the two different professions in terms of what they require and who they're interacting with (although you probably should if you want to try to make those sorts of comparisons).