Anonymous op-ed rant:
The people who seemingly were involved with civil rights activist sandra bland's death and cover-up are not getting into trouble or paying a dime, but now the government is essentially saying to the victim's family, "here's $1.9 million, will that keep you quiet?" And It's not even coming out of police department's pocket, it taxpayer dollars. technically, it's your money.
The settlement is apparently to avoid charges or a public display of possibly horrifying details, but really, shouldn't we be having some sort of trial here? for police who tried to make it look like a suicide?
Regarding the family's compensation however, perhaps something like the equivalent of a kickstarter should be the norm of what is set up to help raise $1.9million for Sandra's family, in order to allow them to independently seek justice in court. forcing the family to chose between compensation or justice seems so odd and wrong, if not straight-up shady.
In kind of a parallel situation, the Obama administration is paying $1.1 million dollars to the family of an italian aid worker killed in a drone strike.
Not that the family shouldn't be compensated for this tragedy of course, the problem is there's no visible effort to avoid it, just a policy of covering it up with pay-offs when it's someone americans might seemingly be more sympathetic for.
And is it even the military's money? or perhaps even more appropriately the person who made the decision to drone a place with innocent people? of course not, it's taxpayer money. again, technically, your money.
But this has nothing to do with saving tax dollars, the point is only to illustrate the government can kind of do whatever they want cause they have a blank check from the american people to cover any damages or payoff victim's families out of court to avoid potentially messy trials.
would the american public approve money for such things if they had a say in the budget?
for accidental deaths, i'd imagine of course, but for these types of systematic reckless killings of which there seem to be no end in sight to? doubtful.
Third and final example, we have a clear and jaw-dropping telling of how a company can simply pay off elected officials to get them off the hook for poisoning kids... from the article below: "The Guardian exposé focused on the shocking story of one corporate giver, lead pigment manufacturer Harold Simmons, who gave a $500,000 corporate check on top of $250,000 in personal contributions and was rewarded with a change to the law which would retroactively cancel the lawsuits of 173 children poisoned by lead paint."
So the cynical moral of the story which one could extrapolate from these unfortunate events might be:
It is acceptable for the government to kill or cause extreme harm to innocent people because they can just use taxpayer dollars to pay off victims.
and it is ok for the rich and powerful to cause extreme harm to innocent people because they can just pay off politicians.
... and who knows, perhaps this is an adequate system of justice, but then maybe all other criminal activity should be sentenced strictly using a financial set of penalties as well, and not have a system where we punish some crimes with harsh prison terms and others solely with bribes.