comment: >
  
  An employee earned income they deferred for retirement. Wether they happen to be employed by a state or private is not relevant.
context: A former Maryland park ranger was arrested and indicted in September for allegedly raping two of his female colleagues. But despite the grim crime he’s accused of, he’s still been allowed to collect nearly $95,000 of his pension as he awaits trial in jail.
  Now, two state lawmakers are hoping to pass legislation to prevent police officers from receiving retirement benefits after being convicted of a felony crime.
  
  ....
  
  Maryland is one of 24 states that have no pension forfeiture laws on the books, meaning that any law enforcement officer who has a pension—even if they’ve been convicted of a crime—is allowed to collect it once they are 55 years old and have served more than 15 years in the job. 
  
  ....
  
  Holding cops who have been found guilty of misconduct accountable is an issue several states have tried to address head-on. States like California, Virginia, and Massachusetts have passed laws allowing them to decertify an officer, essentially ensuring that their record of bad behavior follows them if they try to find a job in law enforcement elsewhere in the country. >
  
  So, in this case the new law would do nothing since the park ranger hasn’t been convicted? >
  
  Which is a good thing, really. As much as we’d sometimes like to see it happen I’m wary of anything resembling a pre-conviction punishment, he’s still innocent right up until the moment a jury finds him guilty. >
  
  Actually, the conviction is not official until sentencing in a number of jurisdictions. >
  
  Isn’t this a no brainer? >
  
  Left: Yes.
  Right: No.
  Center: Meh. >
  
  Am in center. Definite no-brainer. >
  
  Welcome to the left!
  /s? >
  
  On this issue, for sure. >
  
  Centre: how about half a pension? >
  
  Absolutely not. >
  
  Ok then how about 1/3 of a pension and they be forced to wear a clown outfit for a predetermined period of time? >
  
  You somehow came up with a good idea. >
  
  
  Maryland is one of 24 states that have no pension forfeiture laws on the books, meaning that any law enforcement officer who has a pension—even if they’ve been convicted of a crime—is allowed to collect it once they are 55 years old and have served more than 15 years in the job. 
  
  I did not realize so many states still allowed convicted criminals to collect pension from the state. I hope this passes. >
  
  well the issue is convicted criminals on duty. If i committed a crime outside of my work purview then I would still get a pension but if I did it related to my work, then I wouldn't.  
  It has been a law in my state since 1978 >
  
  Accountability for police? What a concept! Somebody should like start a protest movement to raise awareness on the topic… >
  
  Why is it just for police though? Are Maryland lawmakers going to apply the same standard to other government employees such as…Maryland Lawmakers?
  Edit: I was banned from the sub I guess for this chain but to the guy below me: it’s not whataboutism, I was just taking the article at its word which was that Maryland has no pension forfeiture laws. >
  
  I'm all pro-union, but the union representing the cops seems to be more concerned with protecting criminals than making sure cops have appropriate compensation and work conditions.
  If I'm wrong, I'm happy to listen to the opposing view. >
  
  Police unions aren’t unions, that’s why they do what they do. A union helps protect its members from employer abuse, police unions specifically help prevent their members from being held accountable for their actions. >
  
  Exactly. It isn’t a union, it’s a fucking racket, and the entire police force is basically a government funded/protected gang. >
  
  People should stop calling these unions because they’re actually more like mafias. >
  
  Public sector unions=bad, private sector unions=good >
  
  wouldn’t that also include firefighter unions, teachers unions, and the APWU? i’m not sure those are bad…
  i think this is specifically a police union issue. >
  
  Teacher unions are not operating in the interest of the students. >
  
  Their pensions should go to the families of their victims! >
  
  Yes.  That is perfect. >
  
  Good. I hope it happens >
  
  If non-cop gets convicted of a crime they don't lose their pensions, even other government employees.  If they worked without issue for 29 years and in the last year did illegal shit and got busted - they should lose 29 years of "honest" pension?
  Even though this isn't how it works for anyone else convicted of a crime? >
  
  It should only be for committing crimes in the line of duty. If a cop in their free time commits a crime, even murder, then yes, they should get to keep their pension. But not if they commit a crime abusing their power as a police officer. If you worked for a company for 29 years without issue, then you embezzled money from the company, would you expect to get your pension? >
  
  If a cop commits a crime outside of work, his cop buddies help cover it up. It's a story as old as time. >
  
  It's amazing that this kind of thing took THIS long to be suggested.  Kind of how it took this long for people to pass laws making it illegal for cops to sleep with people they arrest. >
  
  Yes.. currently tax payers have to foot the bill for these criminals, just because they happen to be cops. They need to feel the pain and have real consequences for their actions or things will continue to get worse. In fact, when they break the law or abuse their power the penalty should be worse because they are entrusted with so much power. >
  
  You'd think no one would have to fight for basic shit like this. >
  
  I do not know what happens to forfeiture of pension funds.  My hope  is it is donated, like in this case, to a organization related to the crime(s) like Rape Crisis Centers or to pro bono legal services. >
  
  It would become property of the state to use in the general fund. >
  
  How a park ranger gets a $95k/year pension is the real question. He had to have made like $150k/year to get that. >
  
  JFC just make all officers carry insurance.  It works for doctors. >
  
  Better yet, make the unions cover the pensions for cops convicted or fired for cause.   
  That would clean the shit up pronto. >
  
  Why does everyone say this. Do you know what a union is? 
  Also, lots of cops not in unions. >
  
  Because they would stop covering for each other if it was costing them money.   
  I am very familiar with unions >
  
  So why would the union be responsible? You said you’re familiar with unions, then you’d know it’s a bargaining unit between employee and employer. You want members of the bargaining unit to be punished with no due process and with no evidence of any wrong doing. Why would that make sense? If I got hired at any job anywhere and told “if someone else gets caught stealing, the restitution and civil demand comes out of everyone’s paycheck, I just wouldn’t do the job. Nobody would. >
  
  It’s a start >
  
  Well, yes. That would be nice. Also, make money for damages come from the cops and not the taxpayer. Thanks. >
  
  Sounds reasonable and should extend to insurrectionist Congresspersons as well. >
  
  80 percent of the Baltimore PD retires before this comes into effect. >
  
  Good. Get them out of here. >
  
  But they're armed and dangerous! >
  
  im ok with this >
  
  Umm…yeah? No brained. 14 years in the military and you know what we do to people who break military law? Yup, kick them out. Easy decision. >
  
  Why only criminal cops?  How about the American terrorists that invaded our Capital building on Jan 6.  How many of those are on public assistance?  How many are collecting Medicare and Social Security benefits?  Essentially being rewarded for their acts of terror against the U.S. >
  
  Let me guess, the Police Union is having none of it. >
  
  
  The state Fraternal Order of Police claims giving the state the ability to take away an officer’s pension makes the job less attractive to potential new recruits.
  
  If being able to collect a pension after committing a crime on the job was part of what made it attractive, then fuck those candidates. And fuck the Fraternal Order of Police for enabling this shit. >
  
  How about we don't just take their pensions away, how about making it so that all lawsuit settlements come out of their pension fund.  A cop risking his own pension for a large payout is one thing, all of the cops risking their pension because Gary has to be a crooked asshole is quite another.
  Things will work themselves out. >
  
  Yes, this.  The police unions and pensions should pay the fines, not the taxpayers. Maybe then they’ll police themselves or leave. >
  
  I'd settle for criminals no longer able to keep being cops. >
  
  Not good enough. I dont want them stealing tax dollars if they're criminals. >
  
  I have one question that never gets asked. In the article 
  “The state Fraternal Order of Police claims giving the state the ability to take away an officer’s pension makes the job less attractive to potential new recruits.”
  Why? How does this make the job less attractive. Were you planning on breaking the law and collecting a pension. >
  
  Excellent question >
  
  
  "Maryland is one of 24 states that have no pension forfeiture laws on the books, meaning that any law enforcement officer who has a pension—even if they’ve been convicted of a crime—is allowed to collect it once they are 55 years old and have served more than 15 years in the job. "
  
  Well, that is just wrong.  Giving (the one of the worst kind - they betrayed the public trust and forsook their oaths of office) criminals  a pension? >
  
  Grew up in MD. Absolutely a 'police' state. If you're going to give them the run of the house, it should absolutely come with accountability and consequences. >
  
  About FUCKING time! >
  
  GOOD. About fucking time. >
  
  Yes >
  
  Center present.  
  I say good. >
  
  As a Minnesotan, I fully support >
  
  Yes! Next do presidents. >
  
  Maybe criminal presidents shouldn’t get their pensions either >
  
  honestly, they should be paying for lawsuits out of those pensions as well. See how fast behavior changes then. >
  
  Good. >
  
  Fox: The Left’s War on Cops >
  
  If they make this a country wide thing, they outta start with the murderer cop from Mesa that shot an innocent man on his hands and knees begging for his life. >
  
  Great idea! Hope it catches on. >
  
  Why would they get their pensions?!? >
  
  
  Why would they get their pensions?!?
  
  Because its their money? Its paid for out of their own paychecks? Firefighters and cops (and many other government employees) literally don't pay social security taxes, they pay into pension funds for their retirement. >
  
  Right. Which should be forfeit if they’re criminals. >
  
  Sure, right after we confiscate the property of all other convicted criminals and bar them from ever collecting social security/disability. >
  
  That actually happens my man…. >
  
  The only property confiscated from criminals is whatever is used in the commission of their crimes (IE: the car or house a drug dealer deals their drugs from)... And the only time criminals are barred from social security is during the time when they are actually incarcerated.  The government can't deny anyone's entitlements based on prior convictions, for the exact same reason it makes no sense to confiscate police pensions. >
  
  Finally some Common Sense legislation!
  Now get rid of Qualified immunity to rein in law enforcement of their “reinforced untouchable mentality”. >
  
  The police refund I've been waiting for. >
  
  Good luck getting that by the police union.
  Cops always protect their criminal friends. >
  
  What? No! That’s consequences. There can’t be consequences. How are they going to enlist more ~~criminals~~ officers if they aren’t rewarded for years of committing crime. >
  
  First, let’s stop letting them walk away impunity. >
  
  The pensions should be tossed into an umbrella account that pays the victims restitution.. it may be mediocre but it will still take away from the shitheads that use their power in unjust ways >
  
  If they committed a felony on the job, sure.
  I don’t like the idea of taking pensions from anybody for anything they’ve done outside of that job, though. >
  
  What about if they clock out and then go home and clock their wives? And their buddies on the force help them cover for it? Would you be okay with the cop getting his pension then? Or if he clocks out for a break and rapes a girl. Then clocks back in and covers up the evidence. >
  
  Said what I said >
  
  Stop protecting cops (and their pensions) from civil lawsuits. >
  
  Uh, yeah. Criminals should not get pensions. >
  
  You can't take away someone's pension just because they've committed crimes. No shit. >
  
  Unless they pass a law saying they can... >
  
  Dang, based Maryland? >
  
  Yes! Any lawsuits they get convicted and named in should come from pensions! >
  
  I don't know man. What would you think if they after your 401k after you fucked up on the job? >
  
  If I murder unarmed and/or innocent people at my job, I would understand if they came after my 401k >
  
  Jail, prison, death penalty, restitution of future wages. 
  But forfeiture of retirement to further enrich that policy makes no sense. Disregarding the actual cause to convolute the system even more makes no sense. >
  
  The cause shouldn’t be disregarded, but if it takes losing their pension to get them to do their jobs properly, then it’s an acceptable first quick action to take. It’s kinda weird to be more upset about cops losing their pension than the fact that cops are committing crimes at all, let alone some of the most egregious crimes.
  Edit: Same way certain folk say people shouldn’t commit crimes if they don’t want to deal with cops, cops shouldn’t commit crimes if they want to keep their pensions. Seems pretty simple and straightforward. >
  
  How much farther of a stretch is it, if we can take theirs then we can take yours. Once that can of worms is opened, it will never be put back. >
  
  I already said if I kill people unjustly at my job then they can go ahead and take mine >
  
  acab. >
  
  If you commit a crime would you want to give up your 401k? 
  What if the crime was in commission of trying to do your job? >
  
  401k’s aren’t taxpayer funded, are they?