Ferguson unrest

[sharkman]

Illegal choke holds can kill anyone. And, they're illegal.

It's been repeated in the media and elsewhere. The choke hold is not illegal in NY. Here is a link.

Here is a quote.

Chokeholds were banned by the New York City Police Department in 1993, although the tactic is not prohibited by New York City law -- or at least not yet (a bill has been introduced in the New York City Council that would make chokeholds illegal).

If chokeholds were already illegal in NY, then they wouldn't be introducing a bill to make them illegal. Let me know if you're still having trouble with this.

[On Guard for Thee]

It's been repeated in the media and elsewhere. The choke hold is not illegal in NY. Here is a link.

Here is a quote.

If chokeholds were already illegal in NY, then they wouldn't be introducing a bill to make them illegal. Let me know if you're still having trouble with this.

Try looking up NY penal article 121.

[Shady]

Try looking up NY penal article 121.

Why don't you post it instead?

[On Guard for Thee]

Why don't you post it instead?

I've already done so and already directed you to where. What more do you need?

[Smallc]

I've already done so and already directed you to where. What more do you need?

Then link to the post.

[On Guard for Thee]

Then link to the post.

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article121.htm

[eyeball]

You said quite a mouthful,

What I said was very concise. My wife and I worry about our son being killed whenever we hear stories about excessive police force, which is more and more often.

but it sounds like you're pretty concerned about a "way over-the-top get-tough crack-down mentality that seems to have permeated police forces everywhere". I tend to be skeptical of conspiracy theories.

That's just the hard-boiled right-winger in you offering up the same old worn out conspiracy card. A good number of you are pretty good at leaving the impression that you think police are nowhere near excessive enough.

[Smallc]

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article121.htm

It's banned for you and me, not for police officers.

[jbg]

It's banned for you and me, not for police officers.

No it isn't. Here's the text, cloned:

S 121.11 Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation.  A  person  is  guilty  of  criminal  obstruction of breathing or blood  circulation  when,  with  intent to impede the normal breathing or  circulation of the blood of another person, he or she:    a. applies pressure on the throat or neck of such person; or    b. blocks the nose or mouth of such person.  Criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation  is a class A misdemeanor.S 121.12 Strangulation in the second degree.               *Hate Crime Specified Offense  A  person  is  guilty of strangulation in the second degree when he or  she commits the crime of criminal obstruction of breathing or blood  circulation, as defined in section 121.11 of this article, and thereby  causes stupor, loss of consciousness for any period of time, or any  other physical injury or impairment.  Strangulation in the second degree is a class D felony.  *Class D Violent FelonyS 121.13 Strangulation in the first degree.               *Hate Crime Specified Offense  A person is guilty of strangulation in the first degree when he or she  commits the crime of criminal obstruction of breathing or blood  circulation, as defined in section 121.11 of this article, and thereby  causes serious physical injury to such other person.  Strangulation in the first degree is a class C felony.  *Class C Violent FelonyS 121.14 Medical or dental purpose.  For purposes of sections 121.11, 121.12 and 121.13 of this article, it  shall be an affirmative defense that the defendant performed such  conduct for a valid medical or dental purpose.Top of Page

[On Guard for Thee]

It's banned for you and me, not for police officers.

Penal codes are not applied by occupation. Illegal, is illegal. Do you see anything in the law that says cops can be exempt? Of course not.

[Shady]

Penal codes are not applied by occupation. Illegal, is illegal. Do you see anything in the law that says cops can be exempt? Of course not.

Then why did the NYPD just recently change their policy? Smallc is exactly right. Just like cops are allowed to speed in certain circumstances. Doesn't mean I can speed.

[On Guard for Thee]

Then why did the NYPD just recently change their policy? Smallc is exactly right. Just like cops are allowed to speed in certain circumstances. Doesn't mean I can speed.

Once again, let me explain, the NYPD changed their policy because it caused too many deaths. AND, it also became illegal. Please understand there is a difference between a policy and a law.

[poochy]

Penal codes are not applied by occupation. Illegal, is illegal. Do you see anything in the law that says cops can be exempt? Of course not.

So police officers aren't afforded different rights in the performance and execution of thier duties than civilians are? Hmm, last i checked I can't carry a handgun on my hip, it is in fact illegal, police can, in most places in the USA the law is no different than here. So you might be right about this chokehold, but you are wrong in general, obviously.

[On Guard for Thee]

So police officers aren't afforded different rights in the performance and execution of thier duties than civilians are? Hmm, last i checked I can't carry a handgun on my hip, it is in fact illegal, police can, in most places in the USA the law is no different than here. So you might be right about this chokehold, but you are wrong in general, obviously.

In most places in the US the law is much different than here, if there is any gun law at all. But yes, cops are in most places allowed to carry guns, by law. In NY they are not allowed to use a choke hold, by law. Sorry, you are as wrong as usual. But carry on, winding you up is fun.

[Shady]

So police officers aren't afforded different rights in the performance and execution of thier duties than civilians are? Hmm, last i checked I can't carry a handgun on my hip, it is in fact illegal, police can, in most places in the USA the law is no different than here. So you might be right about this chokehold, but you are wrong in general, obviously.

Exactly. And up until very recently, it was even part of their policy to use choke holds, despite the law.

[Black Dog]

Exactly. And up until very recently, it was even part of their policy to use choke holds, despite the law.

Very recently = 21 years.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Black Dog

[Black Dog]

A study which provides support for the notion that whatever problems exist they have nothing to do with race.

Yeah, nothing to do with race, so long as you completely ignore why one particular racial group is so much more poor than most others.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Black Dog

[Black Dog]

Indeed, pretty much the moment someone mentions the words "white privilege", I know it's safe to ignore whatever argument they are about to make, since it won't make any sense.

*proceeds to not make any sense*

Like cybercoma's example... the supposed white privilege of not being attacked by cops without reason. That's not a privilege dude, that's a right. A right that should extend to everyone. If it doesn't, then the police agencies that attack people for no reason should receive reprimands (including criminal prosecution where appropriate) and additional training/oversight so as to rectify the situation. But to frame the issue as one of white privilege makes no sense whatsoever, it is just a manifestation of the race-obsession that some people seem to have. As cybercoma stated before, to him/her, everything is apparently always about race.

It's amazing how racial disparities in things like law enforcement and punishment simply vanish when one chooses to ignore them, as you do here.

It's not a privilege to be treated the way you are supposed to be treated. It's an under-privilege to not be.

Which makes those people who do enjoy the rights and protections they are supposed to privileged when compared to those who do not.

[Shady]

Yeah, nothing to do with race, so long as you completely ignore why one particular racial group is so much more poor than most others.

The two most important reasons are disintegration of the black family, and lack of access to good education.

[Black Dog]

The two most important reasons are disintegration of the black family, and lack of access to good education.

And why have those things occurred?

Funny that both of these things were cited as reasons for the failure of blacks as far back as the mid 1960s.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Black Dog

[Argus]

Selling loosies on the street merits a ticket by the police officers. There is absolutely no need to tackle them to ground. Issue a ticket and move on. It was simply a power trip for the local police which resulted in the death of someone committing a misdemeanor.

You're an expert in American law, are you?

When a police officer decides to arrest you or any reason whatsoever he or she is legally authorized to use whatever amount of force is necessary to overcome your resistance, up to and including killing you. The situation is no different in Canada or anywhere else.

[Argus]

And why have those things occurred?

Funny that both of these things were cited as reasons for the failure of blacks as far back as the mid 1960s.

They are interrelated with drugs, which began to really hit the Black community in the late 60s. Too many teenagers having kids, and raising them without any active participation from the fathers. The girls become 'ho's' and have kids themselves, while the boys join gangs and breed more kids on multiple 'ho's'. Gangstas and drug dealers become male role models, and 'respect' becomes something worth killing over. You see the same sort of thing in Jamaica, with the same kind of results.

I don't see a way to end it, and nobody else does either. That's why it's still happening. Maybe a massive push for birth control to adolescents might help. But one of the problems is so many girls don't mind having babies as teenagers since they don't foresee any other life for themselves anyway.

[Black Dog]

They are interrelated with drugs, which began to really hit the Black community in the late 60s.

Not just drugs, but the war on drugs, which led to mass incarceration of black fathers and mothers.

I don't see a way to end it, and nobody else does either.

Sensible policy on drugs would help a lot.

[Shady]

Not just drugs, but the war on drugs, which led to mass incarceration of black fathers and mothers.

Sensible policy on drugs would help a lot.

This "mass incarceration" is still a small percentage of black fathers. So no, that's not the ultimate reason.

[Black Dog]

This "mass incarceration" is still a small percentage of black fathers.

One in every 15 black males in in prison compared to one in every 106 white men. One in three black males can expect to spend some time in prison in their lifetime.

So no, that's not the ultimate reason.

OK: what is the ultimate reason?

Edited December 8, 2014 by Black Dog