Ferguson unrest

[Bryan]

Apparently you saw a different video than the rest of us.

I saw the same video, unlike you, I actually understand what was in it.

[On Guard for Thee]

I saw the same video, unlike you, I actually understand what was in it.

So then you do get that it was a choke hold, and that a man is dead.

[eyeball]

I saw the same video, unlike you, I actually understand what was in it.

So you're saying all the experts that have declared they saw a choke hold are wrong or that they saw a different video? Have you been in contact with the authorities to set this record straight? If not, why? Don't you think as a professional you have a duty to do or say something?

[Argus]

So you're saying all the experts that have declared they saw a choke hold are wrong or that they saw a different video?

Which experts are you referring to?

[eyeball]

The medical examiners who examined Eric Garner. They cited neck compressions amongst the causes of death.

What I still don't get is how cops can fail to recognize what a pathetic threat such an obese out of shape individual represents. I suppose Garner could have fallen on one of them. Maybe police should be gunning fat people down just in case.

Edited December 10, 2014 by eyeball

[On Guard for Thee]

Which experts are you referring to?

You'd thing the answer should be obvious. They have these people, called doctors.

[Bryan]

So you're saying all the experts that have declared they saw a choke hold are wrong or that they saw a different video?

Who specifically are you calling an expert on chokeholds? Where do they train?

[On Guard for Thee]

Who specifically are you calling an expert on chokeholds? Where do they train?

How about anybody who saw the video to start with, and then the medical examiner who concluded the cause of death. I think they trained in medical school. The rest of us don't need a lot of training in a dojo to understand pulling your arm closed around someone's neck might just be choking them. duh

[GostHacked]

I don't know that he treated me badly. At the time everyone was jumpy and I didn't want an escalation of the situation. Maybe some citizens don't have my skills as a lawyer to avoid confrontation where needed.

Your job, as a lawyer, is all about confrontation.

[eyeball]

Who specifically are you calling an expert on chokeholds? Where do they train?

I don't know, I learned how when I was 11 across the street in Buddy's basement. I was pretty good at it too.

I knew when to stop.

[On Guard for Thee]

I don't know, I learned how when I was 11 across the street in Buddy's basement. I was pretty good at it too.

I knew when to stop.

I learned it in high school on the wrestling team. It ain't rocket science as Bryan would like us to believe.

[jbg]

I don't know that he treated me badly. At the time everyone was jumpy and I didn't want an escalation of the situation. Maybe some citizens don't have my skills as a lawyer to avoid confrontation where needed.

Your job, as a lawyer, is all about confrontation.

Sadly, you don't have much exposure to reputable or good lawyers if you believe that. I see my job as encouraging consensus where possible, confrontation where necessary.

[eyeball]

I learned it in high school on the wrestling team. It ain't rocket science as Bryan would like us to believe.

Point being, this issue isn't about police forces using choke-holds in buggered-up take downs...it's just about buggered-up police.

[On Guard for Thee]

Point being, this issue isn't about police forces using choke-holds in buggered-up take downs...it's just about buggered-up police.

And we are not immune here in Canada either. I have witnessed a couple of times cops reacting to a simple drunk in public as those guys with size nine necks and size 4 hat's, if you get my drift

[Black Dog]

First off, yes he was. He argued with the cops for some time, then cops told him to put his hands behind his back and he ignored them. When they grabbed for his arms he twisted away saying "don't touch me!", at which one of the cops grabbed him from behind to put him down.

Oh well in that case, he definitely deserved to be choked and have his faced shoved into the ground. NYPD policy and general common sense dictates police should use the minimum amount of force necessary to effect an arrest. This looks to me like Maslow's hammer in action.

It happens, on occasion, but it isn't often someone gets shot by police who wasn't a criminal and wasn't putting up any kind of fight.

It happens often enough in the States. Of course we don't know how often because there are no reliable statistics around shooting deaths.

Oh bullshit. Just because I don't spout old sixties anarchist crap about 'the pigs' and ignore context doesn't make me any less capable of judging the authorities wrong when I believe they did wrong. I've posted numerous criticisms of police in the past.

Unlike you, though, my indignation is based on circumstances, not juvenile anti-authority crap.

Oh boo hoo. Your problem is you still see this stuff as a bunch of bad apple incidents: a bug, not an actual feature of the system.

Edited December 10, 2014 by Black Dog

[Shady]

The moral of the story is simple. If you commit a crime, and resist arrest, bad things can happen.

[Black Dog]

The moral of the story is simple. If you commit a crime, and resist arrest, bad things can happen.

And sometimes you can do nothing at all and bad things can happen. See Shady, most adults recognize the world isn't divided neatly into "good guys" and "bad guys". Hope you get there someday.

[Shady]

And sometimes you can do nothing at all and bad things can happen. See Shady, most adults recognize the world isn't divided neatly into "good guys" and "bad guys". Hope you get there someday.

Yes sometimes that's true. But not in the case of Michael Brown or Mr. Garner. They both commited crimes and resisted arrest. Generally, if you steer clear of that, you'll be fine. No matter what race, sex, colour or creed.

[Black Dog]

Yes sometimes that's true.

So what you're saying is your previous post was total rot.

But not in the case of Michael Brown or Mr. Garner. They both commited crimes and resisted arrest. Generally, if you steer clear of that, you'll be fine. No matter what race, sex, colour or creed.

Except, in the real world, people do commit crimes (even one's as heinous as selling loose cigarettes). That's why we have police in the first place. Police are expected to act with restraint and humanity even in difficult circumstances, which is why, when they fail, as they did in both these cases, it's worthy of our attention. I know that's probably a bit more nuance than you can manage, though.

[bush_cheney2004]

The moral of the story is simple. If you commit a crime, and resist arrest, bad things can happen.

pretty much...which leads to the logical question: Why do people resist arrest ?

Yahoo answers knows all the reasons !

Some feel the arrest is unjust.

Some are in an altered state.

Some are mentally ill ...the cops play right into the delusions a person is having.

Some are wanted on other charges.

Some panic.

Some are terrified of jail and will resist even a puny charge just because jail scares them or the cops scare them.

Some resist because they hate cops and hope to get a good shot in on them or more.

Some are suicidal and are trying to get killed.

Some are just stupid.

[Shady]

So what you're saying is your previous post was total rot.

Except, in the real world, people do commit crimes (even one's as heinous as selling loose cigarettes). That's why we have police in the first place. Police are expected to act with restraint and humanity even in difficult circumstances, which is why, when they fail, as they did in both these cases, it's worthy of our attention. I know that's probably a bit more nuance than you can manage, though.

I agree that it's worthy of attention. But when somebody has already been arrested for said activities 30 some times, and is arrested once again, even for loose cigarettes, there isn't an option of declining arrest. The police were there at the request of the businesses he was selling in front of. If somebody was selling cigarettes in front of your house, what would you expect the police to do? Would you be ok if they just left him there, selling in front of your house because he didn't agree with the arrest? Arrests aren't debatable. If one feels that they were wrongfully arrested, there's a legal precedure one can follow to be compensated. Again, the moral is, don't commit a crime and resist arrest, and 99.999999999999999999999% of the time, you'll be fine.

[Shady]

pretty much...which leads to the logical question: Why do people resist arrest ?

Yahoo answers knows all the reasons !

Some feel the arrest is unjust.

Some are in an altered state.

Some are mentally ill ...the cops play right into the delusions a person is having.

Some are wanted on other charges.

Some panic.

Some are terrified of jail and will resist even a puny charge just because jail scares them or the cops scare them.

Some resist because they hate cops and hope to get a good shot in on them or more.

Some are suicidal and are trying to get killed.

Some are just stupid.

Exactly. I wonder what would happen if I pulled a Mike Brown or Eric Garner while I was speeding, and refused to be pulled over? I'd probably be in store for some unpleasant things huh? I wonder why it's so hard for people to understand?

[Black Dog]

I agree that it's worthy of attention. But when somebody has already been arrested for said activities 30 some times, and is arrested once again, even for loose cigarettes, there isn't an option of declining arrest. The police were there at the request of the businesses he was selling in front of. If somebody was selling cigarettes in front of your house, what would you expect the police to do? Would you be ok if they just left him there, selling in front of your house because he didn't agree with the arrest? Arrests aren't debatable. If one feels that they were wrongfully arrested, there's a legal precedure one can follow to be compensated. Again, the moral is, don't commit a crime and resist arrest, and 99.999999999999999999999% of the time, you'll be fine.

I don't know if it's willful ignorance on your part here or just basic stupidity that compels you to write stuff like this, but no one has suggested that someone committing a crime be left alone. Instead, people are proposing the (apparently radical) idea that maybe there were other things that could have been done in this situation, such as continuing to engage with the individual to secure their compliance or, if it was necessary to actually take him into custody, not do so by deploying a technique that has been specifically banned by the police force for more than 20 years.

[Black Dog]

Exactly. I wonder what would happen if I pulled a Mike Brown or Eric Garner while I was speeding, and refused to be pulled over? I'd probably be in store for some unpleasant things huh? I wonder why it's so hard for people to understand?

You guys take your strawmen out for double dates or what?

[Shady]

I don't know if it's willful ignorance on your part here or just basic stupidity that compels you to write stuff like this, but no one has suggested that someone committing a crime be left alone. Instead, people are proposing the (apparently radical) idea that maybe there were other things that could have been done in this situation, such as continuing to engage with the individual to secure their compliance or, if it was necessary to actually take him into custody, not do so by deploying a technique that has been specifically banned by the police force for more than 20 years.

Oh I know, they had already talked to him for about 20 minutes, but they should have talked longer, like it's a debating club or something. There is NO debate. And yes, they could have used other means, like a taser or something, provided that that didn't kill him as well. See Vancouver airport.