U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 09:49 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
It's not really my call. If there are protest will I support them? Yes.

I don't support the taking of another life outside of direct self defense but unfortunately, this sometimes happens when there are protests.
I didn't say it was your call. I asked your opinion.


Glad to see we're on the same page re: use of force.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 09:53 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Stopping a police officer from violating your civil rights is not breaking the law. It is the police officer breaking the law. I have the legal right up to and including lethal force in stopping someone from violating my civil rights.



He was standing around on the sidewalk. I saw this mentioned the other day so I will not claim it as mine. This shows where the government is willing to kill you over a violation no matter how petty. That's the system you support? Are you a big authoritarian government type of guy?


Please, please, please stop misrepresenting this as an intentional killing. Negligent homicide? Perhaps.


Intentionally conflating what happened with "the government being willing to kill you" is not helping your argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:12 AM
 
79,457 posts, read 33,670,997 times
Reputation: 15894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
Please, please, please stop misrepresenting this as an intentional killing. Negligent homicide? Perhaps.
This is not the only example. When we excuse the many examples over and over and over, yes they become intentional murders.


Quote:
Intentionally conflating what happened with "the government being willing to kill you" is not helping your argument.
He was telling them he could not breath. They did not care. The supervisor even shrugged it off as no loss.

Those who could have performed CPR just stood around to watch him die.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:39 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
This is not the only example. When we excuse the many examples over and over and over, yes they become intentional murders.

No, they simply don't. No more so than does one (or more) LEO conviction for killing a suspect prove the opposite.




Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
He was telling them he could not breath. They did not care. The supervisor even shrugged it off as no loss.

Those who could have performed CPR just stood around to watch him die.


If you can speak, you can breathe. How often do you suppose they hear complaints like that? "These cuffs are too tight."


I thought the reporting was that he was still breathing even after he lost consciousness? You don't perform CPR on someone who is still breathing.


Like I said, you're simply undermining your own argument - which is legitimate. You do you, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:57 AM
 
79,457 posts, read 33,670,997 times
Reputation: 15894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
No, they simply don't. No more so than does one (or more) LEO conviction for killing a suspect prove the opposite.
The violate rights because they have known they can get away with it. That is slowly starting to change somewhat but this case shows we still have a long ways to go.

When you know that no matter what you do, the system will defend you, it's intentional.


Quote:
If you can speak, you can breathe. How often do you suppose they hear complaints like that? "These cuffs are too tight."
When you are having a heart attack it feels like you can not breath.

[quote]I thought the reporting was that he was still breathing even after he lost consciousness? You don't perform CPR on someone who is still breathing.

He was laying there dying and the EMT continued to instruct him to "get up".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:02 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
The violate rights because they have known they can get away with it. That is slowly starting to change somewhat but this case shows we still have a long ways to go.

When you know that no matter what you do, the system will defend you, it's intentional.

No, it's not, but I'm done arguing with you about it.




Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
When you are having a heart attack it feels like you can not breath.

So, by him saying "I can't breathe" the LEOs should have known he was having a heart attack? Is that what you're saying?


Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
He was laying there dying and the EMT continued to instruct him to "get up".

So, it's the EMT's fault he died, not Officer Pana-whatever?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:04 AM
 
79,457 posts, read 33,670,997 times
Reputation: 15894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post

So, by him saying "I can't breathe" the LEOs should have known he was having a heart attack? Is that what you're saying?
We can go off on these tangents but when it comes down to it, they had NO right to touch or demand anything out of him. If that stops, the rest becomes immaterial.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:11 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
We can go off on these tangents but when it comes down to it, they had NO right to touch or demand anything out of him. If that stops, the rest becomes immaterial.


We can play the "what if" game all day, too. *IF* Garner hadn't physically resisted being taken into custody, none of this would have happened, either.


The question becomes what was "reasonable" or not and what was proper procedure or not.


Comply with the officers and then after you are cut loose because there was no real reason for you to be arrested in the first place, you sue the pants off the city. Hitting them in the pocketbook will cause a change in policing a LOT faster than any sort of physical retaliation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:18 AM
 
79,457 posts, read 33,670,997 times
Reputation: 15894
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
We can play the "what if" game all day, too. *IF* Garner hadn't physically resisted being taken into custody, none of this would have happened, either.


The question becomes what was "reasonable" or not and what was proper procedure or not.


Comply with the officers and then after you are cut loose because there was no real reason for you to be arrested in the first place, you sue the pants off the city. Hitting them in the pocketbook will cause a change in policing a LOT faster than any sort of physical retaliation.
NO, this idea has to stop. It is not acceptable to have a policy of simply allowing the police to violate the civil rights of the citizens and then let the courts sort it out.

I can't believe anyone actually takes this position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 11:27 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,856 posts, read 7,978,379 times
Reputation: 3796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
NO, this idea has to stop. It is not acceptable to have a policy of simply allowing the police to violate the civil rights of the citizens and then let the courts sort it out.

I can't believe anyone actually takes this position.


OK, then, how do you advocate "stopping" it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top