Breathe easy
- Thread starter BoilersRock
- Start date
While I understand the point this guy is trying to make, stuff like this shows just how much we misunderstand what the issue is and what "systemic racism" is.
No one I've read is disputing that Eric Garner broke the law or that his arrest was warranted. Rather, the issue is that the violence of the arrest was ridiculously excessive for the offense. This was not a violent criminal, it was a man selling untaxed cigarettes. A crime? Yes. Arrest him? Sure. Throw him to the ground with your arms around his neck and ignore him when he is saying, "I can't breathe?" No way.
If someone were to make a shirt referencing Ferguson that said, "Hands Down, don't break the law," I'd think it was in poor taste, but there would be at least a modicum of reasonableness to it if for no other reason than that the facts of Ferguson are more muddled. In the Garner case, though, I honestly cannot understand anyone defending the officers - especially the lack fo response when Garner was in medical distress.
No one I've read is disputing that Eric Garner broke the law or that his arrest was warranted. Rather, the issue is that the violence of the arrest was ridiculously excessive for the offense. This was not a violent criminal, it was a man selling untaxed cigarettes. A crime? Yes. Arrest him? Sure. Throw him to the ground with your arms around his neck and ignore him when he is saying, "I can't breathe?" No way.
If someone were to make a shirt referencing Ferguson that said, "Hands Down, don't break the law," I'd think it was in poor taste, but there would be at least a modicum of reasonableness to it if for no other reason than that the facts of Ferguson are more muddled. In the Garner case, though, I honestly cannot understand anyone defending the officers - especially the lack fo response when Garner was in medical distress.
So the fact that a nearly 400 lb, man continued to resist arrest after being told multiple times to comply does not factor into your calculus at all?
How does a policeman subdue a 400 lb. man who actively resists arrest? Rubber bullets? Pepper spray? Stun gun?
How does a policeman subdue a 400 lb. man who actively resists arrest? Rubber bullets? Pepper spray? Stun gun?
The air is thick with irony. The same people who cheer on corporations that evade taxes and scream about tyranny are the same ones who say a black man selling untaxed cigarettes must submit unquestionably to police authority or suffer the consequences which apparently includes death.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
This post was edited on 12/17 10:02 AM by kescwi
Posted from Rivals Mobile
This post was edited on 12/17 10:02 AM by kescwi
well obviously they kill him
I mean what else can they do?
And while he is laying there dying, they just watch, because if he revives he might Hulk Smash them all.
I mean same reason why they sat around for 4 minutes while the 12 year old kid in Cleveland was shot, he might have been 20 and if you give him aid, he might jump up and get them.
I mean what else can they do?
And while he is laying there dying, they just watch, because if he revives he might Hulk Smash them all.
I mean same reason why they sat around for 4 minutes while the 12 year old kid in Cleveland was shot, he might have been 20 and if you give him aid, he might jump up and get them.
they value submission to authority
more than freedom (in some cases).
A white guy carrying a rifle in a fast food joint? Just exercise his God-give 2nd Amendment rights.
A black kid carrying a toy gun? A threat that you need to take out quickly.
You know, if the guy with the cigarettes had done what he done, and gotten a broken nose, or some other minor injury because he resisted when he shouldn't have, I'm fine with that. You "resist" by initially complying and then getting your day in court.
But the idea that if you "resist" which means anything other than abject submission then if you die, too bad, as if the only options are submit or die is truly ironic as you say coming from folks who probably have a "Don't Tread On Me" flag somewhere in their residence.
more than freedom (in some cases).
A white guy carrying a rifle in a fast food joint? Just exercise his God-give 2nd Amendment rights.
A black kid carrying a toy gun? A threat that you need to take out quickly.
You know, if the guy with the cigarettes had done what he done, and gotten a broken nose, or some other minor injury because he resisted when he shouldn't have, I'm fine with that. You "resist" by initially complying and then getting your day in court.
But the idea that if you "resist" which means anything other than abject submission then if you die, too bad, as if the only options are submit or die is truly ironic as you say coming from folks who probably have a "Don't Tread On Me" flag somewhere in their residence.
Re: Good for them
One, they distort what actually happened. They make it sound like the cops decided to kill a guy because he was 1) black and 2) unarmed. He didn't die because he couldn't breathe because of an alleged "choke hold". He was in terrible health who died of a heart attack.
Two, they'll never protest like this if a black cop kills a black suspect. Or if a black cop kills a white suspect. Or any other combination where the victim is politically incorrect or the perpetrator is politically correct. This is all about hating Whitey.
Three, where are all the protests about all the genuinely innocent black people who are disproportionately killed all the time in this country? Oh, that's right, they're most likely killed by black criminals so nevermind.
Four, given that the news and entertainment media are leftwing stories like this get promoted. Therefore its cheap virtue that masquerades as courageous virtue whenever people jump in front of a camera so they can be seen "protesting". Its phony outrage. Its a fashion statement.
One, they distort what actually happened. They make it sound like the cops decided to kill a guy because he was 1) black and 2) unarmed. He didn't die because he couldn't breathe because of an alleged "choke hold". He was in terrible health who died of a heart attack.
Two, they'll never protest like this if a black cop kills a black suspect. Or if a black cop kills a white suspect. Or any other combination where the victim is politically incorrect or the perpetrator is politically correct. This is all about hating Whitey.
Three, where are all the protests about all the genuinely innocent black people who are disproportionately killed all the time in this country? Oh, that's right, they're most likely killed by black criminals so nevermind.
Four, given that the news and entertainment media are leftwing stories like this get promoted. Therefore its cheap virtue that masquerades as courageous virtue whenever people jump in front of a camera so they can be seen "protesting". Its phony outrage. Its a fashion statement.
Re: Good for them
I don't think the outrage is entirely misplaced.
Have you any concern that a person trusted with authority made use of a technique that is banned by his organization? It was the choke-hold that lead to Garner's death.
This post was edited on 12/17 10:47 AM by BoilersRock
I don't think the outrage is entirely misplaced.
Have you any concern that a person trusted with authority made use of a technique that is banned by his organization? It was the choke-hold that lead to Garner's death.
This post was edited on 12/17 10:47 AM by BoilersRock
Re: Good for them
It was the choke-hold that lead to Garner's death.
Possibly. We'll never know for sure. The physical confrontation that included wrestling and people sitting on top of him may have been more harmful. If Garner was healthy then he wouldn't have died.
Have you any concern that a person trusted with authority made use of a technique that is banned by his organization?
Yes, the officer should be punished for violating policy. Are you aware of anyone who doesn't think he should be punished?
I don't think the outrage is entirely misplaced.
It certainly is selective.
It was the choke-hold that lead to Garner's death.
Possibly. We'll never know for sure. The physical confrontation that included wrestling and people sitting on top of him may have been more harmful. If Garner was healthy then he wouldn't have died.
Have you any concern that a person trusted with authority made use of a technique that is banned by his organization?
Yes, the officer should be punished for violating policy. Are you aware of anyone who doesn't think he should be punished?
I don't think the outrage is entirely misplaced.
It certainly is selective.
Re: they value submission to authority
I don't value submission to authority more than freedom.
What happened to Garner was a tragedy, but he weighed 400 lbs, had high blood pressure, diabetes, and what some have claimed was COPD or asthma. He died of a heart attack because he was in terrible physical condition. Had he complied with the officers to start, he would likely never have died.
What I don't get about some of you guys (not just you) is you seem to side more with the criminals than the people sworn to upload the law. Did Garner deserve to die because of selling illegal cigarettes? No, of course not. Still, he did commit a minor crime and in the sequence of events resisted arrest which led to the cop trying to subdue a 400 lb man in terrible physical condition. He later died of a heart attack.
It's a tragedy, but Garner's own actions make him partly culpable for what happened to him. If the officer had it to do over again, I'm sure he would have tried a different technique to subdue Garner, but how was the cop to know that Garner had high blood pressure, diabetes, and maybe COPD or asthma?
I don't value submission to authority more than freedom.
What happened to Garner was a tragedy, but he weighed 400 lbs, had high blood pressure, diabetes, and what some have claimed was COPD or asthma. He died of a heart attack because he was in terrible physical condition. Had he complied with the officers to start, he would likely never have died.
What I don't get about some of you guys (not just you) is you seem to side more with the criminals than the people sworn to upload the law. Did Garner deserve to die because of selling illegal cigarettes? No, of course not. Still, he did commit a minor crime and in the sequence of events resisted arrest which led to the cop trying to subdue a 400 lb man in terrible physical condition. He later died of a heart attack.
It's a tragedy, but Garner's own actions make him partly culpable for what happened to him. If the officer had it to do over again, I'm sure he would have tried a different technique to subdue Garner, but how was the cop to know that Garner had high blood pressure, diabetes, and maybe COPD or asthma?
Re: Good for them
Thanks for sharing your points of view in more detail, three being that it's about race and one that it's about political ideology.
Elsewhere in this thread you mention that the outrage is "selective" which is a little different from "phony." I didn't see any direct answer to my question about why you think whatever outrage there is is "phony." But I'll leave it at that.
Thanks for sharing your points of view in more detail, three being that it's about race and one that it's about political ideology.
Elsewhere in this thread you mention that the outrage is "selective" which is a little different from "phony." I didn't see any direct answer to my question about why you think whatever outrage there is is "phony." But I'll leave it at that.
Re: Good for them
Are you aware of anyone who doesn't think he should be punished?
Exactly. Every poll taken on this shows that a strong people think or feel there should have been some sort of punishment and/or charge against the cop(s).
However, then there seems to be quite a large segment in society, and some posters on here, that turn it into racism and try to argue with people that do not entirely disagree with them.
Are you aware of anyone who doesn't think he should be punished?
Exactly. Every poll taken on this shows that a strong people think or feel there should have been some sort of punishment and/or charge against the cop(s).
However, then there seems to be quite a large segment in society, and some posters on here, that turn it into racism and try to argue with people that do not entirely disagree with them.
Re: Good for them
"Two, they'll never protest like this if a black cop kills a black
suspect. Or if a black cop kills a white suspect. Or any other
combination where the victim is politically incorrect or the perpetrator
is politically correct. This is all about hating Whitey."
Pretty much. Many out in society, and many on here have not even heard or seen the video of the white guy shot by minority cop in Utah. This is the worst shooting of all the cop shooting that have been discussed lately. At least right up there with the cop shooting in SC.
Video is pretty clear there was no confrontation with cops, the guy who was shot was walking away from police(remember all of that outrage about Brown supposedly being shot in the back), all witnesses say the guy had earphones on and was unable to hear, and he was unarmed and did not even have a "toy" gun that had the toy marking removed.
If this issue was really about police abuse of force or brutality people would have been outraged about this-but, nope. Nothing.
"Two, they'll never protest like this if a black cop kills a black
suspect. Or if a black cop kills a white suspect. Or any other
combination where the victim is politically incorrect or the perpetrator
is politically correct. This is all about hating Whitey."
Pretty much. Many out in society, and many on here have not even heard or seen the video of the white guy shot by minority cop in Utah. This is the worst shooting of all the cop shooting that have been discussed lately. At least right up there with the cop shooting in SC.
Video is pretty clear there was no confrontation with cops, the guy who was shot was walking away from police(remember all of that outrage about Brown supposedly being shot in the back), all witnesses say the guy had earphones on and was unable to hear, and he was unarmed and did not even have a "toy" gun that had the toy marking removed.
If this issue was really about police abuse of force or brutality people would have been outraged about this-but, nope. Nothing.
Re: Good for them
So, does this mean the elderly deserve to die when they get pulled over by police? Does a person with cancer have less of a right to survive an encounter with police? The notion that police can just ignore the health of a citizen is absurd. That you think that way is frightening. Combine this with your otherwise racist beliefs and it leads to a very concerning conclusion.
Re: they value submission to authority
You keep mentioning that he's 400 pounds, as if that is evidence that the police would need to use more force to subdue him. However, you follow it up with his lack of good health . . . which should lead to the conclusion that less force is needed to subdue him. See the flaw, here?
Re: they value submission to authority
(tic)
Here's where you miss the point, entirely. White people only use their guns to hunt for food for their families and defend themselves from blacks. Black people only use their guns to invade the homes of good white families and rob old white women. I hope this helps clarify the issue.
(tic)
Re: Good for them
So, does this mean the elderly deserve to die when they get pulled over by police?
Yes.
Does a person with cancer have less of a right to survive an encounter with police?
Yes.
The notion that police can just ignore the health of a citizen is absurd.
As if they knew his health condition.
Combine this with your otherwise racist beliefs and it leads to a very concerning conclusion.
Feel better?
So, does this mean the elderly deserve to die when they get pulled over by police?
Yes.
Does a person with cancer have less of a right to survive an encounter with police?
Yes.
The notion that police can just ignore the health of a citizen is absurd.
As if they knew his health condition.
Combine this with your otherwise racist beliefs and it leads to a very concerning conclusion.
Feel better?
Re: they value submission to authority
You keep mentioning that he's 400 pounds, as if that is evidence that
the police would need to use more force to subdue him. However, you
follow it up with his lack of good health . . . which should lead to the
conclusion that less force is needed to subdue him. See the flaw,
here?"
Not really because even in poor health a man that is 400lb can do a lot of damage in the short while he can resist. Also, while nothing in the video showed he was armed, there is nothing that shows he is unarmed either. Cops, military personnel, are taught to gain positive control of the situation and his resisting arrest made that a lot harder.
Now did he deserve to die? Nope. Were the cops wrong to lean on him while on the ground and controlled stating he could not breathe? Yes. Were they wrong to leave him on his side/stomach and do nothing until medics got there? Yes. Should there have been a charge of some sort? Yes.
Not sure there is anyone that argues this, even GMM-at least on here. That said, again, like SDBoiler mentions-there is definitely a certain segment of society that completely ignores the resisting arrest(in NY case), confrontation, and/or assault that led to the escalation of events. The question is-Why?
You keep mentioning that he's 400 pounds, as if that is evidence that
the police would need to use more force to subdue him. However, you
follow it up with his lack of good health . . . which should lead to the
conclusion that less force is needed to subdue him. See the flaw,
here?"
Not really because even in poor health a man that is 400lb can do a lot of damage in the short while he can resist. Also, while nothing in the video showed he was armed, there is nothing that shows he is unarmed either. Cops, military personnel, are taught to gain positive control of the situation and his resisting arrest made that a lot harder.
Now did he deserve to die? Nope. Were the cops wrong to lean on him while on the ground and controlled stating he could not breathe? Yes. Were they wrong to leave him on his side/stomach and do nothing until medics got there? Yes. Should there have been a charge of some sort? Yes.
Not sure there is anyone that argues this, even GMM-at least on here. That said, again, like SDBoiler mentions-there is definitely a certain segment of society that completely ignores the resisting arrest(in NY case), confrontation, and/or assault that led to the escalation of events. The question is-Why?
Re: Good for them
Now on to the protests, themselves. . . they are stupid. In most cases, the people marching have no idea what is going on in the cases, and are protesting because they just want a reason to protest. People want to feel as if they are a part of something. They want their Vietnam. They want their Civil Rights movement. So, they protest so they can be a part of something. I'm not against protests. They are a necessary tool to show what the people think and believe. But people recently have been protesting some really stupid thigns that they don't understand. I think that people need to start addressing the issues, themselves, and let the protests not taint their view of the actual issues.
I think the killing of Garner is a major issue. Brown, I still don't know exactly what happened, so it's harder for me to draw any real conclusions beyond, "both of these guys are idiots." I agree with you that the Utah shooting is worse (though the SC one still takes the cake). Police use of force is something that needs to be evaluated in this country. There is a reality to the notion that black people (especially men) are viewed by people (and police, specifically) as more dangerous than other races. That is the root of the issue, and I think it needs to be addressed in an intelligent manner. That said, I'm kind of with you on the bewilderment about people not addressing these other issues. It makes it appear as if their concern for police brutality is not genuine.
Now on to the protests, themselves. . . they are stupid. In most cases, the people marching have no idea what is going on in the cases, and are protesting because they just want a reason to protest. People want to feel as if they are a part of something. They want their Vietnam. They want their Civil Rights movement. So, they protest so they can be a part of something. I'm not against protests. They are a necessary tool to show what the people think and believe. But people recently have been protesting some really stupid thigns that they don't understand. I think that people need to start addressing the issues, themselves, and let the protests not taint their view of the actual issues.
Re: they value submission to authority
1) I don't care about the people who are ignoring facts. The intent of protesters is almost always stupid; 2) GMM has stated somewhere else on this board that he doesn't think the police did anything wrong in the Garner situation. You may have missed it, because there's a lot of drivel to sift through on here.
Re: they value submission to authority
I am convinced that the minority population would be more receptive to the argument that "sometimes the person killed resisted arrest and the situation turned tragic" if there were ever an instance in which the police admit that they were wrong and an officer is prosecuted. That simply doesn't happen in these cases - and it's hard to blame the minority community for wondering how much their race plays into that.
I try not to be one who ignores the escalating elements (i.e. resisting arrest or confrontation). I also do not think every cop in this kind of situation should be indicted/arrested. But there is, as you note, something different about this case (and, I'd suggest, the Rice case in Cleveland). An earlier poster mentioned pepper spray or stun gun - I'm curious why the officers did not think to use either of those restraints. To be sure, a stun gun might still have resulted in his death, but that would still be more defensible than using a tactic that the police themselves had declared to be illegal.
I am convinced that the minority population would be more receptive to the argument that "sometimes the person killed resisted arrest and the situation turned tragic" if there were ever an instance in which the police admit that they were wrong and an officer is prosecuted. That simply doesn't happen in these cases - and it's hard to blame the minority community for wondering how much their race plays into that.
you know
if a cop shoots me in the head because my only "resistance" was I said "no" to a command to say sit down or stand up, I didn't "comply" and if I had "complied" I wouldn't have died but one might still suggest that the cop is a wee bit more responsible in that scenario than I am for my "tragic" death.
I'm glad you allow that cop must feel bad for killing the guy and would have tried a different technique. I'm sure he won't kill the next severely obese person he comes across (which answers your question about knowing the guy might have some health issues).
if a cop shoots me in the head because my only "resistance" was I said "no" to a command to say sit down or stand up, I didn't "comply" and if I had "complied" I wouldn't have died but one might still suggest that the cop is a wee bit more responsible in that scenario than I am for my "tragic" death.
I'm glad you allow that cop must feel bad for killing the guy and would have tried a different technique. I'm sure he won't kill the next severely obese person he comes across (which answers your question about knowing the guy might have some health issues).
Re: you know
It's really baffling to me that some on here think that "comply or die" is a good way for our police to conduct themselves.
It's really baffling to me that some on here think that "comply or die" is a good way for our police to conduct themselves.
Re: they value submission to authority
I don't believe a policeman should ever be allowed to choke out an unarmed man. I don't care if he is actively resisting arrest. Use your training without doing something that is designed to kill someone. Choking a suspect should never be an option for someone who has no weapon. It's too easy to kill someone as we see here.
I don't believe a policeman should ever be allowed to choke out an unarmed man. I don't care if he is actively resisting arrest. Use your training without doing something that is designed to kill someone. Choking a suspect should never be an option for someone who has no weapon. It's too easy to kill someone as we see here.
Re: they value submission to authority
It wasn't you? Oh, well, someone did. If it wasn't you, I apologize. Maybe it was hunk . . someone said it, and it was wrong of me to assume it was you.
Re: Good for them
Presumably the cops referenced in the first post and the grand jury in New York did not think he should be punished.
If you think he should have been punished then what are you fighting against?
Presumably the cops referenced in the first post and the grand jury in New York did not think he should be punished.
If you think he should have been punished then what are you fighting against?
Re: Good for them
I don't know about "phony" because it's real outrage - the people aren't faking. That said, I think what they're outraged over in some specific cases is "fabricated".
What was the cause of death?
I have to admit I haven't kept up, but I thought it was cardiac arrest, not asphyxiation, and that it occurred en route to the hospital.
Taken from a post on Facebook I saw earlier today on this subject:
"coming from a 3x convicted felon who has spent 25% of my life at age 42 behind prison walls, jail bars or locked doors of a drug rehabilitation facility, I found out the most amazing thing a few years back...when i quit breaking the law and committing crimes I QUIT HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE POLICE, THE PROSECUTORS, THE JUDGES AND THE PAROLE/PROBATION OFFICERS AND I CAN BREATHE JUST FINE!"
"coming from a 3x convicted felon who has spent 25% of my life at age 42 behind prison walls, jail bars or locked doors of a drug rehabilitation facility, I found out the most amazing thing a few years back...when i quit breaking the law and committing crimes I QUIT HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE POLICE, THE PROSECUTORS, THE JUDGES AND THE PAROLE/PROBATION OFFICERS AND I CAN BREATHE JUST FINE!"
Re: they value submission to authority
Strike two. I stated he should be fired...to which the ends of the keyboard stated he was appalled at my lack of outrage. LOL!
Re: Good for them
Not fighting against anything. If you read my posts it should be obvious that I take issue with some that
1) Find no fault with the suspects or people that became victims
2) What exactly are the protestors protesting? (That is real and not manufactured)
3) Changing "facts" of the situation to create outrage
4) Pretty much called out some on here(not GMM) as just seeing race or even being racists. How one can have issues and be really worked up about Cleveland, Ferguson, SC, and NY issues, and not really care about what happened in Utah is explained by one thing only.
Not fighting against anything. If you read my posts it should be obvious that I take issue with some that
1) Find no fault with the suspects or people that became victims
2) What exactly are the protestors protesting? (That is real and not manufactured)
3) Changing "facts" of the situation to create outrage
4) Pretty much called out some on here(not GMM) as just seeing race or even being racists. How one can have issues and be really worked up about Cleveland, Ferguson, SC, and NY issues, and not really care about what happened in Utah is explained by one thing only.
Re: Good for them
I have seen not one credible source that is cited by anyone that claims that 'that technique is banned by his organization'. Perhaps our martial arts KH's may weigh in on this issue. I've seen it demonstrated and that particular 'hold' is not considered a 'choke hold' as it places ZERO pressure on the windpipe.
Dude doesn't resist, and submits from the get-go, dude is alive. Period.
This post was edited on 12/22 1:58 PM by Boiler20
I have seen not one credible source that is cited by anyone that claims that 'that technique is banned by his organization'. Perhaps our martial arts KH's may weigh in on this issue. I've seen it demonstrated and that particular 'hold' is not considered a 'choke hold' as it places ZERO pressure on the windpipe.
Dude doesn't resist, and submits from the get-go, dude is alive. Period.
This post was edited on 12/22 1:58 PM by Boiler20
Latest posts
-
-
A Revolution of Common Sense - A Seminal Shift in Values- Latest: New Pal Boiler
-
