Reply With Quote
Baton, IMO... works for England (until 2004 anyways)...
you have a problem with using tasers too?
wtf are they supposed to do? ask nicely?
Baton, IMO... works for England (until 2004 anyways)...
if people were cooperative in the first place, ideally there would be no need for batons, tasers, or firearms in the first place. not saying that makes the killings ok (a lot of cops have been seen to be way to trigger happy), but they can largely be avoided ffs.
for example, if u get pulled over, dont get out of the car... keep your hands on the wheel.
when the cop is trying to arrest or detain you, what the is pushing back going to accomplish?
if you are going to reach for something, don't. explain what you need to reach for.
like this is a really unfortunate case. thankfully the guy lived, and the cop was way to quick to fire away like that. but why would you just go into your car like that without saying a word? tell the cop "my license is in my car" and just dont move. doesnt make the cop right for shooting, but why do anything that could make it worse?
y'all gotta chill with the victim blaming. its easy to say what a victim should have done when you aren't in their shoes.
how about the cop staying in his vehicle and tell the guy to get back in his truck and keep his hands where he can see them? that simple direction would have made a simple traffic stop that much easier, word.
like this is a really unfortunate case. thankfully the guy lived, and the cop was way to quick to fire away like that. but why would you just go into your car like that without saying a word? tell the cop "my license is in my car" and just dont move. doesnt make the cop right for shooting, but why do anything that could make it worse?
The idea that people are risking their lives if they do not show complete forethought of every possible overreaction scenario while they're already under the stress of having been pulled over and yelled at by the police is kind of scary, don't you think?
If we aren't going to hold a trained, experienced police officers responsible for not considering every possible NON-threatening reason a suspect might be acting a certain way, why should suspects/citizens be required to be 100% perfect in how THEY react in these situations?
Last edited by Spurminator; 12-04-2014 at 06:25 PM.
you should understand that police officers aren't kindergarten teachers. they are armed. in my experiences with cops, i've dealt with the situations in a manner that ensures my safety, even if its something really routine like a traffic stop.
there are many cases where the police act overaggressively yet within legal bounds. and there are cases where cops cross the line and are downright vicious. i get that. but that doesn't mean as a civilian you shouldn't act in a manner that minimizes those odds
if a cop was approaching me to detain me, would i start backing off and swatting his arms saying "dont touch me." no. why? maybe because i dont feel like putting myself in any more danger than i need to. doesn't mean a cop would be "in the right" to inflict harm, but why the would i even rationally put myself in a more difficult position than i need to be in?
you can call it victim blaming, but i recognize we dont live in a pretty world where everybody acts exactly the way they're supposed to. many cops are more aggressive and trigger happy than they need to be. but instead of yammering on about my rights, im just going to be smart about it and not give the situation the possibility of escalating
I don't get how you can kill somebody and not even face a trial. I guess all those american action movies, where cops kill all those bad guys casually are more realistic than i gave them credit for...
You need to learn the difference between being illegal and being a breach of policy.
Why would you expect to face a trial if your killing the person was justified?
to determine that is WAS justified, as in FL's ONLY-white-people-can-SYG-against-black-people law,
Texas cop allowed to resign one week after video exposes him putting woman in chokehold
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/t...e+Raw+Story%29
What?
I thought this was about police overreacting, no one in this thread mentioned race until you did.
"But, it does tend to support the position this was not a racially motivated act."
yeah, yeah, post-racial America bull from racist right-wingdingers, who at the same time denigrate, prejudge the average black simply because of .... his black race.
Kizzi didn't decide to jump the BLACK guy, white guys did. There was nothing she could have done at that point do to "de-racist" the "several white guys took down an unarmed black guy" situation.
Does anybody really think cops would have done, and done so quickly and violently, the same take-down of white guy committing the same horrendous crime?
and less bully cops gang-jumping a black guy is so much more adrenalin, intimate fun than tasing or pepper-spraying.
I could be wrong, but I thought I heard the other police who gave testimony were granted immunity.
Was she granted immunity for her testimony?
I don't know. My point was there is no evidence on the tape the Sergeant had a problem or was concerned about the manner in which Mr. Garner was subdued. And, her later statements support that.
Nobody there is immune from civil litigation. If Sgt. Adoni was present; she should have known the choke hold was counter to policy and taken action to stop the officer. I'm not suggesting there's not a wrongful death claim (I think there is if, in fact, the officer employed a banned choke hold), I'm merely pointing out that Sgt. Adoni's presence and inaction makes a civil rights case much more problematic.
The universe isn't confined to the threads in this forum. The Garner case is being conflated with the Brown and Martin cases, elsewhere (if not here). In fact, AG Holder has initiated a civil rights investigation. I was merely making a point that (as I believe to be the case in the Brown and Martin shootings, as well) race was not a factor in Mr. Garner's death. With Sgt. Adoni's presence at the scene, combined with her inaction during the arrest, it will be difficult to make a case that his treatment was racially motivated.
I don't remember anyone ever suggesting that black cops are immune from treating suspects with a racial bias. Even black-on-black bias.
There's as healthy an amount of distrust among Urban African Americans for black cops as there is for white cops.
So, you believe it's possible Sgt. Adoni is a racist? Against other African-Americans?
I won't disagree there is a certain amount of bias against a perceived criminal element. Mr. Garner was known to the police for having committed a crime similar to what he was being accused. I don't believe that has anything to do with race. In other words, I don't believe Mr. Garner was approached or arrested because of his race but, because of his history.
If you're suggesting Sgt. Adoni can be racist against a subsection of blacks, because of geography, it's no longer a race issue but an environmental issue. She distrusts Garner, not because he's black but, because he's known to police and located in an area where one might suspect criminal activity and, in fact, they did suspect Mr. Garner of committing a crime.
Just came across this one. Amazes me how these things still happen in today's society. Guy obviously wasn't going to outrun and escape the police, wtf was the WWE style chokehold for? I don't know the situation though, is the guy responsible being held for manslaughter or murder? If he isn't then he should be tbh.
So, if a 300 lb man doesn't want to be arrested do you just stand there and wait for him to change his mind? I don't understand the logic that just because he was incapable of escaping, he couldn't resist in other ways such as, fighting back or, as it appears in this case, passive resistance. Have you ever tried to get a 300 lb man to put his hands behind his back to be handcuffed, if he didn't want to be handcuffed?
And, no the guy responsible for Mr. Garner's death isn't being charged with a crime; he's been no-billed by a Grand Jury. However, there is some question over whether or not he violated Department policy in using a choke hold to force Mr. Garner into complying with his own arrest so, there's that. I suspect if, in fact, he did use a banned procedure, he'll face disciplinary action and be subject to a wrongful death lawsuit. Both of which I tend to agree (based on my limited knowledge of the facts) are warranted.
I'm saying that the presence of a black cop on site doesn't mean Eric Garner's race wasn't a factor in how he was apprehended.
How many times must I correct you on this smh. Blacks are more successful invoking stand your ground than whites.
Not really. Her presence does not affect the intentions and possible prejudices of the killing officer in the least.
Well a black cop was there, so there is no way the white officer's action could be racially motivated. is silly on it's face.
And, I said it made that assertion problematic given her presence, inaction, and later statements.
There's nothing in the public record, so far, to indicate Mr. Garner's race had anything to do with his arrest or the manner of his death. And, there's plenty in the public record, so far, to indicate Mr. Garner resisted arrest and that the officer's actions were due to that resistance and not his race.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
