Riots in Ferguson

In reply to ronholm:

I don't think anyone here is arguing that Garner was not breaking the law or that it was inappropriate for police to arrest him. Nor does anyone here seem to think he was doing something other than resisting arrest. When resisting arrest, it is appropriate for police to use force to detain a suspect.

The issue is not whether using force was okay or not, but if the level and variety of force used was appropriate, and if the officers should have known better at the moment.

Wilson died primarily because his throat was crushed by the hold the officer placed on his neck. Clearly, that hold was a problem. The officer was not trying to use lethal force, but ended up doing so accidentally. Should the officer have known better than to use that hold? The NYPD has a policy against choke holds. The argument is, that wasn't a choke hold, but a head lock. I do not buy that argument. I think that given the size of Wilson, the officer should have been able to realize that, even if he was trying to execute a head lock, it was going to be impossible.

I studied martial arts for many years. We discussed and practiced head locks and choke holds. I know that I would not have been able to do a good controlling lock on a man Wilson's size, and would only have attempted a neck hold if I was so concerned for my life that I could live with it if the maneuver turned out to be lethal. I practiced neck holds on people bigger than me but smaller than Wilson, and I had to be very careful and work with my partner to be sure I didn't injure them.

In reply to Beer Baron:

Preaching to the choir!!

There is nothing wrong with defending themselves. I have some close friends in law enforcement and pray thet they return to thier families every night safely. Events they face can turn sideways in seconds. Some of that is within their bounds of control and some of it is not. Staying calm, staying composed, and retaining humanity is the key according to some officers I know. Defuse the situation and not escalate it . . .

Beer Baron wrote:

Strike_Zero wrote: While the thread has remained civil . . . The idea/thought of "he deserved it" being ok befuddles me to no end. No one deserves to be killed. What stops the police from killing civilians for petty crimes? Apparently nothing . . . And some folks appear to indicate that is ok . . . When in truth, it isn't ok.

I fully agree that what these people had done, they didn't *deserve* to be killed for. All of these incidents are unfortunate. The flip side that friends I speak with in other parts of the internet seem to miss is that police do have the right to defend themselves if they reasonably feel their lives are in danger. Police don't deserve to lose their lives either just for trying to serve their community. Sometimes it is impossible to tell ahead of time what level of threat a suspect actually poses.

What annoys me about stuff like this is I dislike being put into a position where I feel obligated to defend cops. I know these guys. A certain percentage of them have no business wearing a badge. Some of them I don't even like for reasons I am willing to admit makes them good at their jobs..

But whatever.. These cops are still people, human beings who have family to go home to. Don't punch them in the face, Don't draw a gun on them, fake or otherwise, and don't be a repeat offender on the street debating with them when you know damn well you berkeleyed up. Then they won't kill you.. It isn't that berkeleying hard.

Whatever...

And excuse more again for lowering the level of conversation for just a second... but....

Strike Zero... Notably absent from your little list is anyone with skin other than black? Cops only kill black guys?

All you are doing in encouraging stupidity, promoting it, and contributing to the problem. What you are doing is teaching people to act like an ass to every officer who they might meet, when in fact the likelihood they are going to face some racist rogue officer looking to gun someone down is VERY VERY VERY small. As this attitude grows and the number of idiots looking to provoke an officer grow, so then will the number of incidents. They will find what they are looking for.

Instead.. Lets hold this guy up as a hero. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m9xWKfcZzg

It will inspire other cops to act the same, and it will cause more people to treat cops like they are this cop, meaning more cops are more likely to act like this cop...

Then march you ass down to the hood and teach some young boy to be a man, a real man. Be a role model, open your heart and your life and it WILL really help someone.

Beer Baron wrote: In reply to ronholm: I don't think anyone here is arguing that Garner was not breaking the law or that it was inappropriate for police to arrest him. Nor does anyone here seem to think he was doing something other than resisting arrest. When resisting arrest, it is appropriate for police to use force to detain a suspect. The issue is not whether using force was okay or not, but if the level and variety of force used was appropriate, and if the officers should have known better at the moment. Wilson died primarily because his throat was crushed by the hold the officer placed on his neck. Clearly, that hold was a problem. The officer was not trying to use lethal force, but ended up doing so accidentally. Should the officer have known better than to use that hold? The NYPD has a policy against choke holds. The argument is, that wasn't a choke hold, but a head lock. I do not buy that argument. I think that given the size of Wilson, the officer should have been able to realize that, even if he was trying to execute a head lock, it was going to be impossible. I studied martial arts for many years. We discussed and practiced head locks and choke holds. I know that I would not have been able to do a good controlling lock on a man Wilson's size, and would only have attempted a neck hold if I was so concerned for my life that I could live with it if the maneuver turned out to be lethal. I practiced neck holds on people bigger than me but smaller than Wilson, and I had to be very careful and work with my partner to be sure I didn't injure them.

So you think the officer had an obligation to arrest Garner. No argument about that?

How long should they have argued with the (excuse me again) idiot before bringing him to the ground?

Jumping on his back seems like it worked.. Grabbing the head with your arm is a good way to stay on so the other officers can assist.. Choking or headlock doesn't even need to be the primary goal. Watch the video. The second that Garner hit the ground the "choke" is released and the officer is controlling his head with his hand. You can also hear other officers showing concern for Garner by NOT just beating him further or whatever.. Listen carefully.

Did that "choke" move really crush his throat? I thought the cause of death was a heart attack? I have been punched in the throat more than enough times in my life and never had it crushed.. I saw nothing in the video which would have hurt a healthy man.

So with an obligation to arrest Garner... How long are you going to stand there debating with him while a crowd forms, and how are you taking him into custody?

this isn't pointed at ANY PARTICULAR PERSON … just a gentle reminder … this thread has lasted 20 pages … 19 and 1/2 more than I thought it would

it still has the potential to digress to the usual floundered, name calling … people getting butthurt … etc …

so like I started with … this is good …so far …lets keep it that way

it's been an enjoyable read so far

Wally wrote: In reply to ronholm: Not long at all. The two guys in plain clothes don't go around alone doing these busts. The six officers most likely all came together. I would be willing to bet the entire encounter lasted less than 10 minutes. The guy doing the filming was locked up a few days after he shot the video for something unrelated but that is irrelevant. During the video he stood back and filmed never getting in the way like a lot of idiots. He is a piece of crap and with police following 24/7 was bound to do something stupid but he's not important to this case, just a bystander.

Who he was and why he was shooting the video DOES matter because what you have seen is ONLY the parts of the video this dirtbag wanted you to see.

Show me the clip in it entirety and I'll bet the entire story changes (hence no Grand Jury Indictment)

So the other officers were there... Are you going to stand around and debate with Garner for 10 minutes after responding to a call about a fight, and witnessing him break the law YET AGAIN?

Probably not.

ronholm wrote: Strike Zero... Notably absent from your little list is anyone with skin other than black? Cops only kill black guys? All you are doing in encouraging stupidity, promoting it, and contributing to the problem. What you are doing is teaching people to act like an ass to every officer who they might meet, when in fact the likelihood they are going to face some racist rogue officer looking to gun someone down is VERY VERY VERY small. As this attitude grows and the number of idiots looking to provoke an officer grow, so then will the number of incidents. They will find what they are looking for. Instead.. Lets hold this guy up as a hero. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m9xWKfcZzg It will inspire other cops to act the same, and it will cause more people to treat cops like they are this cop, meaning more cops are more likely to act like this cop... Then march you ass down to the hood and teach some young boy to be a man, a real man. Be a role model, open your heart and your life and it WILL really help someone.

This is why I stay out of these threads.

These are the events in the news. Those are the events I chose based on them being in the news. Do you want me find the one where the suspect CLEARLY posed a threat and was not killed and only subdued? They are out there . . . Care to guess their race? I'm not sure we want to go down that road . . .

Did you stop reading my post after the list? . . . If civilians/citizens are a race, then I'm guilty of that.

I posed some very good questions that, what I think, were absent of race. So what if the victims were black. If the victims were white, my questions still apply.

What my post is asking people to do is think . . . Look at everything presented . . . Put yourself in some else shoes.

I also mentor several kids, from several races. They all come from the hood AND from well established (read: rich) neighborhoods. And you know, all of them get same level of respect from me and my peers. They also receive the same amount care and attention. We all sit and talk about events, reactions, and actively listen to each others opinions. Edited: We ask ALL the mentees to put themselve in each other's shoes. It creates an interesting atmosphere.

If I misunderstood your post, I apologize . . . But I think you blew my a bit out of proportion.

Strike_Zero wrote: What my post is asking people to do is think . . . Look at everything presented . . . Put yourself in some else shoes.

This is my critique of both extremes in these debates. Before judging, we should try to put ourselves in the shoes of all the people directly involved. Because of people's biases they seem to not be willing to put themselves in the shoes of one person or another. Sometimes that means people don't want to consider what it is like to be poor and uneducated and lack the ability to see your way out of that. Sometimes that means not being able to see what it is like to be a law enforcement officer trying to serve their community when you don't know what is or is not going to end up being a lethal threat.

EveryQuarterMile wrote: When I see the video I feel that the officer should have tased Eric Garner rather than putting him in a headlock (physical force is always a gray area).

Using a taser is just as dangerous as using a gun, especially if the individual has chronic health issues. Good armchair quarterbacking on this though

Tim Baxter wrote: This is the kind of thread I wish wasn't on this site, as it makes me think so much less of people I otherwise like very much.

This is the kind of comment I wish wasn't on this site, as it makes me think so much less of people I otherwise like very much...

Huh. Funny how that works.

strike_zero said: While the thread has remained civil . . . The idea/thought of "he deserved it" being ok befuddles me to no end.

Nobody said that. What they have said is that in a PHYSICAL altercation, you always have the chance of being injured or dieing. Yes, DIEING, not "being killed", as being killed implies the cop wanted to kill the man being arrested, which is such an absurdly idiotic thing to say there is nothing more to say about it.

Did the gentleman deserve to die? Absolutely not. Does it happen when you resist arrest from an individual that has had the powers placed upon him/her to do said arresting? Yes. It has exactly zero to do with racism, and everything to do with the person's actions.

Paraphrasing a bit, but there are a few post that indicate "he deserved it" for messing with the officer.

Well . . . what about other cases where there was a phyical altercation or the suspects shot at officers and/or shot civilians and the suspects wasn't killed or died from the event?

We can hen pick semantics all day, but that doesn't dillute the fact that suspects died/killed for petty crimes where those that committed more henious ones get their day in court.

I think it is best for me check out of this one . . . .

Mrs. 914 and a friend are in NYC for the weekend, cops are all over the place! Where you normally see one or two cops on a corner, now you see 5 or 6. She hasn't seen any protesters.

I called her this morning, I saw on the news that Prince William and Kate are in town, maybe that's it. For $50,000 you could have dinner with them.

"I don't have that kind of stash in my sock drawer"

Ah well, maybe next visit.

Strike_Zero wrote: We can hen pick semantics all day, but that doesn't dillute the fact that suspects died/killed for petty crimes where those that committed more henious ones get their day in court.

I honestly am curious as to what your point is? Unfortunately, life sucks a lot due to the randomness we encounter in it. Nobody should die for petty crimes, I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread agrees. I think the moral of the story that some people are trying to hit home is that if you do not commit crimes, you have nothing to worry about. I feel little empathy for people who put themselves in a position that can cause harm to themselves, and then try to gain pity when something happens.

In reply to HiTempguy:

Pretty much, not everything ends up the way they'd prefer.

Still, the #1 most likely way to not get killed by police is to not break the law.

Strike_Zero wrote: ...We can hen pick semantics all day, but that doesn't dilute the fact that suspects died/killed for petty crimes where those that committed more heinous ones get their day in court...

Garner did not die as the result of a petty crime (selling cigarettes). He died as the result of resisting arrest for that crime (not that that was OK either, but it's clearly different) which of course is a step to get him his day in court.

So yes, some semantics are important.

Strike_Zero wrote: Thanks Tim!! While the thread has remained civil . . . The idea/thought of "he deserved it" being ok befuddles me to no end. No one deserves to be killed. What stops the police from killing civilians for petty crimes? Apparently nothing . . . And some folks appear to indicate that is ok . . . When in truth, it isn't ok. If Mr. Brown conducted himself inappropriately (don't know, I wasn't there), was it right for him to be killed and left in the streets? For Tamir Rice, was it appropriate for officers to kill a person in an open carry state where they thought he was in his 20s? For Mr. Garner, was it appropriate to be killed over selling some loose cigarettes?

Yes, it WAS right for Brown to be killed. He assaulted an officer and attempted to take his weapon. That's essentially attempted murder. Officer Wilson responded in self defence. Brown even turned back towards him after being shot at and charged him. There was about 35 feet between the blood from the first "out of vehicle" volley and the last.

Was it "right" for that poor kid to be killed? Of course not, it's terrible. But it's the kid's own damn fault. Open-carry state has nothing to do with it. Open carrying is NOT brandishing. And no way in hell does it mean brandish a pistol then point it at police who are approaching you. The orange muzzle device was removed and the officers had no way of knowing it wasn't a real weapon. Legally and practically, they did nothing wrong. The kid demonstrated hostile intent with a fake gun that had been modified to look real. The responsibility for the incident was Tamir's and his parents, not the cops.

For Garner, he wasn't "killed over selling some loose cigarettes," he was arrested over selling loose cigarettes. He wasn't intentionally killed, at most it is accidental death from negligence, but even with the cop using the wrong neckhold or whatever, the main reason he died was E36 M3ty health. Pull the same move 100 more times on 100 different people and I doubt any one of them would have passed away from it.

I'm not familiar enough with the details of the other incidents you listed so I cannot address them.

Strike_Zero wrote: Paraphrasing a bit, but there are a few post that indicate "he deserved it" for messing with the officer. Well . . . what about other cases where there was a phyical altercation or the suspects shot at officers and/or shot civilians and the suspects wasn't killed or died from the event? We can hen pick semantics all day, but that doesn't dillute the fact that suspects died/killed for petty crimes where those that committed more henious ones get their day in court. I think it is best for me check out of this one . . . .

Messing with an officer? YOU are the one playing semantics. You are deliberately choosing words that diminish the criminality of certain parties' actions in order to push your agenda. Punching a cop in the face and attempting to take his weapon is not "messing with" him, nor is it a "petty" crime.

HiTempguy wrote:

Tim Baxter wrote: This is the kind of thread I wish wasn't on this site, as it makes me think so much less of people I otherwise like very much.

This is the kind of comment I wish wasn't on this site, as it makes me think so much less of people I otherwise like very much... Huh. Funny how that works.

Wow, you're firing on all cylinders these days

Strike_Zero wrote: Paraphrasing a bit, but there are a few post that indicate "he deserved it" for messing with the officer. Well . . . what about other cases where there was a phyical altercation or the suspects shot at officers and/or shot civilians and the suspects wasn't killed or died from the event? We can hen pick semantics all day, but that doesn't dillute the fact that suspects died/killed for petty crimes where those that committed more henious ones get their day in court. I think it is best for me check out of this one . . . .

What we have here are guys who headed out onto a race track with dry rotted tires with cords showing and a gas tank spilling all over the place inside the cab of the car.. Then took off driving to fast without a helmet or harness... and they blew up in a ball of fire.

It isn't that I think they "deserve" what they did to themselves.. It just doesn't push my sympathy button.

^This

Acting like Brown, Garner and the rest of the current propaganda campaign are victims of anything but their own mistakes will bring you more of this.

No matter what some of you intend to do... This is what you are creating..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYNdrsxrgNo

Basically the actions of those involved dictated the outcome of them somewhat, but unfortunately some here prefer to not take into account those actions. It sickens me to see some people here basically being like the family of the kid that killed the cop here in Indy over the summer that I linked a few pages back.

To everyone saying "They shouldn't have had to kill him so he could have his day in court" fail to understand that isn't always an option. To me, its about the same as "I'm sorry the officer died, but it never would have happened if he had stayed in his car" SMDH

Tim Baxter wrote: This is the kind of thread I wish wasn't on this site, as it makes me think so much less of people I otherwise like very much.

I agree 100%. Unfortunately now that I know the position of some of these people I can no longer be a part of the group. I expect more from this board but unfortunately it appears as though some hatred still is apparent.

Yamaha and his "pants up don't loot" didn't contribute anything other than division to the conversation. I we t to graduate school in Indiana and Yamaha reminds me of all the "townies" that wanted to pickfoghts with college students due to some overcompensation issues.

Hi temp guy makes it apparent that he believes poor people are morally lacking and we should all resolve to accept his position. I hesitate to mention that he appears to be the most angry with those that are "ethnic" but since this will be my last post, I think it's worth a mention.

bobzilla loves Korean cars so we can safely ignore his contributions.

This thread is full of fail. Hess was still labor in under the idea that Mr Wilson suffered a fractured orbital socket. Since I hope that we have all seen the pictures we all understand that Wilson wasn't injured in the way that some ot the propagandists would have you believe.

Ronholm appears to have a negative experience with every black, gay, or transgender person he meets. He appears certain that his spaghetti monster in the sky tells him everything he needs to know about this people who are different than him.

The worst thing about all of this is that I no longer wish to participate in this board. I will check in to see what Jakeb is able to do with the BMWs because he is skilled. But I no longer wish to sort through the contributions of Yamaha or bobzilla or especially ronholm in order to see the genius of Jakeb. Perhaps I can keep up with Jakeb on his own site.

GPS and woody and others are great but I am tired of the borderline crap I am forced to read here every day.

In reply to mattm:

Wow, you took a sarcastic post of mine and turned it straight into a chastisement........cudos.

He's grandstanding, if you ignore him, he'll go away quietly.

LOL!