• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No Indictment in Chokehold Death [W:1903,2680]

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
If it happened would I oppose it? What do hypotheticals have to do with this, and the issue would be the law, not the police.
Click to expand...

Still running away from the answer? It's becoming obvious. Look, if you're as authoritarian as to always believe that police are justified because someone broke the law. State it, then remove the "Libertarian" label. If you're not, then admit your statement:

How about "don't break the law and you won't have to worry about a confrontation with the police"?
Click to expand...

Is full of nonsense. :shrug:

So lobby the NH house to remove the seaweed laws from the books if they bother you. Or better yet, if you come visit here, don't let your kids collect seaweed. I wouldn't want the Rye, NH cops to put your kid in our jails. They aren't that nice apparently.
Click to expand...

Supporting the police state? How Libertarian of you.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

TheDemSocialist said:
This is ****ing unreal. It was an prohibited choke hold and the coroner called it a homicide, how does that not generate at the very least a manslaughter charge?
Click to expand...

legally speaking, a death can be a homicide and not raise to the level of murder or manslaughter.

in my state this would be classed as "Excusable homicide" a doctrine in which someone doing something legal without criminal negligence causes death by accident. it is legal to use force to effect an arrest, even if department policy is more restrictive, my understanding is the officer was fired....
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
No one said a child got arrested, what was asked of you is if you'd have a problem with kids being arrested for it. You already said you wouldn't. Breaking the law remember? ;)
Click to expand...


kinda hard to have issues with non-existent things

i got enough real **** to deal with.....

lets stick to what actually is or has happened....shall we
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Henrin said:
Not really. The man was on the sidewalk selling cigarettes that are only illegal because the state wants tax revenue. The state is pretty damn good at crying rivers. The shopkeeper doesn't even own the sidewalk, so his desire for the man to move along means nothing. Cry shopkeeper, cry.
Click to expand...


so if you own an ice cream store, and an ice cream truck parks out front of your store....no issue , right?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Henrin said:
Not really. The man was on the sidewalk selling cigarettes that are only illegal because the state wants tax revenue. The state is pretty damn good at crying rivers. The shopkeeper doesn't even own the sidewalk, so his desire for the man to move along means nothing. Cry shopkeeper, cry.
Click to expand...

No, but the CITY that levied the taxes does own the sidewalk. And that's NOT the only illegality here. Licensed sellers agree to abide by certain rules to carry the product for sale. One of those is no sale to minors. The illegal street dealer has no such restriction.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

ReverendHellh0und said:
I doub't they will see a "theft" of 2 bucks, especially since jacking all the bridges and tunnels up by a dollar.


Shopkeeper, too aint missing much.


That said, garner should have gotten a fine, not kilt. based on the law as it stands.
Click to expand...

Once again, as with any code that requires a fine only, once you break the same damn code enough times, increased penalties are called for.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

clownboy said:
Once again, as with any code that requires a fine only, once you break the same damn code enough times, increased penalties are called for.
Click to expand...



True, for example, if I get enough points on my license, I get a notice from the DMV in the mail that my license has been suspended and these are the fines I owe.


I don't get jumped by a jock cop and have him attempt to choke me out. (that's not even a legal action).


And again, his only crime that day was.....?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Still running away from the answer? It's becoming obvious. Look, if you're as authoritarian as to always believe that police are justified because someone broke the law. State it, then remove the "Libertarian" label. If you're not, then admit your statement:



Is full of nonsense. :shrug:



Supporting the police state? How Libertarian of you.
Click to expand...

I hate to burst your bubble, but being a Libertarian doesn't mean you oppose the idea of laws being passed and maintained on the books. I think you're confusing Libertarianism with anarchy.

And yes, when people break laws, and commit crimes like murder, rape, robbery, embezzlement of non-profit funds, extortion, etc., I like it when the police arrest them. I'm weird like that.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

gdgyva said:
so if you own an ice cream store, and an ice cream truck parks out front of your store....no issue , right?
Click to expand...

I don't own the road. The ice cream truck can park on the side of the road if he feels like it.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
I hate to burst your bubble, but being a Libertarian doesn't mean you oppose the idea of laws being passed and maintained on the books. I think you're confusing Libertarianism with anarchy.
Click to expand...

Wanting to do with laws like picking up seaweed and selling lemonade now constitutes anarchy. Pointing out that some laws are stupid and being arrested for violating them is authoritarian... means... anarchy... ... Do you know the meaning of these words you use?

And yes, when people break laws, and commit crimes like murder, rape, robbery, embezzlement of non-profit funds, extortion, etc., I like it when the police arrest them. I'm weird like that.
Click to expand...

Still won't answer the question? Here, I'll make it easier for you: Would you support your kids being arrested for picking up seaweed? If no, then your statement is nonsense. If yes, then may whomever have mercy on your soul.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Wanting to do with laws like picking up seaweed and selling lemonade now constitutes anarchy. Pointing out that some laws are stupid and being arrested for violating them is authoritarian... means... anarchy... ... Do you know the meaning of these words you use?



Still won't answer the question? Here, I'll make it easier for you: Would you support your kids being arrested for picking up seaweed? If no, then your statement is nonsense. If yes, then may whomever have mercy on your soul.
Click to expand...

Once again, let me explain since you're being obtuse.

My kids won't get arrested for picking up seaweed. My kids would get arrested for selling drugs in school, for breaking into houses, for setting fires to peoples' pets, blowing up our neighbor's house, raping the cheerleaders, murdering the class nerd, and so on. And yup, that's what happens when you break laws.

Many laws are stupid. Like the ACA, for instance. And the strict gun laws in New York City. But we aren't discussing stupid laws and stupid lawmakers. We're discussing the police, who don't make laws.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
Once again, let me explain since you're being obtuse.
Click to expand...

Obtuse would imply I don't understand your point. I more than understand it and realize you simply don't want to answer the question.

My kids won't get arrested for picking up seaweed. My kids would get arrested for selling drugs in school, for breaking into houses, for setting fires to peoples' pets, blowing up our neighbor's house, raping the cheerleaders, murdering the class nerd, and so on. And yup, that's what happens when you break laws.

Many laws are stupid. Like the ACA, for instance. But we aren't discussing stupid laws and stupid lawmakers. We're discussing the police, who don't make laws.
Click to expand...

However, if they did get arrested for picking up seaweed: would you support it as they did break the law? Saying they won't so there is no point in answering is nonsense. You can't see into the future anymore than I can. What I am asking you is, if it were your kids being arrested for violating a ridiculous law, would you support it? It's a simple answer: Yes/No.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Obtuse would imply I don't understand your point. I more than understand it and realize you simply don't want to answer the question.



However, if they did get arrested for picking up seaweed: would you support it as they did break the law? Saying they won't so there is no point in answering is nonsense. You can't see into the future anymore than I can. What I am asking you is, if it were your kids being arrested for violating a ridiculous law, would you support it? It's a simple answer: Yes/No.
Click to expand...


My kids won't get arrested for picking seaweed. You keep asking me a ridiculous question. It isn't going to happen. They don't arrest people in NH for picking up seaweed. They also won't get arrested for walking their unicorns without a leash. I won't get arrested for shooting Brad Pitt while he's wearing my husband's boxer shorts. And I already answered the question about supporting the arrest of my children if they get arrested for breaking a law.

If you don't like the seaweed laws in NH, why don't you write to our governor about them? I live here and they don't concern me at all. Why do they bother you?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
My kids won't get arrested for picking seaweed.
Click to expand...

Still using that magical glass ball? Eh, lookie, I'm getting tired of you ignoring

You keep asking me a ridiculous question. It isn't going to happen. They don't arrest people in NH for picking up seaweed. They also won't get arrested for walking their unicorns without a leash. I won't get arrested for shooting Brad Pitt while he's wearing my husband's boxer shorts. And I already answered the question about supporting the arrest of my children if they get arrested for breaking a law.

If you don't like the seaweed laws in NH, why don't you write to our governor about them? I live here and they don't concern me at all. Why do they bother you?
Click to expand...

You're still missing the point, aren't ya? Here, let me explain it simply, ignore the fact that you have a magical 8 ball to see into the future, ignore that you think you know what will happen 3-5-10 years from now: If your kids were arrested for breaking an insignificant law, would you support their arrest?

You know, your silence and avoidance of the question are far more telling than your continued assertions that you can see into the future.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Are you saying kids have never been arrested/threatened/harassed for selling lemonade? :)







The faces not shown? Guess why. :) The second video? Kids threatened with arrest if they don't shut down their lemonade stands. Please tell us all how your "Libertarian" ideas justify that.
Click to expand...



Clearly the officers acted improperly. If you watch the video - one of the girls tried to pull away and more than one refused to do what the police told them to do.

IN IS INEXCUSABLE that those girls were not tasered, thrown to the ground and beat for "resisting." I guess because the girls were white girls the police show them favoritism.
 
Last edited:
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
Clearly the officers acted improperly. If you watch the video - one of the girls tried to pull away and more than one refused to do what the police told them to do.

IN IS INEXCUSABLE that those girls were not tasered, thrown to the ground and beat for "resisting." I guess because the girls were white girls the police show them favoritism.
Click to expand...

That's kind of the point that tres borrachos is missing. She just stated that if you don't want a confrontation with the police, you shouldn't break the law. Those girls broke the law and resisted, talked back etc. Would she have supported somebody putting those girls in a chokehold? According to her statements: Yes. However, she's not willing to come out and admit it. It's the thing about authoritarians. The small government stuff? It's only for show.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Henrin said:
I don't own the road. The ice cream truck can park on the side of the road if he feels like it.
Click to expand...

well....you can tell you arent a businessman

dont know what you do for a living.....

but you ask 100 store owners that question, and you'll end up with a different response than yours

its funny how some people have no issue taking things away from some, and giving them to others......

especially when it isnt theirs to give..........
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

clownboy said:
No, but the CITY that levied the taxes does own the sidewalk. And that's NOT the only illegality here. Licensed sellers agree to abide by certain rules to carry the product for sale. One of those is no sale to minors. The illegal street dealer has no such restriction.
Click to expand...

So essentially the law makes the parties unequal, so in order to resolve this problem it's best if only one of those outlets is legal. Fixing bad law with more law is not something I fully understand. Bad law needs to be repealed, not fixed by more law. That's just bad governance.

As for the government owning the side walk, well, the man in question was trading with willing members of society, which is entirely in his right to do, so when the law says certain trade between willing members is against the law on public property they are essentially telling the people they can not practice their rights on government property. That is not something I support.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Still using that magical glass ball? Eh, lookie, I'm getting tired of you ignoring



You're still missing the point, aren't ya? Here, let me explain it simply, ignore the fact that you have a magical 8 ball to see into the future, ignore that you think you know what will happen 3-5-10 years from now: If your kids were arrested for breaking an insignificant law, would you support their arrest?

You know, your silence and avoidance of the question are far more telling than your continued assertions that you can see into the future.
Click to expand...

So now you're asking me if I support my kids being arrested for breaking an "insignificant law". Why? The purpose of this thread isn't to debate how significant or insignificant laws are, is it?

There is no answer to your question other than the one I keep repeating and you keep ignoring, so let me try it once more to see if it sinks in, and then let this thread get back on topic since I'm sure everyone is tired of your incessant, off-topic questions to me.

I support the idea of my children getting arrested if they break the law and the punishment for breaking that law involves arrest. If my kids break the law, they have to pay the price. My family isn't above the law. We aren't the Kennedys.

Not sure what it is you didn't get the first dozen times I posted that?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
That's kind of the point that tres borrachos is missing. She just stated that if you don't want a confrontation with the police, you shouldn't break the law. Those girls broke the law and resisted, talked back etc. Would she have supported somebody putting those girls in a chokehold? According to her statements: Yes. However, she's not willing to come out and admit it. It's the thing about authoritarians. The small government stuff? It's only for show.
Click to expand...

Of course, in actual reality, those girls weren't 350lbs even if you put them together. The mischaracterization and silly memes just don't stop with you. They should, you're not very good at it.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

ReverendHellh0und said:
True, for example, if I get enough points on my license, I get a notice from the DMV in the mail that my license has been suspended and these are the fines I owe.


I don't get jumped by a jock cop and have him attempt to choke me out. (that's not even a legal action).


And again, his only crime that day was.....?
Click to expand...
Be caught driving on that suspended DL and see how it goes. It can go from bad to worse real fast if you argue.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
So now you're asking me if I support my kids being arrested for breaking an "insignificant law". Why?
Click to expand...

It's what I've been asking from the beginning, in different ways, but from the beginning. The seaweed, the lemonade, they're all insignificant laws which don't harm anyone if they're broken.

The purpose of this thread isn't to debate how significant or insignificant laws are, is it?

There is no answer to your question other than the one I keep repeating and you keep ignoring, so let me try it once more to see if it sinks in, and then let this thread get back on topic since I'm sure everyone is tired of your incessant, off-topic questions to me.

I support the idea of my children getting arrested if they break the law and the punishment for breaking that law involves arrest. If my kids break the law, they have to pay the price. My family isn't above the law. We aren't the Kennedys.

Not sure what it is you didn't get the first dozen times I posted that?
Click to expand...

You didn't post that a dozen times. You just answered it now and if you posted it before, it wasn't in reference to me. Lol. Now - Second question: If your kids started crying and moving their hands away from the police, would you support the police using a chokehold to subdue them? Maybe tasering? Any force necessary? Yes?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

gdgyva said:
well....you can tell you arent a businessman

dont know what you do for a living.....

but you ask 100 store owners that question, and you'll end up with a different response than yours

its funny how some people have no issue taking things away from some, and giving them to others......

especially when it isnt theirs to give..........
Click to expand...

I am a businessman. What does being a businessman have to do with the road not being my property? The ice cream truck has the right to be on the road if otherwise granted permission by the state, so I can't even begin to imagine what say I have on the matter.

Is he blocking my business? No, he is selling ice cream like I am doing in your example. He might be taking some of my business, but he is not stopping people from shopping at my store if they want to do so.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

clownboy said:
Of course, in actual reality, those girls weren't 350lbs even if you put them together. The mischaracterization and silly memes just don't stop with you. They should, you're not very good at it.
Click to expand...

Somebody's following me through threads. No it does not. The size of an individual does not dictate the force used. If that was true, hell, a police officer would be justified in beating anybody they believed was beyond their capabilities.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

tres borrachos said:
So now you're asking me if I support my kids being arrested for breaking an "insignificant law". Why? The purpose of this thread isn't to debate how significant or insignificant laws are, is it?

There is no answer to your question other than the one I keep repeating and you keep ignoring, so let me try it once more to see if it sinks in, and then let this thread get back on topic since I'm sure everyone is tired of your incessant, off-topic questions to me.

I support the idea of my children getting arrested if they break the law and the punishment for breaking that law involves arrest. If my kids break the law, they have to pay the price. My family isn't above the law. We aren't the Kennedys.

Not sure what it is you didn't get the first dozen times I posted that?
Click to expand...

Since another sinless member of the forum? :roll:

I wonder how many people there are on the forum that never broke any regulation or law in their life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom