Page 179 of 276 FirstFirst ... 79129169177178179180181189229 ... LastLast
Results 1,781 to 1,790 of 2756

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

  1. #1781
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,034

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that if the policy is banned by the employer, and it's illegal for another person who isn't a cop to use it, how can it be legal for cops to use it?



    Yes, and I'm stating it's a double standard.
    You're asking why is it legal for cops to use force, and why it isn't legal for private citizens to use force.

    Seriously?

    I can't justify that with an answer. Like I said, lobby the Justice Department to make it so that cops can't ever, ever use any kind of force at their discretion, and please let me know how you make out with that.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  2. #1782
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    There's nothing absurd about it. I don't know that the issue has ever come before the state legislature or the NYC Council but if it did they decided to leave it to the PD to decide whether the use of the choke-hold made sense or not. The NYPD decided it didn't make sense for them. Other NY State police agencies may have decided otherwise.

    The NYPD, like any other organization, is free to make rules governing how its employees discharge their duties. They cannot tell officers to do something that is illegal but they can restrict the legal things that they can do. Every employer does that.


    Again the exception is made is for cops, in general, because if they can't force someone to do something they cannot do their jobs. If they go to arrest someone and that person just walks away how are they to deal with it if they can't legally grab the guy and cuff him? That doesn't mean that they can use excessive force and the there are legal (though rarely successful) and administrative remedies when cops go overboard. The difference is that you and I can never legally initiate the use force. We are automatically wrong. The police aren't necessarily automatically wrong.
    No one is saying they shouldn't be allowed to initiate contact. What is being questioned is how some forms of contact can be banned, illegal outside of uniform and still be legal for them to use. That's like saying: Okay, well you're banned from driving without glasses, but it's not illegal if you do, and you won't get a ticket either.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  3. #1783
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    You're asking why is it legal for cops to use force, and why it isn't legal for private citizens to use force.
    Nope. I'm asking why a policy that bans the police from using X, still means that X is legal, even though it isn't legal for the rest of the population. Would it not fall outside of what is legal for them to use if they aren't allowed to use it?
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  4. #1784
    Sage


    Thoreau72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 09:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    20,267

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    If justice is killing an unarmed man for suspicion of selling loose cigarettes - God help us all.
    Cops are not really concerned with justice, they are concerned with authority.

  5. #1785
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,443

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    No one is saying they shouldn't be allowed to initiate contact. What is being questioned is how some forms of contact can be banned, illegal outside of uniform and still be legal for them to use. That's like saying: Okay, well you're banned from driving without glasses, but it's not illegal if you do, and you won't get a ticket either.
    That example isn't good because generally the says that you have to comply with the rules established by the state Department of Motor Vehicles so by driving without glasses you are breaking the law because you're not complying
    with the state DMV regulations.

    This is a better parallel. I can legally carry a firearm in my home state. My employer forbids bringing firearms onto the work premises. If I do so it is not a crime. I cannot go to jail for it. I can be fired.

    Work rules and laws are two different things. Do you contend that an employer cannot restrict the legal actions of employees who are discharging their duties?
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  6. #1786
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:14 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,978

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    You are making unfounded allegations. In fact I would describe what you are doing as defaming the officers.
    1) There is really no question that Pantaleo used a choke hold.
    2) There is no question that choke holds were banned by the NYPD.
    3) The grand jury doesn't evaluate whether an officer violated its code of conduct. It determines if he broke the law.
    4) Since you missed it: The medical examiner ruled Garner's death as a homicide. He is still facing a disciplinary hearing, and possible federal charges.

    A grand jury heard the testimony and brought no charges. So you are committing a serious civil offense.
    lol

    Aside from the fact that you have no understanding of defamation, and no recognition that what you're suggesting violates my right to free speech: If Pantaleo thinks I'm defaming him, he can sue me.


    "This case cries out for an anti-tax rebellion. Ultimately it is liberalism that is at the root of this man's death."
    "It's the taxman's fault!" is the most absurd meme of this entire sad affair.

  7. #1787
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:14 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,978

    Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    You have not seen the evidence.
    Neither have you.


    Are you accusing the prosecutor of corruption? Or malfeasance?
    I'm saying:

    • Under ordinary circumstances, grand juries are a rubber stamp.
    • Just about the only people who ever get a pass from a GJ are police officers.
    • The video clearly showing an officer using a banned choke hold, and the medical examiner classified it as a homicide. If an officer can't get indicted given just that evidence alone, then something in the system is seriously broken.
    • It is entirely plausible that the prosecutor threw the case. After all, he has to work with the NYPD, and that's going to be difficult if he has to vigorously prosecute a NYPD officer.

    There should also be no question that any American citizen has the right to question and criticize a grand jury proceeding.

  8. #1788
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Ask the officer. What we know and the evidence clearly shows is that the officer announced his intent and Garner resisted. Thats going to result in an arrest every time. But be honest. That HAS to be one of the tamest take downs you have witnessed of a subject twice the officers size and resisting arrest. He swung his arms and refused to comply, another officer got him around the neck and shoulders and in 8 seconds he was down and that same officer held his head and shoulders down while he was cuffed.

    He is dead because he refused to comply with the law enforcement officer. I dont know if he is guilty or not...but I DO know he had some 30 prior arrests, and many of them were felonies. If he wasnt guilty, he should have gone to court. Its not like he didnt know the way there.
    Why did the officer announce his intent? On what grounds? And this 'tamest take down', totally unnecessary by the way, killed the man. There was no apparent need to even talk with Eric Garner, much less 'take him down'.

    If his 30 prior arrests were anything like selling cigarettes on the street then the NYPD should look around for something more constructive to do.

    Here's what the guy who shot the video, who appeared in front of the GJ, had to say. Eric Garner grand jury rigged, says man who filmed chokehold - NY Daily News

  9. #1789
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:14 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,978

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Just watch. Already we are seeing increased meddling by the Justice Department into local crimes.
    I am watching, and I see no sign whatsoever of anyone nationalizing any police force. You're just scaremongering, and unconvincingly so.


    I doubt you can make that case.
    How about pointing to the dozens of nations that don't use grand juries, and are not tyrannies?

    Or are you classifying any nation whose Constitution you personally did not write as "tyrannical?"


    If a prosecutor can bring serious charges against anyone for any reason without the brakes of overwatching citizens then the conditions for tyranny are set.
    News flash! Prosecutors can get ANYONE indicted. 162,000 federal cases were brought before grand juries in 2010; only 11 of them declined an indictment. That's less than 0.01% of cases. Again: It’s Incredibly Rare For A Grand Jury To Do What Ferguson’s Just Did | FiveThirtyEight

    The idea that a grand jury is a check on anything, let alone prosecutorial powers, is a joke.


    There was no tyranny in that particular death unless it was the tyranny of too much fried chicken and gravy. Police did not kill him with impunity. He died because he was a sick, out of shape fatass who resisted arrest.
    And yet, he was breathing and talking before a police officer used a banned choke hold on him, and another officer compressed his chest.

    The tyranny, by the way, is that police officers can apparently kill citizens in police custody with impunity. How can you possibly view that as a beneficial to anyone?

  10. #1790
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,182

    Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

    Quote Originally Posted by ReverendHellh0und View Post
    Al sharpton owes 4 million in back taxes, Eric Garner much less. Think about that.
    To my knowledge, Eric Garner didn't owe any taxes - he was selling cigarettes illegally. Every legal entity in NYC that sells cigarettes has a license to do so and sells them in packages that are sealed and come directly from the distributor. If they sell to a minor or break open packs and sell them separately, they will also be charged and potentially subject to arrest if they do it enough times.

    If the IRS issued a warrant for Al Sharpton's arrest, I'm pretty sure big Al would glory in the publicity and enjoy being handcuffed on the streets. If big Al decided to resist arrest, he might very well also find himself face planted into the pavement and forcibly detained.

    Equating Al Sharpton to Eric Garner does nothing to advance the discussion. But that's just my view
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •