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

Do a YouTube search. He stirs the racist pot quite often.

That's not what I asked you. I asked you to show us where he said cops were there to harass black people.

Here a couple of his latest comments speaking to the NAACP.

“In too many communities around the country, a gulf of mistrust exists between local residents and law enforcement. Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement,” adding “Guilty of walking while black or driving while black; judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness.”

Ummmm... he said black men didn't trust the police. That is a fact. However, it doesn't show he said cops are there to harass black people.

“We know that statistically, in everything from enforcing drug policy to applying the death penalty to pulling people over there are significant racial disparities, that’s just the statistics.”

Ummm... yes, that's a fact.

It seems you can't show us where he said cops are there to harass black men. Instead, he described why it is minorities don't trust law enforcement and is due to the fact that there are demonstrable disparities in the treatment of racial groups when it comes to law enforcement and treatment by the law. That's not the same as saying cops are there to harass black people. That's your claim about what he said and so far you haven't substantiated it yet.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I'm surprised it took this long for someone to find away to make this about Obama.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

There is nothing to back up their case they saw anything. For all we know they made it up.

So let's assume that they did? Even when the suspect has an extensive history of EXACTLY what he was accused of doing?

Look, that kind of disagreement is why there needed to be an investigation and if Garner had allowed that investigation to happen he likely wouldn't have been restrained. It's just that simple. If he REALLY thought that the cops were harassing him all he had to do was let things go, get names of the cops and find a lawyer to help him sue for harassment.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Don't worry, there's no shortage of people on an ego trip that need a job.


"These cases" might not seem about race but people of color and the poor do seem to be taking the brunt of these low crime laws passed by politicians.

When politicians raise taxes on free market items such as cigarettes so that poor people can't afford a pack it opens an underground market for selling single cigarettes. It's just supply and demand. Unfortunately, more often than not the police response to low level crimes is becoming more akin to military response than it is just giving someone a ticket or a fine.

The question is...why does anyone need to be forcefully taken down to the ground for selling a cigarette in the first place? Would this low level crime have even happened if NY hadn't put a $5 tax on a pack of cigarettes that ultimately ended up taking Eric Gardner's life?


These cases aren't about race.....they're about the low level crime "nanny state" tax laws... that politicians are passing that usually effect and hurt poor people the most.

I agree that the Gardner case makes no sense and needs to be explained better to us all.

But there's no need because Pelosi, Sharpton, etc, along with the media, have already told us it's all about racist police departments and court rooms.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

There appears to be a good informal rule-of-thumb to be adopted here.
It's quite simple too.
If an incident such as this occurs and you have to know the race of the protagonists before you decide if you should care, then you can use some self-reflection because your motives aren't pure.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I agree that the Gardner case makes no sense and needs to be explained better to us all.

But there's no need because Pelosi, Sharpton, etc, along with the media, have already told us it's all about racist police departments and court rooms.

Oh, STOP.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

There appears to be a good informal rule-of-thumb to be adopted here.
It's quite simple too.
If an incident such as this occurs and you have to know the race of the protagonists before you decide if you should care, then you can use some self-reflection because your motives aren't pure.

What.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Someone who "resists", then is shown putting his hands up, someone in this case, should not be dead. He did resist in the beginning, then he is shown putting his hands in the air, the police did not have to kill this man (by using a banned police chokehold), they didnt have to kill him period.

So are you saying at first; one can resist, attempt to move the officer back from them.....then put his hands up and say cmon now theres no need to do this?

Did you know that some people tell the cops they cannot breathe when cuffs are being put on them? Even after cuffs are put on them?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

So are you saying at first; one can resist, attempt to move the officer back from them.....then put his hands up and say cmon now theres no need to do this?

Did you know that some people tell the cops they cannot breathe when cuffs are being put on them? Even after cuffs are put on them?

Did you know that some cops abuse their power?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

So let's assume that they did? Even when the suspect has an extensive history of EXACTLY what he was accused of doing?

Look, that kind of disagreement is why there needed to be an investigation and if Garner had allowed that investigation to happen he likely wouldn't have been restrained. It's just that simple. If he REALLY thought that the cops were harassing him all he had to do was let things go, get names of the cops and find a lawyer to help him sue for harassment.

As I've stated before. This is the terrible solution advocated by all of the police brutality advocates:

- If you don't like the way police treat you, let yourself be harassed, then fight long battles in court, spend thousands of dollars you may not have on attorneys, and hope courts see things your way. If you win? You may just win enough to break even. If you don't win, then you're stuck with all the bills you incurred.

Please, never again tell us about how you're all for small government and constitutional rights? It's not only laughably false, it's just plain dishonest at this point. You're an apologist for police brutality. :)
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I have watched this video over and over. The cop never tells the guy he's under arrest.

Not required. If you have any doubt, it is your responsibility to ask. If they lie to you about it or say something that doesn't match their actions, then they can be held responsible, but they have no obligation to say "you are under arrest". Not from what I've learned or found out. They made it clear with their actions.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Go back and read.....that's why they say it is fundamental.

I read it, and it was nonsensical. The fact that the cops managed not to kill anyone else has what bearing on this case?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Someone who "resists", then is shown putting his hands up, someone in this case, should not be dead. He did resist in the beginning, then he is shown putting his hands in the air, the police did not have to kill this man (by using a banned police chokehold), they didnt have to kill him period.

DemSocialist, have you watched the video? He was breathing and talking well after the chokehold had been released. The unfortunate thing is that the coroner mentioned it at all. One has to wonder if there was any physical evidence that he'd even been placed in one.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not required. If you have any doubt, it is your responsibility to ask. If they lie to you about it or say something that doesn't match their actions, then they can be held responsible, but they have no obligation to say "you are under arrest". Not from what I've learned or found out. They made it clear with their actions.

BULL. They are required to inform you.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

So are you saying at first; one can resist, attempt to move the officer back from them.....then put his hands up and say cmon now theres no need to do this?
Can they? No. But that does not deserve to be killed.

Did you know that some people tell the cops they cannot breathe when cuffs are being put on them? Even after cuffs are put on them?
Did they die like this while a cop was using a banned chokehold on them?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

The level of his supposed resistance does not equal the level of force used to detain him.

Don't be a criminal and you wont have those type issues. Remember, your reputation precedes you.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Don't be a criminal and you wont have those type issues. Remember, your reputation precedes you.

This is a really, really dumb statement.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

The level of his supposed resistance does not equal the level of force used to detain him.

According to you. What force should have exactly been used to detain him. Be specific, and not negative (example: shouldn't have did this is negative). Asking what should have been used, not what should not have been used. And how likely is it to have worked in this specific instance?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not required. If you have any doubt, it is your responsibility to ask. If they lie to you about it or say something that doesn't match their actions, then they can be held responsible, but they have no obligation to say "you are under arrest". Not from what I've learned or found out. They made it clear with their actions.

I don't think you're right. You cannot be guilty of resisting arrest if you don't know you're under arrest.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Man, the level of hyperbole with this stuff is unreal. I don't know what's got into the water in this country but the angry/crazy/stupid level is just off the charts.


It is Luther.....ever hear of Mike Tremoglie? Former Philly Cop.....writes books. He has stats on White cops shooting black people. Black Cops shooting white people. Latino cops shooting black people. Deaths, shootings, Two Man patrol interaction with the public, single man interaction with the public. Etc etc.

He was on the Bill Bennett show the other day talking about the problem of Holder taking this into a Civil Rights issue.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not required. If you have any doubt, it is your responsibility to ask. If they lie to you about it or say something that doesn't match their actions, then they can be held responsible, but they have no obligation to say "you are under arrest". Not from what I've learned or found out. They made it clear with their actions.

So... if they have not obligation to tell you that you're under arrest.... how is a person still guilty of resisting something they didn't know they were under? If police are not under obligation to tell a person they're under arrest, isn't a resistance to arrest just self defense? Genuine question.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

According to you. What force should have exactly been used to detain him. Be specific, and not negative (example: shouldn't have did this is negative). Asking what should have been used, not what should not have been used. And how likely is it to have worked in this specific instance?

"Okay, what's going on here? We've had a complaint about such-and-such called in to 911." Guy answers. Cops tell him to keep moving and leave the guy alone. Or they place him under arrest. To place him under arrest, first they tell him he's under arrest. (Not done.) Then they tell him to put his hands behind his back and turn around. (Not done.) If he doesn't? They use one of their fancy tasers to bring him down. This was a ****-up from Jump Street.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

BULL. They are required to inform you.

Show the exact law and requirement. What has to be said, specifically. I could be wrong, but I've been seeing plenty of support for what I said, specifically in a situation like this. Does a law say it has to be before the cuffs come out? What are the exact requirements?
 
Back
Top Bottom