- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 59,365
- Reaction score
- 27,050
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death
Except their own policies. In short, we're arguing that if the police are banned from doing something, then that something is still lawful for them to use. That's just plainly absurd.
The wider point is that if someone without a badge had done this, it wouldn't be justified. There is no blurry line here about whether the person had a gun. There is no blurry line about whether this person attacked the police. There is no blurry line about who attacked who. So why is the exception being made for cops here?
There are no laws in the State of New York prohibiting the police from using a choke-hold
Except their own policies. In short, we're arguing that if the police are banned from doing something, then that something is still lawful for them to use. That's just plainly absurd.
though there are in other jurisdictions. As a matter of policy the NYPD prohibits the use. So the answer would be no they cannot. However because it isn't illegal for them to use one a criminal proceeding based solely on the choke-hold will go nowhere. It becomes an NYPD administrative issue and the most the NYPD can do is fire the guy and possibly take action against his pension. That's it.
Of course the family, and should, and will, bring a civil action, but that's against the city - the taxpayers - and not the cop. The NYPD pays a hundred million or so a year to settle civil cases against it. If for no other reason the people should be screaming for change because of that alone.
Of course the police are treated differently. They ultimately cannot do their job if they can't force compliance with their legal orders. That doesn't mean that force should be first resort as it was here. It should be the last resort.
The wider point is that if someone without a badge had done this, it wouldn't be justified. There is no blurry line here about whether the person had a gun. There is no blurry line about whether this person attacked the police. There is no blurry line about who attacked who. So why is the exception being made for cops here?