• 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!

Video Shows Man Getting Punched by Cop After Resisting Arrest in Harlem

Good luck doing that without some sort of society backing you up. ;)

You really have no understanding of history, do you? If I overpower your government it will collapse and I will assume all of you as my slaves. At best all I would need is loyal well trained followers to fight for me and a good amount of weaponry. I can also win an election and not really give a crap about the people after I'm elected. More than likely I will do just fine doing what I want and since the people are so stupid they will probably reelect me repeatedly.
 
Last edited:
Good luck doing that without some sort of society backing you up. ;)

All that matters is his consent to the government. He can make the rest of us slaves (as he said himself). Which seems kind of contrary to libertarianism if you ask me.
 
All that matters is his consent to the government. He can make the rest of us slaves (as he said himself). Which seems kind of contrary to libertarianism if you ask me.

You already approve of whatever conditions I would impose on you by taking over control. You're really just complaining because you don't like the way I worded it.
 
You already approve of whatever conditions I would impose on you by taking over control. You're really just complaining because you don't like the way I worded it.

What I find amusing...and hypocritical...is that you started out in this thread complaining about how our "government" does what they want to people, puts them in cages and makes slaves of them. And now, you are talking about how you'd like to do the same thing.

LOL!!
 
If you want to throw me in that hell I will attempt to kill you. Your only choices are to either subdue me or kill me because I sure as hell am not going freely.

That is never a problem for the police in Houston, Texas.

I suggest you either behave when you come to town or prepare for one good ass whooping. Me, I avoid the police, but I do have sense enough to interact with them without getting my ass kicked.
 
What I find amusing...and hypocritical...is that you started out in this thread complaining about how our "government" does what they want to people, puts them in cages and makes slaves of them. And now, you are talking about how you'd like to do the same thing.

LOL!!

I never said I wanted to put people in cages. The whole point of the car example was to show how absurd it is to accept the logic behind the social contract. The reason I said the part about taking over the country and making everyone my slave is because that is how governments were founded and still exist today. None of you are apparently aware enough to realize that I changed nothing but the slaveholders.
 
The "sovereign citizen" is just another term for "anarchist". Society has a responsibility to establish and enforce certain rules for the purpose of maintaining order which protects and preserves the rights of all citizens. You certainly have the right to disagree with the rules and plead your case but if you are going to participate in the society then you also need to be held accountable to those rules.

Is that what Herrin considers himself? I know several of these people. The ones I know are certifiably crazy, and I avoid them like the plague.
 
Is that what Herrin considers himself? I know several of these people. The ones I know are certifiably crazy, and I avoid them like the plague.

No.

....
 
That's kind of what I thought. Since his partner was next to useless and he didn't have sufficient non-lethal force to subdue the guy he could have just followed him. He had is ID. It's not like he didn't know where he lived. The backup (in the form of the MALE officers) arrived pretty promptly.

A male officer of the body mass of the female officer would also not have helped one flying fig against this guy. This guy was just too big for even 2 big officers. But again, a boxing fight?! What kind of lame brain idea was that. In all honesty the female officer did the right thing to not get involved until backup arrived.
 
Some people just need to be shot to learn a lesson. If EVERYONE just did what the cops told them, instead if this pompous bs no one would die or get shot
 
I have seen the video and it seems that the officer did act in a somewhat questionable manner, but I still come back to my argument that I have used several times before. The best way to fight a police officer is in the court room, not on the street. On the street, you don't have a chance, in a court room, you have the right to defend yourself and there are plenty of referee's keeping it fair.
 
Some people just need to be shot to learn a lesson. If EVERYONE just did what the cops told them, instead if this pompous bs no one would die or get shot

I'm sorry, but that's just cowardice. Just submit to abusive authority, huh?
 
I have seen the video and it seems that the officer did act in a somewhat questionable manner, but I still come back to my argument that I have used several times before. The best way to fight a police officer is in the court room, not on the street. On the street, you don't have a chance, in a court room, you have the right to defend yourself and there are plenty of referee's keeping it fair.

It's a fair point, but we should at least challenge the notion that police can detain and then assault a citizen who was -- for some undetermined reason -- suspected of a misdemeanor. The people cheering on the assault of a citizen should be ashamed.

If the guy had slugged the cop, these same people justifying the cop's actions would support shooting the citizen in self-defense. Personally, I espouse a different standard: If you, as an officer imbued with state authority, lay a hand on a citizen, you should be made to justify it fully. The burden of proof should ALWAYS be on the state.
 
It's a fair point, but we should at least challenge the notion that police can detain and then assault a citizen who was -- for some undetermined reason -- suspected of a misdemeanor. The people cheering on the assault of a citizen should be ashamed.

If the guy had slugged the cop, these same people justifying the cop's actions would support shooting the citizen in self-defense. Personally, I espouse a different standard: If you, as an officer imbued with state authority, lay a hand on a citizen, you should be made to justify it fully. The burden of proof should ALWAYS be on the state.

That can be done in court very easily. Especially with technology where it is today. The whole incident was being filmed, at that point, he should have just complied with the officer and then take his evidence to court and make his case.
 
That can be done in court very easily. Especially with technology where it is today. The whole incident was being filmed, at that point, he should have just complied with the officer and then take his evidence to court and make his case.

Being detained and arrested is a hardship regardless. I'm against officers detaining citizens without cause. I find the actions of this officer to be overbearing and, ultimately, abusive. Regardless, you're right that not resisting is probably in the guy's best interest, but there needs to be a serious upgrade in police accountability in this country. We shouldn't just tolerate this kind of harassment.
 
Being detained and arrested is a hardship regardless. I'm against officers detaining citizens without cause. I find the actions of this officer to be overbearing and, ultimately, abusive. Regardless, you're right that not resisting is probably in the guy's best interest, but there needs to be a serious upgrade in police accountability in this country. We shouldn't just tolerate this kind of harassment.

You are correct, unlawful detentions should be addressed, but you, as a citizen on the street are not to take the law into your own hand and determine what is and is not a lawful detention. That is the whole purpose of having a judicial system. A unlawful or lawful detention is not labeled as such until after a court case determines it. If you have the opinion that you have ben unlawfully detained and have evidence to back that up, you take it to court. You don't fight with the officer on the side of the road. Comply, and take your issues up with the court or file a complaint.
 
You are correct, unlawful detentions should be addressed, but you, as a citizen on the street are not to take the law into your own hand and determine what is and is not a lawful detention. That is the whole purpose of having a judicial system. A unlawful or lawful detention is not labeled as such until after a court case determines it. If you have the opinion that you have ben unlawfully detained and have evidence to back that up, you take it to court. You don't fight with the officer on the side of the road. Comply, and take your issues up with the court or file a complaint.

I pretty much agree. The guy should fight the charges in court, not in the street. He should have filed complaints and, if he had the resources, sue the officer, the department and the city.
 
Why follow the idiot? To have sufficient non-lethal force to subdue him without engaging in a fistfight on the street where you put lives in danger. What if the guy had grabbed the cop's gun, for example?

I saw the video on FaceBook and my first thought was "What did the guy do to get arrested?" The cop asked him for his ID which he handed over without complaint. And then when the cop put his ID in is pocket and wouldn't give it back, that's when things began to turn ugly.

At no point did the cop inform the guy why he was being arrested (at least not that I heard anyway). Now, I understand the arguments that says that resisting arrest starts the moment the citizen refuses to comply with the police officer's instructions to submit to his authority, but under what grounds did the cop have the authority to restrain the guy? Again, what did he do?

From what I saw of the video, the man did NOTHING that justified being arrested. He defended himself against the cop's aggressive actions as the cop assaulted him, not the other way around. Frankly, I would have resisted too if a cop simply walks up to me, asks me for my ID, stashes it in his pocket and refuses to return it to me and then insists that I submit to his authority without informing me why I'm being arrested (not to mention never reading me my rights).

So if you don't like it when a cop asks to frisk you because he tells you he thought you had a knife you're supposed to curse at him, try to walk away, engage in a fist fight with him, and have your cheering section taunt him with a cellphone camera?

Wait a minute...

Let's get it straight. The cop threw the first punch. The guy did everything he could not to make physical contact with the police officer.

And NO! I'm not going to just submit to an allegation that I had a weapon on me when no one not even the police actually saw it - at least not without first having the situation explained to me as to why you want me to submit to a pat down. That's unlawful search and seizure followed by unlawful arrest. BTW: Wasn't stop and frisk halted in NYC recently anyway?
 
Last edited:
I have seen the video and it seems that the officer did act in a somewhat questionable manner, but I still come back to my argument that I have used several times before. The best way to fight a police officer is in the court room, not on the street. On the street, you don't have a chance, in a court room, you have the right to defend yourself and there are plenty of referee's keeping it fair.

That's the point I've been trying to make. Once the officer made a decision to cuff him, Mr. George should have cooperated. Instead, he ended up in an ambulance with multiple charges. In the old days he would have been knocked unconscious with a baton or blackjack.
 
Let's get it straight. The cop threw the first punch. The guy did everything he could not to make physical contact with the police officer.

There's a point in the video in which Mr. George says he's not afraid of the cop. Sounds like a threat. Also, I noticed that just before we see the plainclothes officer swing at Mr. George, all we see is the sidewalk and feet. So we don't see what transpires between the two at that point. In any case, it seems to me once Mr. George resisted arrest the officer was entitled to use non-lethal force, including punches, to detain him. He's lucky this was't in the 1960s or '70s. His head would have been split open with a truncheon. Fortunately, most people knew then to keep their mouths shut and cooperate.
 
I saw the video on FaceBook and my first thought was "What did the guy do to get arrested?" The cop asked him for his ID which he handed over without complaint. And then when the cop put his ID in is pocket and wouldn't give it back, that's when things began to turn ugly.

At no point did the cop inform the guy why he was being arrested (at least not that I heard anyway). Now, I understand the arguments that says that resisting arrest starts the moment the citizen refuses to comply with the police officer's instructions to submit to his authority, but under what grounds did the cop have the authority to restrain the guy? Again, what did he do?

From what I saw of the video, the man did NOTHING that justified being arrested. He defended himself against the cop's aggressive actions as the cop assaulted him, not the other way around. Frankly, I would have resisted too if a cop simply walks up to me, asks me for my ID, stashes it in his pocket and refuses to return it to me and then insists that I submit to his authority without informing me why I'm being arrested (not to mention never reading me my rights).



Wait a minute...

Let's get it straight. The cop threw the first punch. The guy did everything he could not to make physical contact with the police officer.

And NO! I'm not going to just submit to an allegation that I had a weapon on me when no one not even the police actually saw it - at least not without first having the situation explained to me as to why you want me to submit to a pat down. That's unlawful search and seizure followed by unlawful arrest. BTW: Wasn't stop and frisk halted in NYC recently anyway?

While he may have had a case, and still has a case against the officer, his fight with the officer could have been avoided. If he had proof that he was detained unlawfully, then he has a case. But instead of cooperating, and taking the high ground, he decided to lower himself to the level of the officer. This is the lesson we should teach all those who involve themselves in a conflict with the law. If you are unlawfully being detained, then fight that battle in court where you wont be killed. And if that does not work, you can always reach out to the public who will protest your cause.
 
Being detained and arrested is a hardship regardless.

So is being knifed, shot, raped, robbed, or murdered. And before the NYPD began its stop-and-frisk policy these were all too common in some areas of the city.

I'm against officers detaining citizens without cause. I find the actions of this officer to be overbearing and, ultimately, abusive.

Me, too, but in this case why don't we just wait until all the facts are in before we come to conclusions (other than the fact that Mr. George used poor judgment when he resisted). Meanwhile:

Commissioner Bill Bratton defended the officers, who made the bust on Wednesday.

“You have no right, no right under New York law, to resist arrest, which was going on, based on what I’m seeing in that video,” Bratton said.

“The Internal Affairs group will now be reviewing the video, as we always do. But in my preliminary review of that, I saw nothing inappropriate with the officers’ behavior."

Video of NYPD cop boxing with hostile suspect under review | New York Post

Regardless, you're right that not resisting is probably in the guy's best interest, but there needs to be a serious upgrade in police accountability in this country. We shouldn't just tolerate this kind of harassment.

Neither should we tolerate uncivil behavior on the part of citizens. You can't demand freedom without accepting the responsibility that goes with it.
 
But instead of cooperating, and taking the high ground, he decided to lower himself to the level of the officer.

I take exception to that comment. While the officer's Walker impersonation might leave something to be desired, there is a point in the video just before the officer swings at Mr. George where we don't see what happens. Just because the officer's punch is the first one we see doesn't mean he threw the first punch. And even if he did he had every right to use reasonable force to detain Mr. George to effect an arrest.
 
Well it's good the cop didn't shoot him, but it looks like he started that fight.

Well, no, Mr. George started it when he wouldn't submit to being cuffed. In the old days he would have been knocked unconscious with a blackjack plainclothes officers kept on their person.
 
Back
Top Bottom