• 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!

Man Who Filmed Cop Choking Eric Garner Was Indicted (Video).....

At 2:30 you see the deliberate crushing of him. That man had done exactly nothing. He was crushed, beaten and tazered more times that can be counted. No charges against the officers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku4...to stop.[/FONT][/COLOR][/B][/INDENT][/INDENT]
 
from the OP article
"Orta was indicted on weapons charges after an arrest on Aug. 2 in the St. George neighborhood of Staten Island."

His arrest has nothing to do with the filming. I imagine a defense attorney will claim they are related somehow. Seems Orta is of the "not my fault" crowed. Don't carry a weapon unless your authorized.

He's authorized by the 2nd amendment.
 
What do you think law enforcement officials should do when they see someone committing a miksdemeanor, go to issue a citation, and the individual that is committing the misdemeanor refuses to so much as provide a name, let alone accept a citation? How do you see things going once people realize that they can just blow off cops and have absolutely no responsibility for misdemeanor crimes and no consequence or repercussion whatsoever?

I think there is a happy medium between asking politely and delivering a chokehold. If you don't agree then let me just say I hope you're not a school teacher.
 
Who the hell are you?

The name's Wanderer. CycloneWanderer. I like long walks, listening to books on tape, and playing sports. I dislike people who don't understand my witty comments and quote them days after they've been posted while acting offended. It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance.
 
great. but what if they wont stop and wont even give you Jose Ramirez? And what happens to law and order when people realize there is no consequence to breaking the law?

Curious that you think that the only option if a person is committing a misdemeanor or minor offense that they must be violently assaulted and beaten to death because you see no other option. :roll:
 
I think there is a happy medium between asking politely and delivering a chokehold. If you don't agree then let me just say I hope you're not a school teacher.
Thats why I decided not to go into teaching...but...not really the point. You mention the happy medium, which is REALLY your way of avoiding the point. The point is...if you allow lawlessness, bad **** happens. They did not approach Garner to choke him because he was selling cigarettes illegally. They didnt approach him necessarily to arrest him. He did not get put to the ground because he was accused of legally selling cigarettes. For all we know, they would have issued a citation and that would have been the end of it. Does it look like Mr Garner was in any way shape or form receptive to being issued a citation, politely or otherwise? THEN what? Just ignore it because the lawbreaker says 'leave me alone'?
 
Curious that you think that the only option if a person is committing a misdemeanor or minor offense that they must be violently assaulted and beaten to death because you see no other option. :roll:
Geeeeezus....the drama....

He was not beaten to death, nor was he assaulted. He was taken to the ground and cuffed because he resisted arrest. He didnt die because he was taken to the ground, he died because he was 200+ pounds overweight and resisted arrest and had a heart attack (over an hour after the incident).
 
Nope, however in threat assessment a random criminal has a lower probability of negatively affecting me than the government. So probably should err on the side of caution against the government, statistically speaking.

Actually no. Statistically speaking that ONE random criminal has just as much chance of affecting you personally as that ONE random cop.
 
What do you think law enforcement officials should do when they see someone committing a miksdemeanor, go to issue a citation, and the individual that is committing the misdemeanor refuses to so much as provide a name, let alone accept a citation? How do you see things going once people realize that they can just blow off cops and have absolutely no responsibility for misdemeanor crimes and no consequence or repercussion whatsoever?

Oh, just shoot them.

I mean, its a slippery slope, if you let them sell illegal cigarettes, then the next thing you know they will be raping children.

FFS, you have no idea how policing works and you're trying to defend an execution. You don't use a choke hold on a man who shows no signs of violence. Ever. In civilized countries, police arew restricted to using force one degree higher than the threat against them or civilians. If there is no threat, they cannot use violence, merely restrictive holds, if necessary.

Don't give me the danger ****, policing is far far safer than a career as a mental health professional, a construction worker or even pilot.

Your scenario is ludicrous, as its the law, you must identify yourself to a police officer or face charges of obstruction of justice, which is a felony. That gives them the right to make an arrest then and there.

If citations are not effective, that is a matter to be debated and fixed, you do not become legalized vigilantes dispensing a level of justice YOU think appropriate.

FFS, conservatives go ape**** every time Obama thinks about an executive order, whine and whine about he's shredding the constitution, but at the first sign of criticism of a cop, you're willing to throw out the whole bill of rights.
 
I guess you won't answer the question about coincidence.

Keep deflecting and excusing corrupt cops.
In order to ascertain 'coincidence' we have to know a little about the facts. Its rather obvious from the husbands arrest history he is committing criminal acts that he is getting caught at approximately every 2-3 months (27 arrests in a relatively short period of time). By his on record, his arrest wold certainly be considered "normal" for him. Correct? Now....to the wife...Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody? If she actually slapped someone, then there is no conspiracy. So...to answer the question, I will ask again....

Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody?
 
In order to ascertain 'coincidence' we have to know a little about the facts. Its rather obvious from the husbands arrest history he is committing criminal acts that he is getting caught at approximately every 2-3 months (27 arrests in a relatively short period of time). By his on record, his arrest wold certainly be considered "normal" for him. Correct? Now....to the wife...Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody? If she actually slapped someone, then there is no conspiracy. So...to answer the question, I will ask again....

Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody?

Nice...

That is an award winning deflection.

But, it makes no sense whatsoever. You just proved he was "known to police" and they could nail him pretty easy to get even.
 
It wouldn't be that hard for cops to toss a weapon into a guy's car, or an eight ball of coke, and make up charges. Happens all the time, especially in NY state.

Basically if the cops have it out for you the only thing you can do is leave town.
 
Are you admitting cops are almost all crooked and that's why their "attracted" to criminals?

That little tactic doesn't work for you either way. Because they seem to be from your accounts "attracted" to you.
 
Oh, just shoot them.

I mean, its a slippery slope, if you let them sell illegal cigarettes, then the next thing you know they will be raping children.

FFS, you have no idea how policing works and you're trying to defend an execution. You don't use a choke hold on a man who shows no signs of violence. Ever. In civilized countries, police arew restricted to using force one degree higher than the threat against them or civilians. If there is no threat, they cannot use violence, merely restrictive holds, if necessary.

Don't give me the danger ****, policing is far far safer than a career as a mental health professional, a construction worker or even pilot.

Your scenario is ludicrous, as its the law, you must identify yourself to a police officer or face charges of obstruction of justice, which is a felony. That gives them the right to make an arrest then and there.

If citations are not effective, that is a matter to be debated and fixed, you do not become legalized vigilantes dispensing a level of justice YOU think appropriate.

FFS, conservatives go ape**** every time Obama thinks about an executive order, whine and whine about he's shredding the constitution, but at the first sign of criticism of a cop, you're willing to throw out the whole bill of rights.

You are cute when you are angry.

That was a good yahoo son. Your response had zero relative bearing to my comment, but it was a good rant nonetheless.

He wasnt executed. He wasnt killed. He wasnt choked to death. He never stopped breathing during the 'chokehold'. He had a cardiac arrest and he died. Grossly overweight and morbidly obese people should not resist arrest.
 
Last edited:
I think there is a happy medium between asking politely and delivering a chokehold. If you don't agree then let me just say I hope you're not a school teacher.

We don't know if he wasn't asked politely first. In any event, when a police officer tells you to give them your hands, it's not a polite request, it's a command. As it should be.
 
Nice...

That is an award winning deflection.

But, it makes no sense whatsoever. You just proved he was "known to police" and they could nail him pretty easy to get even.
Its not even SLIGHTLY a deflection. The male suspect gets arrested every few months. In order to ascertain coincidence or conspiracy, you need to answer ONE SIMPLE QUESTION. Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody?

Its really a simple question. Answer it and I will be able to answer your question regarding 'coincidence'. Eagerly. Gladly.

Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody?
 
Curious that you think that the only option if a person is committing a misdemeanor or minor offense that they must be violently assaulted and beaten to death because you see no other option. :roll:

How do you even get that from the post you quoted as responding to? Nice bit of putting what's in your head into someone else's words.
 
It wouldn't be that hard for cops to toss a weapon into a guy's car, or an eight ball of coke, and make up charges. Happens all the time, especially in NY state.

Basically if the cops have it out for you the only thing you can do is leave town.

You're watching way too much TV. "Happens all the time". :lamo
 
Actually no. Statistically speaking that ONE random criminal has just as much chance of affecting you personally as that ONE random cop.

Nope, government policies are broad reaching. Since the problems with the poli e departments are nationwide, we're talking an aggregate breakdown in proper threat assessment. It's not just one cop, government is not 1. It's like saying I shouldn't worry about airport security because one TSA agent over there won't be a problem. But there's more than one and I have to deal with them whenever I fly.

Government has always been the number one threat to freedom and liberty. A necessity, yes, but one we're meant to keep a very close eye on.
 
Nope, government policies are broad reaching. Since the problems with the poli e departments are nationwide, we're talking an aggregate breakdown in proper threat assessment. It's not just one cop, government is not 1. It's like saying I shouldn't worry about airport security because one TSA agent over there won't be a problem. But there's more than one and I have to deal with them whenever I fly.

Government has always been the number one threat to freedom and liberty. A necessity, yes, but one we're meant to keep a very close eye on.

So, you show you not only do not understand statistical probability, but you also don't understand police departments. Try as you might, those departments are local, have local rules and policies and are under local control.
 
So, you show you not only do not understand statistical probability, but you also don't understand police departments. Try as you might, those departments are local, have local rules and policies and are under local control.

And yet what they are being taught and trained how to react spans nationally. Obviously this isn't a local issue.

And I likely know well more about statistics and statistical analysis that you could ever hope to achieve.
 
Nice...

That is an award winning deflection.

But, it makes no sense whatsoever. You just proved he was "known to police" and they could nail him pretty easy to get even.

Wait...where did you go?



Did the police set up the wife to slap somebody or did she actually slap somebody?
 
Back
Top Bottom