EPTIf Ferguson is any lesson, the media and race baiters made it out to be outright murder, then when the facts came out you'd be hard pressed to even say their races had anything to do with it at all.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1501
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
If Ferguson is any lesson, the media and race baiters made it out to be outright murder, then when the facts came out you'd be hard pressed to even say their races had anything to do with it at all. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On December 04 2014 05:39 Danglars wrote: Wait till all the details come out. It certainly looks bad right now. If Ferguson is any lesson, the media and race baiters made it out to be outright murder, then when the facts came out you'd be hard pressed to even say their races had anything to do with it at all. Well, since we have a damn video of the incident, it looks pretty bad right now. But of course, the excuses will still come. | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8545 Posts
On December 04 2014 05:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Idiotic prosecutor's office, should have been criminal negligence etc. Not murder. they really wanted to indict him on murder charges? don't know if I should be angry or sad or just indifferent to this clusterfuck. | ||
|
RCMDVA
United States708 Posts
| ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32069 Posts
On December 04 2014 05:47 Doublemint wrote: they really wanted to indict him on murder charges? don't know if I should be angry or sad or just indifferent to this clusterfuck. I don't even know what's accurate anymore because I read that one place and then others I saw criminal negligence and manslaughter. I am pretty sure it was the latter things. Also, the choke hold is not illegal. It is against NYPD policy, however. Illegal would mean there is a law against it (making it a crime) which it is not. Numerous places have reported this and it's incorrect. Media standards really have taken a dive in the digital age, but they're completely gone down the shitter between this and Ferguson. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
In terms of police brutality this is about as clear as it gets and he still walks. Consider me floored. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On December 04 2014 06:20 QuanticHawk wrote: Also, the choke hold is not illegal. It is against NYPD policy, however. Illegal would mean there is a law against it (making it a crime) which it is not. Numerous places have reported this and it's incorrect. Media standards really have taken a dive in the digital age, but they're completely gone down the shitter between this and Ferguson. No, contrary to the legal system the media has some kind of moral compass left, and publicly strangling someone on camera is still considered to be a crime. If these things are legal it's the system that needs a rework, not the media. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23259 Posts
On December 04 2014 06:20 QuanticHawk wrote: I don't even know what's accurate anymore because I read that one place and then others I saw criminal negligence and manslaughter. I am pretty sure it was the latter things. Also, the choke hold is not illegal. It is against NYPD policy, however. Illegal would mean there is a law against it (making it a crime) which it is not. Numerous places have reported this and it's incorrect. Media standards really have taken a dive in the digital age, but they're completely gone down the shitter between this and Ferguson. Uhh Choke holds are illegal...? Pretty sure if someone chokes you, you can press charges? In addition to being illegal for civilians they are banned by the NYPD. So what would of made the choke hold legal? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18830 Posts
| ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32069 Posts
On December 04 2014 07:25 GreenHorizons wrote: Uhh Choke holds are illegal...? Pretty sure if someone chokes you, you can press charges? In addition to being illegal for civilians they are banned by the NYPD. So what would of made the choke hold legal? http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20141117/civic-center/councilman-introduces-law-make-nypd-chokeholds-illegal This was proposed in response to Garner's case specifically because it is only a NYPD policy, and not a law as reported by lots of places. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11534 Posts
Can you imagine that happening to someone who is not a cop? If a cop kills a person, there should be a trial. Always. (Also true for anyone else). If he really had reasons to do that, he should not be found guilty in court. This would do a lot to a) reduce the amount of people the police kill, b) make people a lot less unhappy when a cop kills someone, because they know that at least there will be a trial, at nearly no negative effect. The only things i can see that would speak against this are the fact that it clutters the justice system (But if it does, maybe the police are killing too many people in general, and that should be looked at?). Or you fear that the justice system might find innocent cops guilty. In that case you might want to look at the justice system in general, because if it does that for cops, it will do it a lot more for common people. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/howard-morgan-ex-cop-shot_n_1399834.html | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On December 04 2014 07:45 QuanticHawk wrote: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20141117/civic-center/councilman-introduces-law-make-nypd-chokeholds-illegal This was proposed in response to Garner's case specifically because it is only a NYPD policy, and not a law as reported by lots of places. if it's prohibited then how is it not already illegal? it's illegal for everyone else, why wouldn't it be illegal for police officers. that doesn't make sense. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32069 Posts
On December 04 2014 07:54 travis wrote: if it's prohibited then how is it not already illegal? it's illegal for everyone else, why wouldn't it be illegal for police officers. that doesn't make sense. Cops don't make laws. Law makers do. Currently, it's basically a company policy, and you can get disciplined/canned for breaking it. Hence the law being proposed. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11534 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23259 Posts
Well, as an NYC resident I hear a lot of people talking about protesting at Grand Central and the Rockefeller center tonight. I might go see what's up since I'll be in the area later. Looks like there are already people gathering in Times Square. On December 04 2014 07:45 QuanticHawk wrote: http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20141117/civic-center/councilman-introduces-law-make-nypd-chokeholds-illegal This was proposed in response to Garner's case specifically because it is only a NYPD policy, and not a law as reported by lots of places. This doesn't make any sense. They don't need a new law to call shooting someone to death a crime even if a cop does it, so why would they need a new law for choking someone to death? Choking, like shooting someone, is a crime in itself. One has the opportunity (usually at trial not at the grand jury) to explain why it might have been necessary, but shooting or choking shouldn't stop being a crime just because a cop did it. It shouldn't require some new law either. From what I gather the law being proposed is a reaction to the NYPD not disciplining people for violating their rules, it doesn't make choking people a crime as it already is, it bans choke holds from any situation, meaning it wouldn't be able to be used for self defense either (which would be the new part). "The chokehold is prohibited by NYPD policy but there is no enforcement. When there is no enforcement there is no deterrent," From what I see looking around sites reporting on the use of the word "illegal" it seems the basic position is that "choke holds are only a crime when civilians do it". I'm not saying that might not be the case, but it certainly seems strange. It's illegal for civilians, it's banned by the NYPD, but only the NYPD can decide whether to punish cops who do it (with or without reason)? By this logic wouldn't it also not be a crime for a cop to put a choke hold on an infant? | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32069 Posts
On December 04 2014 08:03 Simberto wrote: I am pretty sure "Don't strangle people" is a law. I am pretty sure you need to read before commenting then On December 04 2014 07:53 Ace wrote: Never forget; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/howard-morgan-ex-cop-shot_n_1399834.html I've never even heard of this case. 'Howard Morgan's van was crushed and destroyed without notice or cause before any forensic investigation could be done. ... Howard Morgan was never tested for gun residue to confirm if he even fired a weapon on the morning in question. The State never produced the actual bullet proof vest worn by one of the officers who claimed to have allegedly taken a shot directly into the vest on the morning in question. The State only produced a replica.' Holy shit. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23259 Posts
On December 04 2014 08:20 QuanticHawk wrote: I am pretty sure you need to read before commenting then I've never even heard of this case. 'Howard Morgan's van was crushed and destroyed without notice or cause before any forensic investigation could be done. ... Howard Morgan was never tested for gun residue to confirm if he even fired a weapon on the morning in question. The State never produced the actual bullet proof vest worn by one of the officers who claimed to have allegedly taken a shot directly into the vest on the morning in question. The State only produced a replica.' Holy shit. According to police, Morgan opened fire with his service weapon when officers tried to arrest him, which caused them to shoot him 28 times. But then there is this little detail Morgan was found not guilty on three counts, including discharging his weapon. One can only imagine what the story would of been for Garner if it wasn't caught on tape. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21725 Posts
On December 04 2014 08:24 GreenHorizons wrote: But then there is this little detail One can only imagine what the story would of been for Garner if it wasn't caught on tape. resisted arrest, forced to choke him in self defense while attempting to restrain from violent assault. Not hard really. See the riots are there for a reason. The mistrust is there for a reason. Just because one case might have been handled correctly doesn't mean the US doesn't have a systematic issue with its police forces and their use of excessive force. Even if choking him to death was not against the law he should have been severely punished by his own police department for killing a man using a prohibited maneuver while having overwhelming evidence against him. So what exactly has the department done against him? Ignoring the fact most countries would call this manslaughter if not murder a dishonorable discharge looks to be the least punishment he should have gotten. | ||
| ||
