EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3164
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8525 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On April 20 2021 21:24 Doublemint wrote: what I found to be a well thought through and presented argument was that Chauvin acted according to the training manual. that was just really really good. most of us know that the training is insuffice and actually lackluster compared to... a lot of other countries let's say. but that Nelson guy turned it around and said he acted according to the training manual. and therefore very much along the line of the law. which is true of course. Police has to or they are just thugs, from the law they derive their powers and it legitimizes actions they take when on duty - well the lawul ones at least which is exactly the point of contention. even though we here also know - especially POCs - that it produces undesirable results, to put it very nicely... but does a jury of random people? jury composition makes it interesting though with the 6 people split white/minority. so... let's hope for the best and prepare for the worst I guess, especially if you are from around the area. what I also found interesting were the images of the Police tanks already good to go if shit hits the fan. quite some symbolism. I mean, there must be a maxim in the manual, that the use of force has to be appropriate, right? And killing a handcuffed person that is pinned to the ground seems pretty celarly no an appropriate use of force. But it's the US, so you never know. It's really getting more and more ridiculous from my perspective. I would be AFRAID if I were a black person living in the US. FUCK, it's even scary to try and put oneself in the shoes of a POC and think about police. It's kinda like bein a man and waking up to sexism and no go zones / curfews for women. Yeah, nobody mandates them but it's just safer to not go out for women at times, wheras in the west, white men rarely have to think about when, where and in what clothes they go ANYWHERE. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21687 Posts
On April 20 2021 21:24 Doublemint wrote: Does the manual and training say to apply pressure to a captured and subdued suspect until they lose consciousness, not to check for a pulse or perform CPR if they have no pulse and just keep up the pressure until they are dead?what I found to be a well thought through and presented argument was that Chauvin acted according to the training manual. that was just really really good. most of us know that the training is insuffice and actually lackluster compared to... a lot of other countries let's say. but that Nelson guy turned it around and said he acted according to the training manual. and therefore very much along the line of the law. which is true of course. Police has to or they are just thugs, from the law they derive their powers and it legitimizes actions they take when on duty - well the lawul ones at least which is exactly the point of contention. even though we here also know - especially POCs - that it produces undesirable results, to put it very nicely... but does a jury of random people? jury composition makes it interesting though with the 6 people split white/minority. so... let's hope for the best and prepare for the worst I guess, especially if you are from around the area. what I also found interesting were the images of the Police tanks already good to go if shit hits the fan. quite some symbolism. I find that doubtful, even in the US. The initial takedown and subdue might have been according to his training, but at some point between the start and him getting choked to death he stopped being a violent/aggressive suspect to be taken down with maximum force. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15689 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8525 Posts
you can only fight what's infront of you in a court of law. and if you plausibly convince random jury members that is what the law says, even if it is a fucked up law or fucked up training manual leading to the execution of a law... well you know, things might get dicey outside in this case. but it's all speculation anyway as we just wait for the end of the deliberations. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I do firmly believe that being a jury should be fully voluntary, though, since the current system of jury duty is little better than conscription. The whole lie they tell you about how great it is that you're serving your country quickly goes out the window after you see how scummy the jury-selecting judges can be when selecting for something as involved as a murder trial. Apparently you're a terrible person according to this broken system if you don't want to spend months and months of your life, to your own career detriment, serving on a jury just because you rolled unlucky enough that a big trial was recruiting juries the day you came in for your summons. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8525 Posts
if tensions were not so high sure... but I read Minneapolis is like a fortress because of this trial and potential protests or even riots. get more confrontational... in case of no conviction is not not a good choice of words imho. https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-judge-scolds-maxine-waters-for-abhorrent-comments-says-she-may-have-given-chauvin-an-argument-for-appeal/ | ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15689 Posts
On April 20 2021 22:47 Doublemint wrote: I don't know about the judge, will have to trust you on this. but Water's comments were not helpful in any way? at least that is what I gathered. it was definitely not in any way "failed insurrection leader" kind of egging people on... but helpful? I mean as a representative does her responsibility not outweigh the need to speak plainly to constituents? if tensions were not so high sure... but I read Minneapolis is like a fortress because of this trial and potential protests or even riots. get more confrontational... in case of no conviction is not not a good choice of words imho. https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-judge-scolds-maxine-waters-for-abhorrent-comments-says-she-may-have-given-chauvin-an-argument-for-appeal/ Her comments don't need to be helpful. She has zero reason to hold her tongue. And being confrontational should not be a bad thing. It should be possible to be incredibly rude to a police officer with nothing bad happening. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Ben...
Canada3485 Posts
On April 20 2021 22:34 farvacola wrote: The judge in Chauvin's trial is a fucking moron and I hope he faces discipline for his comments regarding what Maxine Waters said. As a judge that denied jury sequestration multiple times, it was especially improper for him to bring outside news into the courtroom and connect it with jury deliberations one way or another. The judge's comments on what Waters said were especially stupid because he quite literally went on to point out that the jurors were told not to watch or read the news. If that was the case, they would not have known she had made those comments in the first place so it's only because of the judge they knew about them. When I first read what he said, the first thing that came to mind was "is he trying to actively sabotage this verdict or give the defence an easy means of appeal?". It was that bad. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
On April 21 2021 00:45 Ben... wrote: The judge's comments on what Waters said were especially stupid because he quite literally went on to point out that the jurors were told not to watch or read the news. If that was the case, they would not have known she had made those comments in the first place so it's only because of the judge they knew about them. When I first read what he said, the first thing that came to mind was "is he trying to actively sabotage this verdict or give the defence an easy means of appeal?". It was that bad. I had basically the exact same thought when I first learned of what the Judge said. | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8525 Posts
of course she can say just about anything, first amendment etc. the question is should she do that given what is goin on outside? at least that is what I am asking lookin in from the EU perspective. first amendment absolutism is also in the DNA pool of the US left apparently  | ||
|
farvacola
United States18828 Posts
| ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8525 Posts
 | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
Source: CNN on-air (This time is in Central) | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8983 Posts
| ||
| ||
