Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
49 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

So. A black guy does something evil and gets confronted by the police. The police try to get the black guy into the car and black guy doesn't want to and fights back. Then cop, while fighting with the black guy, gets the upper hand and subdues criminal black guy by force. Then people whine about it.

And yet how many people got shot and killed in Chicago this past weekend? Who cares. This one is a big deal.

10

Posted
42 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

So. A black guy does something evil and gets confronted by the police. The police try to get the black guy into the car and black guy doesn't want to and fights back. Then cop, while fighting with the black guy, gets the upper hand and subdues criminal black guy by force. Then people whine about it.

And yet how many people got shot and killed in Chicago this past weekend? Who cares. This one is a big deal.

Man, I could have predicted that you’d be the one in here saying this.  A couple of issues.

you say the black guy does something evil: do we know what he did yet?  According to the family attorney, he was being taken in for questioning in a non-violent crime.  I don’t necessarily believe that, but I also haven’t seen any cops say what he was being taken in for.

Black guy refused to be taken in and fought back: granted, 100% true from anyone’s side of the story.

Cop gets upper hand and subdues criminal by force: also, this is true.  Notice that nobody is complaining that they subdued this criminal by force.  Nobody is claiming that they used excessive force while subduing him.

You skip right from that previous point to saying that people whine about it.  You blow right past the issue here, which is what the cops did once the suspect was subdued and the situation was well in hand.  That is what people are upset about; that is where the claim of excessive force comes in.  You conveniently skipped that part while summing up.  Either you’re too stupid to understand the issue or you’re being deliberately obtuse.  It’s 50/50 really; I could see it going either way.

Lastly, what the fock do people in Chicago have to do with this story?  Are the people there killed by cops?  I’m trying to see how this is related.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Big Blue 06 said:

Man, I could have predicted that you’d be the one in here saying this.  A couple of issues.

you say the black guy does something evil: do we know what he did yet?  According to the family attorney, he was being taken in for questioning in a non-violent crime.  I don’t necessarily believe that, but I also haven’t seen any cops say what he was being taken in for.

Black guy refused to be taken in and fought back: granted, 100% true from anyone’s side of the story.

Cop gets upper hand and subdues criminal by force: also, this is true.  Notice that nobody is complaining that they subdued this criminal by force.  Nobody is claiming that they used excessive force while subduing him.

You skip right from that previous point to saying that people whine about it.  You blow right past the issue here, which is what the cops did once the suspect was subdued and the situation was well in hand.  That is what people are upset about; that is where the claim of excessive force comes in.  You conveniently skipped that part while summing up.  Either you’re too stupid to understand the issue or you’re being deliberately obtuse.  It’s 50/50 really; I could see it going either way.

Lastly, what the fock do people in Chicago have to do with this story?  Are the people there killed by cops?  I’m trying to see how this is related.

He was accused of forgery.

Posted
Just now, BiffTannen said:

Cops get fired :thumbsdown:

How are LEOs supposed to deal with these animals?

You would think that one of the cops would have had enough sense to tell the bone rack scared guy that perhaps he should take his knee off the the guy's neck.  Four trained police officers have that little knowledge on how the human body works?  Not one of them had enough sense that when the guy stopped crying that he couldn't breath that possibly things had gone wrong?

Posted
6 minutes ago, The Observer said:

You would think that one of the cops would have had enough sense to tell the bone rack scared guy that perhaps he should take his knee off the the guy's neck.  Four trained police officers have that little knowledge on how the human body works?  Not one of them had enough sense that when the guy stopped crying that he couldn't breath that possibly things had gone wrong?

The animal should have cooperated rather than resisting arrest. Another bad buy off the streets and the earth. :thumbsup:

Posted

Jesus Christ. Can't put an illegal chokehold on them, cant gun them down from your truck after trying to stop them as a citizen and can't keep a knee on their neck.....its always something. 

 

 

Posted
16 minutes ago, BiffTannen said:

The animal should have cooperated rather than resisting arrest. Another bad buy off the streets and the earth. :thumbsup:

Dude would still be alive if he didn't fight the cops. Or even better, if he didn't start committing crimes in the first place.

  • Like 1
Posted

That cop's best move right now is to pull out a gun and blow his own head off. Ya got to wonder how many times he's pulled this stunt over his career. Major fock up and now his won life is dogshit.

Posted
4 minutes ago, lod001 said:

That cop's best move right now is to pull out a gun and blow his own head off. Ya got to wonder how many times he's pulled this stunt over his career. Major fock up and now his won life is dogshit.

Eye for an eye. I doubt anyone would feel bad for him.  He killed someone else.

Posted
37 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Dude would still be alive if he didn't fight the cops. Or even better, if he didn't start committing crimes in the first place.

I know you prob dont know alot about use of force policies and are really just trolling here...but Ill bite anyway.  Question, do you think cops should be fired if they make a serious breach of policy and that breach of policy kills someone?

Posted
1 minute ago, Fireballer said:

I know you prob dont know alot about use of force policies and are really just trolling here...but Ill bite anyway.  Question, do you think cops should be fired if they make a serious breach of policy and that breach of policy kills someone?

It's not my call to make a judgment on them. I don't know Minnesota's policing policies unlike almost everyone else here seems to know. I must have missed that day in class.

But I do believe the guy would still be alive if he didn't commit crimes.

Posted
1 hour ago, Big Blue 06 said:

  You blow right past the issue here, which is what the cops did once the suspect was subdued and the situation was well in hand.  That is what people are upset about; that is where the claim of excessive force comes in.  

.

This..."use only that force necessary to overcome the resistance".  This type of statement is literally in every UofF policy in accredited police agencies.  Many also say that "shunting air or blood" is deadly force, and that obviously wasnt necessary here. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

 

But I do believe the guy would still be alive if he didn't commit crimes.

That has nothing to so with this.  Youre missing the nuance here, Newbie.  Police training and policies require cops to back off of use of force once the resistance is overcome. Even if this guy murdered people, you can only use the force necessary to overcome resistance.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

That has nothing to so with this.  Youre missing the nuance here, Newbie. 

Him being a criminal has nothing to do with this run in? And.... newbie?  :doh:

The cops will go to court or whatever and what comes of it comes of it.

Posted

Holy sh!t that’s a bad video. 
 

I can half understand the cop in blue with his back to the action- he was watching the crowd.

The guy with the knee to the neck is focked. He didn’t let up, even long after the guy stopped talking and went limp. He deserved to be fired. And now he needs to be prepared to be sued for everything he’s got. 
 

That was a focking d’ck move.

Posted

Lessons learned here

1. Don't commit crimes, its bad for your health.

2. Don't resist arrest and fight the cops, also bad for your health.

3. Dude was telling the cops he couldn't breathe, seems to me there needs to be some better police training, I did not like what I saw.

  • Confused 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Him being a criminal has nothing to do with this run in?

Youre confusing his need to be arrested with use of force. Force is a tactic used to facilitate an arrest. Damn right he needed to be arrested and it seems like him getting roughed up while he resisted was necessary.  What youre not comprehending is that the officer continued to use force, deadly force at that, AFTER the resisting arest was over.  Bigly no no.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

Lessons learned here

1. Don't commit crimes, its bad for your health.

2. Don't resist arrest and fight the cops, also bad for your health.

3. Dude was telling the cops he couldn't breathe, seems to me there needs to be some better police training, I did not like what I saw.

Very simple and correct assessment

Posted
7 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

Lessons learned here

1. Don't commit crimes, its bad for your health.

2. Don't resist arrest and fight the cops, also bad for your health.

3. Dude was telling the cops he couldn't breathe, seems to me there needs to be some better police training, I did not like what I saw.

My guess is the following:

1. This will deter no bad guys from criminal activity.

2. This will deter no violent bad guy from fighting cops.

3. This will be a big deal in that police station and probably others for them to look at and learn from.

Posted

There is some good news out of this. Crump is a busy man. Blacks killed by whitey is good for business. He will probably need to hire extra help. This is helping out the economy in a weird sort of way. ;)

Posted
9 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Youre confusing his need to be arrested with use of force. Force is a tactic used to facilitate an arrest. Damn right he needed to be arrested and it seems like him getting roughed up while he resisted was necessary.  What youre not comprehending is that the officer continued to use force, deadly force at that, AFTER the resisting arest was over.  Bigly no no.  

I just think the cop will end up in court and action will be taken. I don't know what that action is or will be.

Posted
9 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Dumb cop learned nothing from the Eric Garner debacle years ago.

Nope. Different story. Go watch the Garner one then watch this. The Garner one was a struggle the whole time. This guy was subdued.  

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Nope. Different story. Go watch the Garner one then watch this. The Garner one was a struggle the whole time. This guy was subdued.  

I'm just saying Garner died because he was choked to death. This cop did the same thing but in an even worse way. my guess is its been his SOP during his career and it finally blew up in his face.

Posted
5 minutes ago, lod001 said:

I'm just saying Garner died because he was choked to death. This cop did the same thing but in an even worse way. my guess is its been his SOP during his career and it finally blew up in his face.

No, he didn’t. He died because he was in horrible health and decided to fight.  

Posted
8 minutes ago, lod001 said:

I'm just saying Garner died because he was choked to death. This cop did the same thing but in an even worse way. my guess is its been his SOP during his career and it finally blew up in his face.

The "carotid restraint" was, and still is, taught in police training.  The key is that it is a deadly force tactic, and should only be used in those situations.  For example, an officer is fighting for his service weapon or an edged weapon and fears for his life, a choke is a perfectly acceptable use of force.  This, for example is a perfectly legit application of a choke.  Dude is known to have a weapon and was reaching for it.

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

No, he didn’t. He died because he was in horrible health and decided to fight.  

So you are saying he would have died that day anyway if the cop didn't have his arm around his neck? Pretty sure he wouldn't have died that day.

Posted
1 minute ago, lod001 said:

So you are saying he would have died that day anyway if the cop didn't have his arm around his neck? Pretty sure he wouldn't have died that day.

The thought is that the struggle caused a cardiovascular event causing his death, not the choke. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, lod001 said:

So you are saying he would have died that day anyway if the cop didn't have his arm around his neck? Pretty sure he wouldn't have died that day.

I’m saying if he hadn’t have fought he wouldn’t have died. If he exerted himself  at all doing anything with the same energy he probably would have died. He decided to fight. Cops have to fight back and subdue. Once Garner was subdued the legal hold on him stopped. That’s not what happened here. 

Posted

I haven't watched the video, but let guess. Black guy breaks the law. Black guy decides to fight instead of facing the law. Black guy dies. 

I think I've seen this one before.

Posted
Just now, Cdub100 said:

I haven't watched the video, but let guess. Black guy breaks the law. Black guy decides to fight instead of facing the law. Black guy dies. 

I think I've seen this one before.

Looks like there was some unnecessary force in this one, sorry to report. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...