Why isn't there as much public outrage with the cop killer...

[knapplc]

Everyone knows the vast majority of officers are Good Guys. Those officers, the VAST majority of officers, aren't being discussed here. And their existence, their majority amongst the Police, doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about here.

 

We can't just claim Police Officers are "good" and walk away from what's happening.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Everyone knows the vast majority of officers are Good Guys. Those officers, the VAST majority of officers, aren't being discussed here. And their existence, their majority amongst the Police, doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about here.

 

We can't just claim Police Officers are "good" and walk away from what's happening.

But, we don't also have to have nationwide protests that direct hate towards officers in general. We also don't need our president commenting on the matter and inflaming the situation, which is EXACTLY what he's done. I'm extremely disappointed in him and as a voter of his I'm completely shocked with his behavior. And before someone goes off and says they are peaceful protesters, I know most of them are, but a few bad ones can rile up a crowd.

[knapplc]

What, specifically, did the president say that was inflammatory?

 

 

 

And before someone goes off and says they are peaceful protesters, I know most of them are, but a few bad ones can rile up a crowd.

 

 

This is what everyone you're disagreeing with in this thread is saying about the police.

[carlfense]

We do a pretty good job here weeding out the bad ones. Eventually they make themselves known and we push them out the door and say see ya!

That seems to usually be the case with smaller police departments. It's much easier to keep track of who is doing (or not doing) what they are supposed to be doing.

[Minnesota_husker]

Well, the general population is pretty hurt, scared, pissed, and hesitant too. The difference with your regular citizen is that we don't carry legal authority and a lethal weapon. When I screw up at my job, customers receive incorrect data. When police officers screw up at their job, people end up hurt and dead. That's why there's a demand for justice. And you should want justice and accountability too, BRI, in order to help make your fellow officers better at their job.

The issue is that according to the justice system, the two major examples of them "Screwing up" were found not to be screw ups.

 

 

In the brown situation, he attacked a police officer. Any one who does that, knows what the officer has on his tool belt. The autopsy evidence shows that he had gun residue on his hand, which means he was close to the gun when fired which supports the officers claim that he was wrestling for it.

 

In the Manhattan issue, Eric was told he was being placed under arrest. The law states that when you are told you are being placed under arrest, it is illegal to fight back or argue what you are being arrested for.Even if it is a BS reason, you can fight that in court, not on the street. He died of a heart attack that was brought on by the stress of the moment. The choke hold and "I cant breath" added but were not the contributing factor.

 

It is sad it happened, but if you ask a cop how often he hears "I cant breath" or "This hurts, i have an injury" you would be shocked. Eric was a big guy, and when he struggled with the cops, they had to use force.

 

Both are sad situations. I hate to see anyone die, but at the end of the day, villainizing cops as a whole is as ridiculous as villainizing African American as a whole.

 

There is a large difference when officers are sitting in their car and are shot at point blank range compared to a guy having a heart attack after resisting arrest and being taken down.

[carlfense]

The choke hold and "I cant breath" added but were not the contributing factor.

That's like trying to say that firing the gun didn't kill the guy because it was the bullet that hit him . . . and even after the bullet hit him it was his own heart that pumped the blood out of the wound.

 

Please don't try to defend the Garner situation.

[knapplc]

The Economist, 8/15/14

 

 

In 2012, according to data compiled by the FBI, 410 Americans were “justifiably” killed by police—409 with guns. That figure may well be an underestimate. Not only is it limited to the number of people who were shot while committing a crime, but also, amazingly, reporting the data is voluntary.

 

In America... it is hardly surprising that cops resort to their weapons more frequently. In 2013, 30 cops were shot and killed.

 

Unless America can either reduce its colossal gun ownership rates or fix its deep social problems, shootings of civilians by police—justified or not—seem sure to continue.

 

 

The Economist, 3/22/14

 

It is easy to see why the police like to be better armed than the people they have to arrest. They risk their lives every day, and are understandably keen to get home in one piece. A big display of force can make a suspect think twice about pulling a gun. “An awful lot of SWAT tactics are focused on forcing the suspect to surrender,” says Bill Bratton, New York’s police chief.

 

 

Fox News (Bill O'Reilly), 12/2/14

 

In 2012, 123 African- Americans were shot dead by police. Same year, 326 whites were killed by police bullets. Whites comprise 63 percent of the population; blacks 13 percent.

 

 

National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund

 

There are more than 900,000 sworn law enforcement officers now serving in the United States, which is the highest figure ever. About 12 percent of those are female.

 

According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, an estimated 1.2 million violent crimes occurred nationwide in 2011, a four percent decrease from 2010.

 

On average, over the last decade, there have been 58,261 assaults against law enforcement each year, resulting in 15,658 injuries.

 

A total of 1,501 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty during the past 10 years, an average of one death every 58 hours or 150 per year. There were 100 law enforcement officers killed in 2013.

[Minnesota_husker]

 

The choke hold and "I cant breath" added but were not the contributing factor.

That's like trying to say that firing the gun didn't kill the guy because it was the bullet that hit him . . . and even after the bullet hit him it was his own heart that pumped the blood out of the wound.

 

Please don't try to defend the Garner situation.

 

Valid point. My point is that if he doesnt struggle with the cops, they dont have to take him down... That caused him to have a heart attack.

 

Garner swats the police officers arms away when he is told that he is being placed under arrest.

 

 

This is a much cloudier line and I would say this is porbably close to excessive force, but by law when the police tell you that you are under arrest, they have the right to detain you. Eric fought that and that cause some excessive force.

[carlfense]

Valid point. My point is that if he doesnt struggle with the cops, they dont have to take him down... That caused him to have a heart attack.

 

Garner swats the police officers arms away when he is told that he is being placed under arrest.

 

This is a much cloudier line and I would say this is porbably close to excessive force, but by law when the police tell you that you are under arrest, they have the right to detain you. Eric fought that and that cause some excessive force.

Nothing that Garner did, and I'm referring to both the resisting arrest (which is extremely mild by resisting arrest standards) and the original offense, justified a choke hold or the half a dozen officers standing around watching him die without offering medical assistance.

[Minnesota_husker]

 

Valid point. My point is that if he doesnt struggle with the cops, they dont have to take him down... That caused him to have a heart attack.

 

Garner swats the police officers arms away when he is told that he is being placed under arrest.

 

This is a much cloudier line and I would say this is probably close to excessive force, but by law when the police tell you that you are under arrest, they have the right to detain you. Eric fought that and that cause some excessive force.

Nothing that Garner did, and I'm referring to both the resisting arrest (which is extremely mild by resisting arrest standards) and the original offense, justified a choke hold or the half a dozen officers standing around watching him die without offering medical assistance.

 

Probably going to just go in circles with this. But I highly doubt they realized anything was wrong. I wasnt there, so that is me simply assuming.

 

I agree the choke hold seemed unnecessary, but he was a big guy and in trying to restrain him, this was a tactic that they felt could subdue him.

 

It wasnt illegal. He was under arrest. He was resisting arrest.

 

 

While I agree that in hindsight this might have felt unnecessary, at the time they were trying to place him under arrest.

 

 

I guess my question, is what would you want done to the cops? Arrested for murder or manslaughter? I dont see anything legally wrong with what they did. After watching it, it seemed a bit excessive but in the moment, the cop might have felt that was needed to subdue him.

 

 

It is awful Eric passed away. He wasnt posing a threat, but at the end of the day, he was resisting.

[carlfense]

I agree the choke hold seemed unnecessary, but he was a big guy and in trying to restrain him, this was a tactic that they felt could subdue him.It wasnt illegal. He was under arrest. He was resisting arrest.

Actually, the chokehold was illegal. IIRC they were banned by the NYPD in 1993.

 

While I agree that in hindsight this might have felt unnecessary, at the time they were trying to place him under arrest.

When Garner was, in your words, "swat[ting] the police officers arms away," the appropriate proportional response is to secure his arms. There were six officers present. There was no danger justifying an illegal chokehold.

 

I guess my question, is what would you want done to the cops? Arrested for murder or manslaughter? I dont see anything legally wrong with what they did. After watching it, it seemed a bit excessive but in the moment, the cop might have felt that was needed to subdue him.

I want them held to the same standards as anyone else who kills someone on the street. I want an independent investigation (as in, not the department investigating itself) to determine if any crimes were committed. I want a special prosecutor appointed to reduce the appearance of collusion. These are things that we haven't seen recently.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

What, specifically, did the president say that was inflammatory?

 

 

 

And before someone goes off and says they are peaceful protesters, I know most of them are, but a few bad ones can rile up a crowd.

 

 

This is what everyone you're disagreeing with in this thread is saying about the police.

Sending white house officials to a criminals funeral seems pretty inflammatory to me considering he didn't send any white house officials to a 2-star generals death. Speaking like body worn cameras are going to solve the entire problem. Saying law enforcement needs to be reformed, I'm simplifying it to some extent there, commenting at all on a local law enforcement matter without knowing all the facts. Nevermind his comments were always slanted towards Darren Wilson being wrong in his use of force in the situation in the beginning. Just because he's the POTUS doesn't mean he has a clue on how law enforcement works. Not allowing "the system" to go through the process before commenting several times on the Michael Brown situation and speaking about justice. Darren Wilson was guilty in several people's minds no matter what the evidence showed.

 

Knapp, it's obvious we aren't going to agree on this issue, and that's fine, you have your opinion and I have mine. Protesters are walking around with "I can't breath" shirts and shirts with pictures of Michael Brown on them turning those situations into a racial issue, which they never were. You don't have to agree with me and I don't have to agree with you, but I have to keep explaining everything over and over and over again and frankly it's growing tiring. You're just looking for someone to argue with, as is carlfense, and I'm not going to keep arguing about it because just like I'm not changing my opinions, none of you are going to change your opinions. Again that's okay, but I'm sure it'll get turned around that "Oh since he's a cop he knows everything etc. etc. etc. rabble rabble rabble" even though I'm not saying that specifically. I'm just trying to give you folks another perspective from the law enforcement side of things, but no one wants to listen to it.

 

I'll refrain from giving my opinion on matters pertaining to law enforcement to folks that have already made up their minds. I tried..............

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Should of used a kimura lock.

[Minnesota_husker]

 

I agree the choke hold seemed unnecessary, but he was a big guy and in trying to restrain him, this was a tactic that they felt could subdue him.It wasnt illegal. He was under arrest. He was resisting arrest.

Actually, the chokehold was illegal. IIRC they were banned by the NYPD in 1993.

 

While I agree that in hindsight this might have felt unnecessary, at the time they were trying to place him under arrest.

When Garner was, in your words, "swat[ting] the police officers arms away," the appropriate proportional response is to secure his arms. There were six officers present. There was no danger justifying an illegal chokehold.

 

I guess my question, is what would you want done to the cops? Arrested for murder or manslaughter? I dont see anything legally wrong with what they did. After watching it, it seemed a bit excessive but in the moment, the cop might have felt that was needed to subdue him.

I want them held to the same standards as anyone else who kills someone on the street. I want an independent investigation (as in, not the department investigating itself) to determine if any crimes were committed. I want a special prosecutor appointed to reduce the appearance of collusion. These are things that we haven't seen recently.

 

Chokehold being banned is a weird thing seeing cops in NY are still using it. over 1200 complaints about it came out between 2009-2014... I need to do more research on this.

 

 

Disagree. When someone is resisting arrest, your first job is to subdue them. Eric was a big guy and the only way to subdue his arms were to get him on the ground.

6-1 doesnt mean he cant still harm a few officers on his way down. Like i stated above, Choke-hold might have been unnecessary but they were trying to subdue him. Used force.

 

 

I am perfectly ok with a independent investigation. I agree the city prosecutor shouldnt be involved because of their relationship with the police. I have no issue with your last point and agree.

[carlfense]

Eric was a big guy and the only way to subdue his arms were to get him on the ground.

First, it's false to say that the only way to subdue his arms was to get him on the ground.

 

Second, if the goal is to get him on the ground (which I'm fine with in this situation) the acceptable technique has nothing to do with a chokehold. The head and neck are not involved for reasons that should probably be obvious.

 

BRI can probably chime in with how he was trained to take a resisting suspect to the ground.