5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death

[tonymctones]

Except I had already answered that question several times in this thread.

Why is the chokehold prohibited?

chokehold prohibited due to a rash of deaths of perps by cops  in the 1980's attributed to its use

is it illegal?

[tonymctones]

they did that nice trick from "american gangster".  Russell crowe's partner kills a guy.. but they pretend he's alive to pacify a crowd of people.  In this case, it's only a few people with cell phones watching... but the dude is fading, unconscious, pulse either fading fast or gone, compeltely nonresponsive - and they keep him in cuffs on the ground instead of putting him in

that shit about "he died in the hospital" actually means "he wasn't pronounced dead until he got to the hospital".

It looks a lot like he's checking out on the ground - procedure is to take the handcuffs of a non-reponsive/unconscious/fading person and use CPR or other means, get him to the ER.   TWO PARAMEDICS were suspended for their behavior that day, correct?  So before anyone just creates "they did nothing wrong...", let's look at those suspensions.

doing something against procedural protocol doesnt mean the broke the law.

Before anyone goes around calling for them to be charged, what law did they break?

[240 is Back]

Good point..people just aren't familiar with all the tricks the cops use to keep themselves out of trouble..they lie just like everyone else does when they are in trouble..this attitude that the cops are so holy is mystifying to me

if he resisted, yes, take him down.  I would have preferred taser, i mean there is so much to go wrong with weights and angles when a badass cop decides to put hand on throat.   Taser is much more exact and scientific.

BUT my beef is the video of dude on ground, breathing barely or expiring, and EMTs just chilling.   get his fat ass to the ER, then book him for his crimes.  Any cop letting a man die on the ground is a piece of shit, even if dude did resist arrest from a cop with repeated public sack check charges, for a misdearmoner "selling smokes" charge lol.

[240 is Back]

doing something against procedural protocol doesnt mean the broke the law.

Before anyone goes around calling for them to be charged, what law did they break?

Wait - we are debating if a cop has to uncuff a man losing breathing or consciouosness and needing medical attention?

lol i dont think either of us wants to have that debate, it's not something worth debating. 

[tonymctones]

if he resisted, yes, take him down.  I would have preferred taser, i mean there is so much to go wrong with weights and angles when a badass cop decides to put hand on throat.   Taser is much more exact and scientific.

I can agree with that, they didnt break any laws but there were better ways to handle the situation.

[andreisdaman]

I can agree with that, they didnt break any laws but there were better ways to handle the situation.

your semantics are amazing

[tonymctones]

your semantics are amazing

there is no semantics in whether or not they broke the law.

They either broke it or they didnt....in this case they did not....

[Al Doggity]

there is no semantics in whether or not they broke the law.

They either broke it or they didnt....in this case they did not....

No, it isn't that simple dumbass. Whether or not a cop uses excessive force- as determined by a court of law- rarely comes down to something as cut and dried as whether or not they used a "prohibited" chokehold. I know you have such an advanced understanding of the law, but 99% of the time that won't be the case. The reason so many people harp on the chokehold is that in this case the excessive force is blatant. That move is banned because it often leads to death unnecessarily. Whether or not it is illegal by NY state law is irrelevant. It is blatantly excessive.

[tonymctones]

No, it isn't that simple dumbass. Whether or not a cop uses excessive force- as determined by a court of law- rarely comes down to something as cut and dried as whether or not they used a "prohibited" chokehold. I know you have such an advanced understanding of the law, but 99% of the time that won't be the case. The reason so many people harp on the chokehold is that in this case the excessive force is blatant. That move is banned because it often leads to death unnecessarily. Whether or not it is illegal by NY state law is irrelevant. It is blatantly excessive.

ahhh no, simply using a chokehold isnt excessive force.

there were many factors that lead to his death, the chokehold only being one of the many. So again if the man had been taken down and died without a chokehold, would you still think the force was excessive?

[Soul Crusher]

2 cops got executed n nyc today

[Al Doggity]

ahhh no, simply using a chokehold isnt excessive force.

Derr... yeah, it is when it's a prohibited hold.

[240 is Back]

2 cops got executed n nyc today

i saw the headline but didn't see the story yet, was on the road alll night.   insane.  They should do TWO things.

1) Find, arrest, convict, jail then execute the prick that did this.
2) Cops need to end that blue wall bullshit.

The MOMENT cops are tougher on bad cops than everyone else - crap like this stops/slows very much.   People hate cops at the moment.  They get away with things they shouldn't do.  I mean yes, this guy was selling smokes earlier in week and tried to walk away when "arrested" for it.  He wasn't outrunning a Big Wheel at that size.  And when nut grabber arrived, yes, he squirmed.  But they took him down hard, they left him life ending in cuffs without medical attention..

you do enough of that shit, and you justify it with enough "he shouldn't have ran" and "there's no law that says we cannot let you die in cuffs" and "come on, that's only 98% of a chokehold" - You try enough of that technicality shit, and you might feel okay, but PEOPLE see it as COPS BEING A-HOLES and protecting other a-holes.

The MOMENT cops start testifying against their peers, this slows.   I mean, imagine if you're at work at a bank and the teller next to you steals $10,000... you're right there... it'd be fully expected for you to testify against her.  But cops?  There  were plenty of cops there, and they all saw nothing, said nothing.  Lying on reports, that's insane.

So this is a tragedy, you lock up & execute the shithead that did it.  But then you end that blue wall bullshit.

[Rhino]

Key Stone Cops. 

[tonymctones]

Derr... yeah, it is when it's a prohibited hold.

you do understand the difference between prohibited and illegal right brainchild?

[Skip8282]

you do enough of that shit, and you justify it with enough "he shouldn't have ran" and "there's no law that says we cannot let you die in cuffs" and "come on, that's only 98% of a chokehold" - You try enough of that technicality shit, and you might feel okay, but PEOPLE see it as COPS BEING A-HOLES and protecting other a-holes.

The MOMENT cops start testifying against their peers, this slows.   I mean, imagine if you're at work at a bank and the teller next to you steals $10,000... you're right there... it'd be fully expected for you to testify against her.  But cops?  There  were plenty of cops there, and they all saw nothing, said nothing.  Lying on reports, that's insane.

So this is a tragedy, you lock up & execute the shithead that did it.  But then you end that blue wall bullshit.

Exactly, this hyper-technicality shit doesn't win any friends when criminals abuse it, and it's equally immature non-sense when cops do it.

Every stupid little thing they claim endangers their lives so they have to use maximum force. 

And it's actually possible to be against police abuse AND against murdering cops in retaliation.

Already the 4 year-old arguments are abound that if you don't stand by the cops, you're supporting the crooks. 

[Skip8282]

it was true when I said it and even more so now....

he broke no law by using a chokehold, sorry albert simple feelings (and I emphasize SIMPLE) doesnt make an argument

Agreed, no law broken.  But shouldn't we (society) require at least a reasonable progression of force?

Hell, when I used to bounce part time we could remove people this big and smaller but a lot more muscled without killing them...EVER.  There were 5 or 6 cops and they had to use a hold that would increase the chances of a persons death?

[tonymctones]

Exactly, this hyper-technicality shit doesn't win any friends when criminals abuse it, and it's equally immature non-sense when cops do it.

Every stupid little thing they claim endangers their lives so they have to use maximum force.  

And it's actually possible to be against police abuse AND against murdering cops in retaliation.

Already the 4 year-old arguments are abound that if you don't stand by the cops, you're supporting the crooks.  

or that if you support the cops actions then youre supporting killing citizens

[tonymctones]

Agreed, no law broken.  But shouldn't we (society) require at least a reasonable progression of force?

Hell, when I used to bounce part time we could remove people this big and smaller but a lot more muscled without killing them...EVER.  There were 5 or 6 cops and they had to use a hold that would increase the chances of a persons death?

I can agree that they were aggressive, I have said so in this thread already.

I dont think the amount of force was excessive though. The guy was not only verbally refusing orders but PHYSICALLY RESISTING arrest. Sorry bro, when you they are trying to place you under arrest and you get physical they are going to get physical.

I defintely think it could have been handled better and that the police probably could have talked the guy down eventually.

simple minded people want to focus on the perfectly legal chokehold. The fact is though that even if they hadnt have used a chokehold and the guy had died b/c of having pressure on him when he was laying down (which was a reason he died) they would still be bitching and moaning.

[Skip8282]

 The fact is though that even if they hadnt have used a chokehold and the guy had died b/c of having pressure on him when he was laying down (which was a reason he died) they would still be bitching and moaning.

That's not a fact, that's speculation and I don't think it would...or it would have been significantly reduced.  We're right back the original discussion - the cops went from 0-60 in .2 seconds, when they could've performed a reasonable increase in the force used.  It was a pack of freaking smokes for gods sake.

If they want to be 'professionals', then they can take into account the severity of the charges, the health of the individual, etc.  Mindlessly arguing that he was resisting so anything is fair game is absurd.

[tonymctones]

That's not a fact, that's speculation and I don't think it would...or it would have been significantly reduced.  We're right back the original discussion - the cops went from 0-60 in .2 seconds, when they could've performed a reasonable increase in the force used.  It was a pack of freaking smokes for gods sake.

ok sure its speculation, do you think its accurate speculation?

Fact is it wasnt just a pack of smokes, he RESISTED ARREST both verbally and PHYSICALLY!!!

They started out talking to this man, HE was the one who became irrate, He was the one who refused verbal requests and HE was the one who PHYSICALLY RESISTED.

[tonymctones]

If they want to be 'professionals', then they can take into account the severity of the charges, the health of the individual, etc.  Mindlessly arguing that he was resisting so anything is fair game is absurd.

Seriously dude you just posted about the other side doing this and now youre doing it to me?

For fucks sake, where did I say that if you resist anything is fair game?

Again simply b/c you support the cops actions doesnt mean you support everything they could or would do in a situation like this.

Thats a bullshit argument and does nothing but make your stance look like shit b/c you cant argue without the hyperbole.

[Skip8282]

Seriously dude you just posted about the other side doing this and now youre doing it to me?

For fucks sake, where did I say that if you resist anything is fair game?

Again simply b/c you support the cops actions doesnt mean you support everything they could or would do in a situation like this.

Thats a bullshit argument and does nothing but make your stance look like shit b/c you cant argue without the hyperbole.

No, that's exactly what you're doing.  I keep asking you about a reasonable progression of force, and you just keep saying he was resisting and capitalizing it for some reason.

[tonymctones]

No, that's exactly what you're doing.  I keep asking you about a reasonable progression of force, and you just keep saying he was resisting and capitalizing it for some reason.

thats b/c I dont believe the progression of force was necissarily excessive in this situation.

If they have pulled out guns and started pistol whipping or shooting him then I would agree with you.

Here they got physical with a guy who was verbally and PHYSICALLY resisting arrest.

[Skip8282]

thats b/c I dont believe the progression of force was necissarily excessive in this situation.

If they have pulled out guns and started pistol whipping or shooting him then I would agree with you.

Here they got physical with a guy who was verbally and PHYSICALLY resisting arrest.

Well then, I think a lot of people disagree.  And this maybe one of those issues where a split will always exist.

[tonymctones]

Well then, I think a lot of people disagree.  And this maybe one of those issues where a split will always exist.

but you didnt answer my question on the chokehold.

do you think its accurate to say that even if they hadnt have used a chokehold and the guy had died b/c of having pressure on him when he was laying down (which was a reason he died) they would still be bitching and moaning?