5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death

[tonymctones]

He told them not to touch him and tried to turn away.  That's it!  You're claiming that means he contributed to his own death.  It's absurd.

Strict obedience to authority is not what we as a society should ever be required to display.  He had every right to ask questions of them, and in most State's you have every right to resist an unlawful arrest.  BTW...you have no idea if he was even guilty in this matter, they could have harassing him for his previous record.

Giving that they were willing to murder him over some untaxed smokes, it wouldn't surprise me if the arrest was unlawful to begin with.  Like I said, his big crime was fucking with the salaries of cops, prosecutors, and judges.

Skip he resisted being taken into custody, if had been peaceful and cooperative do you think they would have put him in a chokehold?

if not, then yes his actions played a role in the escalation of the situation. There is no way to dispute that...

who said anything about being obedient? there is a time and a place for everything and when youre surrounded by 3 cops its not the time to resist being taken into custody!!!!

would it make it better if he was guilty skip?

[240 is Back]

how did I know this mental midget would show up here with a zimmerman comment?

Nobody excused zimmermans actions

actually a shitload of getbiggers called him a hero that did nothing wrong by hopping out of a truck with a 9mm and pursuing an unarmed minor who was running away.

He has some % of culpability/responsibility for that confrontation, but they said it was 100% trayvon because, well, zimmerman's "word" that the dead guy started the fight.   No evidence of that, just his word, discounted on several other lies.

So yeah, anyway, these cops went overboard and shouldn't have the police powers anymore.

[tonymctones]

actually a shitload of getbiggers called him a hero that did nothing wrong by hopping out of a truck with a 9mm and pursuing an unarmed minor who was running away.

He has some % of culpability/responsibility for that confrontation, but they said it was 100% trayvon because, well, zimmerman's "word" that the dead guy started the fight.   No evidence of that, just his word, discounted on several other lies.

So yeah, anyway, these cops went overboard and shouldn't have the police powers anymore.

the legality of his actions has no bearing on whether or not he bears responsibility for the outcome. If he had not followed trayvon the altercation would have never taken place so yes his actions absolutely played a role in trayvons death.

That doesnt make his actions illegal, sorry to burst your bubble there little buddy

[Skip8282]

Skip he resisted being taken into custody, if had been peaceful and cooperative do you think they would have put him in a chokehold?

if not, then yes his actions played a role in the escalation of the situation. There is no way to dispute that...

who said anything about being obedient? there is a time and a place for everything and when youre surrounded by 3 cops its not the time to resist being taken into custody!!!!

would it make it better if he was guilty skip?

Of course it's disputable and you're merely trying to argue that all resistance is the same. 

Trying to argue that because he put up light - and we're talking VERY light resistance - means that it led to the cops using an excessive amount of force, thus he contributed to his own death, is absurd.

He's dead because the cops are abusive.

He's dead because the cops failed to control themselves.

They'll probably walk, because all too many people will take your view and think he brought it on himself because wasn't strictly obedient.

[tonymctones]

Of course it's disputable and you're merely trying to argue that all resistance is the same. 

Trying to argue that because he put up light - and we're talking VERY light resistance - means that it led to the cops using an excessive amount of force, thus he contributed to his own death, is absurd.

He's dead because the cops are abusive.

He's dead because the cops failed to control themselves.

They'll probably walk, because all too many people will take your view and think he brought it on himself because wasn't strictly obedient.

I am not arguing that all resistance is the same but to say that his actions did not result in the escalation of the situation is dishonest...

he is dead b/c he refused the orders and resisted being taken into custody by abusive cops who failed to control themselves. The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation. THAT DOES NOT EXCUSE THE COPS ACTIONS

I think youre to emotionally involved in this bro. I have not once defended the cops actions, they should be dealt with as the force used was excessive.

But that doesnt excuse the mans actions either, he had a hand in the escalation of the situation. There is absolutely no way to deny that!!!

[Skip8282]

I am not arguing that all resistance is the same but to say that his actions did not result in the escalation of the situation is dishonest...

he is dead b/c he refused the orders and resisted being taken into custody by abusive cops who failed to control themselves. The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation. THAT DOES NOT EXCUSE THE COPS ACTIONS

I think youre to emotionally involved in this bro. I have not once defended the cops actions, they should be dealt with as the force used was excessive.

But that doesnt excuse the mans actions either, he had a hand in the escalation of the situation. There is absolutely no way to deny that!!!

Of course you're defending the cops.  You're just trying to play it both ways.


This is the crux of your argument and says it all:
 
"The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation"

They were NOT in a situation to be abusive and lose control.  You want it to be that way because you want to claim he's partially at fault.   

This is like a saying a battered woman contributed to her own beating because she did something to trigger the abusive husband....like I said, an absurd argument.

[tonymctones]

Of course you're defending the cops.  You're just trying to play it both ways.


This is the crux of your argument and says it all:
 
"The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation"

They were NOT in a situation to be abusive and lose control.  You want it to be that way because you want to claim he's partially at fault.   

This is like a saying a battered woman contributed to her own beating because she did something to trigger the abusive husband....like I said, an absurd argument.

LMFAO I am in no way defending the cops. I am being intellectually honest is all.

A man has no right to get physical with his woman. The cops DO!!!!

Now the amount of physical force was OBVIOUSLY excessive that doesnt excuse the man escalating the situation.

Everyone in the situation could have handled themselves better, do you agree?

[Al Doggity]

LMFAO I am in no way defending the cops. I am being intellectually honest is all.

A man has no right to get physical with his woman. The cops DO!!!!

Now the amount of physical force was OBVIOUSLY excessive that doesnt excuse the man escalating the situation.

Everyone in the situation could have handled themselves better, do you agree?

  Glad to see you've kept that logic bone razor sharp.

[tonymctones]

Glad to see you've kept that logic bone razor sharp.

Wow look who crawled out of their shit stained life to stalk me. You haven't posted in months and then suddenly return just after I did.

How are those public handouts working for you Albert?

[Al Doggity]

Wow look who crawled out of their shit stained life to stalk me. You haven't posted in months and then suddenly return just after I did.

How are those public handouts working for you Albert?

Like most of the nonsense you post,  I have no idea what you're talking about and neither do you. "Public handouts" aren't working for me at all. 

I'm glad to see you haven't posted for months. That means I haven't missed you accidentally posting a reasonable, logical argument. My technique of looking in the last post column, seeing your name and being 100% sure you've either just posted something stupid or are trying to backtrack out of something stupid you posted earlier remains infallible.

[Al Doggity]

BTW, they're cops, dumbass. By nature of their job, at least half of the people they deal with on a daily basis could have "handled themselves better". The chokehold is banned precisely because death is a probable and avoidable outcome in many cases in which it might be used. The fact that the man being arrested could have "handled themselves better" doesn't lower the police's obligation to behave in a lawful manner.

[tonymctones]

BTW, they're cops, dumbass. By nature of their job, at least half of the people they deal with on a daily basis could have "handled themselves better". The chokehold is banned precisely because death is a probable and avoidable outcome in many cases in which it might be used. The fact that the man being arrested could have "handled themselves better" doesn't lower the police's obligation to behave in a lawful manner.

Lmfao good to see your comprehension skills haven't gotten any better there boss. No where have I defended the cops. No where did I justify their use of excessive force.

My point this entire time has been that the man himself is also partly responsible for the confrontation.

[Al Doggity]

Lmfao good to see your comprehension skills haven't gotten any better there boss. No where have I defended the cops. No where did I justify their use of force.

My point this entire time has been that the man himself is also partly responsible for the confrontation.

No, the point you have been trying to make is that the man is responsible for his ending up in a chokehold and subsequently dying, which is a stupid and wrong point..

you;to say that this guy had no hand in the situation and by extension the outcome is dishonest.

you:Let's all be intellectually honest here and admit the he played a role in his own death.


Skip's domestic abuse comparison is exactly right. Do you understand that the chokehold is illegal for NYPD?  Do you understand that the reason it is illegal is precisely because of a situation like this?

[Dos Equis]

No, the point you have been trying to make is that the man is responsible for his ending up in a chokehold and subsequently dying, which is a stupid and wrong point..

you;to say that this guy had no hand in the situation and by extension the outcome is dishonest.

you:Let's all be intellectually honest here and admit the he played a role in his own death.


Skip's domestic abuse comparison is exactly right. Do you understand that the chokehold is illegal for NYPD?  Do you understand that the reason it is illegal is precisely because of a situation like this?

Tony is right about this.  If a chokehold is illegal in New York, and the chokehold was the cause of death, then the cop committed a crime.

Even if that's true, the cop used the chokehold because the man was irate, enormous, and resisted arrest.  If the man was truly "peaceful," and had not resisted arrest, he'd still be alive.  That doesn't justify the cop's conduct, but it does mean the man did play a role in his own death.  Tony calling that "intellectually honest" is spot on.  It's just not the PC thing to say. 

[Al Doggity]

Tony is right about this.  If a chokehold is illegal in New York, and the chokehold was the cause of death, then the cop committed a crime.

Even if that's true, the cop used the chokehold because the man was irate, enormous, and resisted arrest.  If the man was truly "peaceful," and had not resisted arrest, he'd still be alive.  That doesn't justify the cop's conduct, but it does mean the man did play a role in his own death.  Tony calling that "intellectually honest" is spot on.  It's just not the PC thing to say. 

The chokehold is illegal. It's illegal because it can lead to death unexpectedly. The man's being irate played no more a part in his death than him being an oxygen-consuming organism did. Saying the man played a role in his own death IS an intellectually dishonest attempt to justify the cop's actions. (I know intellectual dishonesty is your stock-in-trade, BB, but even for you this is weak.)

[tonymctones]

The chokehold is illegal. It's illegal because it can lead to death unexpectedly. The man's being irate played no more a part in his death than him being an oxygen-consuming organism did. Saying the man played a role in his own death IS an intellectually dishonest attempt to justify the cop's actions. (I know intellectual dishonesty is your stock-in-trade, BB, but even for you this is weak.)

Would the cops had gotten physical and put him in a choke hold if had obeyed orders and not resisted?

[Skeletor]

Would the cops had gotten physical and put him in a choke hold if had obeyed orders and not resisted?

Possibly. It has happened before-and recently:

[Al Doggity]

Would the cops had gotten physical and put him in a choke hold if had obeyed orders and not resisted?

By this logic, iif  someone is caught speeding and then shot by the cops with a rocket launcher, that person plays a part in their own death. Not only would shooting the speeder with a rocketlauncher be an overreaction, but it would be an ILLEGAL overreaction. Cops have the right to get physical with resisters, but that particular hold is illegal because this particular outcome is completely foreseeable. Police officers, in theory at least, are supposed to be trained to handle difficult situation without resorting to illegal tactics. The outcome of this situation lies solely in the hands of the cop who performed the illegal chokehold.

[Al Doggity]

Possibly. It has happened before-and recently:

Good point. The cop who performed the chokehold was actually at the center of two recent lawsuits. One in which he presented false information in a police report and one in which he misrepresented a crime scene to perform an illegal strip search (in the middle of a public street.) 

[Donny]

Is it just the Picture or are most American Cops overweight?  Nothing against the Cops over there and i am sure most are good men. Just most Videos Show a very high Ratio of burger bellies

[tonymctones]

By this logic, iif  someone is caught speeding and then shot by the cops with a rocket launcher, that person plays a part in their own death. Not only would shooting the speeder with a rocketlauncher be an overreaction, but it would be an ILLEGAL overreaction. Cops have the right to get physical with resisters, but that particular hold is illegal because this particular outcome is completely foreseeable. Police officers, in theory at least, are supposed to be trained to handle difficult situation without resorting to illegal tactics. The outcome of this situation lies solely in the hands of the cop who performed the illegal chokehold.

Again not a equivalent scenario...if a person is pulled over for speeding and then refuses orders and then resists arrest yes that person plays a role in the escalation of the situation and had responsibility for the outcome as well.

Again would the cops have gotten physical and put him in a chokehold if he had followed orders and not resisted?

[240 is Back]

My point this entire time has been that the man himself is also partly responsible for the confrontation.

cops have training, numbers, and weapons of various lethality at their disposal.  

When there are five cops with all of these things - They are SUPPOSED to be able to put 1 man into custody without killing him.  Especially when he clearly says "I cannot breathe".

Anyone who defends it - This could be YOU getting choked to death.  You could have an unforseen stroke, seizure, etc, and when police arrive, you don't 'obey' and end up getting choked to death over it.  These cops maybe don't deserve prison, but they should NOT be on the streets tomorrow, doing it again.

Didn't one of them have a pending charge issue for something else?  Thought I saw that.

[tonymctones]

The over reaction and abuse of the cops doesn't justify the man refusing orders and resisting arrest!!!

The man did those thing before the choke hold was ever put on him.

[tonymctones]

cops have training, numbers, and weapons of various lethality at their disposal. 

When there are five cops with all of these things - They are SUPPOSED to be able to put 1 man into custody without killing him.  Especially when he clearly says "I cannot breathe".

Anyone who defends it - This could be YOU getting choked to death.  You could have an unforseen stroke, seizure, etc, and when police arrive, you don't 'obey' and end up getting choked to death over it.  These cops maybe don't deserve prison, but they should NOT be on the streets tomorrow, doing it again.

Didn't one of them have a pending charge issue for something else?  Thought I saw that.

Who is defending it you piece of fucking shit?

[RRKore]

Would the cops had gotten physical and put him in a choke hold if had obeyed orders and not resisted?

Maybe.  After all, he was a large and scary Hebrew.