Protests/Possible Riots

[SteelPro]

In Tennessee vs. Garner in 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an officer cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect is a significant threat to the officer or to others.

Isn't that a bit vague? If I'm an officer and a guy is running from me and I believe he has a weapon I can just say "well if I let him get away, he could have used that weapon (gun/knife/car) against unsuspecting civilians". It's an easy catch-all.

I'm not trying to be a dick or be argumentative, just to understand this better.

Again I believe that being a cop has to be one of the most harrowing jobs one could ever imagine.
Is the dude pulling out his wallet to willfully comply or is that a gun? You have to decide in less than 1 second.

I know you aren’t being a dick, and I agree with you. At the end of the day no matter what the guidelines are it will come down to a judgement call by the officer. And he or she doesn’t get a chance to review it on instant replay.

[jebrick]

Isn't that a bit vague? If I'm an officer and a guy is running from me and I believe he has a weapon I can just say "well if I let him get away, he could have used that weapon (gun/knife/car) against unsuspecting civilians". It's an easy catch-all.

I'm not trying to be a dick or be argumentative, just to understand this better.

Again I believe that being a cop has to be one of the most harrowing jobs one could ever imagine.
Is the dude pulling out his wallet to willfully comply or is that a gun? You have to decide in less than 1 second.

All handled under Garner. Does the police officer believe that the fleeing person poses a threat to the community? Did the officer see a weapon? Is the suspect fleeing from a violent crime? If the answers to these are yes then the police will be fine in court.

In the Rose case, the suspect is fleeing from a driveby shooting so it would be reasonable for the officer to think that the suspect had a weapon. Unless the officer has a record of excessive force, charging him is a placating measure for the community. There is no reasonable judge who would convict him. But it does look bad.

[FortyThree]

For me it boils down to, Simply Cooperate with the Authorities and Don't run or resist and you'll live to see another day.

Tell that to the families of Philando Castile and Eric Garner.

[Kodiak]

For me it boils down to, Simply Cooperate with the Authorities and Don't run or resist and you'll live to see another day.

Tell that to the families of Philando Castile and Eric Garner.

Well, Eric Garner was resisting arrest/orders...so probably come up with a better example.

It's also a double-edged sword - the more people run/resist or attempt to assault officers, the more alert and aggressive officers are going to be. If we're being completely honest, if no one ever shot at the cops then our cops wouldn't even have guns.

[COR-TEN]

Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.

[Kodiak]

Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.

Was he breaking the law? Did he resist arrest?

That doesn't excuse what the cops did, but he'd still be alive if not for his choice to resist arrest.

My point is don't make lawbreakers into marytyrs and you're view might be taken more seriously.

[Drummer Boy]

Just watched the video again, for maybe the 4th or 5th time. That is not resisting arrest. That's fucking murder.

But yeah, Kodiak, you're a libertarian! What a fucking joke.

[Kodiak]

Just watched the video again, for maybe the 4th or 5th time. That is not resisting arrest. That's fucking murder.
.

He absolutely resisted arrest. You're smarter than this, I think.

Again, unnecessary use of force and resisting arrest are not mutually exclusive....and when we can dispense with the bullshit race baiting and fake martyrdom then maybe we can start having honest discussions.

Insults aren't going to make your case for you. Yes, I am a libertarian, and I'm not surprised you don't understand what that means. Typical bullshit dismissive tactic because you've got nothing.

There are honest, squeaky clean people who actually have been wrongfully shot by police. But instead the poster children are Eric Garner and Michael Brown. Have you ever wondered why that is? You need to spend some time thinking about why.

[swissvale72]

Jesus fucking christ.

Garner was selling unlicensed cigarettes. Fucking cigarettes.

And choke holds were banned.

Fuck this country is fucked.

Was he breaking the law? Did he resist arrest?

That doesn't excuse what the cops did, but he'd still be alive if not for his choice to resist arrest.

My point is don't make lawbreakers into marytyrs and you're view might be taken more seriously.

Totally with you on this principal, Kodiak...making martyrs out of thugs isn't very appealing.

Easy for people that have never been in the position that the cop was to criticize what he was doing....but it's very easy for properly trained officers, using the techniques in which they've been trained, to have it go awry and slip into a choke hold. This shit's not an exact science and it never does goes down like it's demonstrated in the classroom.

[Legacy User]

I'm surprised you mouth breathers can turn on a computer.