Official Fuck the Police thread

[ExistenceNow]

Originally Posted by justink

that's not how a GJ works.

people plea down all the time, but a GJ can't assign plea deals.

it amazes me how many people don't even understand their own justice system...

sad as fuck.

like that asshole who thought you have to be read miranda rights before you're arrested.

But they always do that on Law and Order.

That has to be a thing.

[gripes81]

Originally Posted by justink

except he was fine as long as the cops were on top of him and he later lost consciousness after he was all alone.

i've said from the beginning that positional asphyxia is the cod. we know that because the me said so.

if you really want something to argue about, it should be why he wasn't laid on his side which is what is trained in most departments to prevent PA, rather than his chest.

but instead the ignorant folks out there complaining are too focused on the media strawman of the "chokehold" because that was easier to sell.

educate yourself if you really want to make a halfway decent argument.

but there, i just gave it to you.

Ok I'll bite, define "positional asphyxia" for me since you know all

[justink]

Originally Posted by gripes81

Ok I'll bite, define "positional asphyxia" for me since you know all

you have a google machine, don't you?

in short, it's why 80% of the population sleeps on their sides and not their back or chest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positional_asphyxia

dude is too fat to be active like resisting arrest and be laying in certain positions.

coupled with the ME's definition of "homicide" when one person causes another's death. including a when police shoot and kill a suspect legally. it's still ruled a "homicide". homicide does not mean murder.

or when a police officer handcuffs a suspect on the ground and that person's body can't take it. would that person die standing in place un handcuffed? no. did he die on the ground handcuffed (sop for a person refusing arrest)? yes.

so, who's fault is this death?

this is far from the first time this has happened. like i've said earlier... i've seen it happen myself once. and i've prevented at least a few that i can remember.

[gripes81]

Originally Posted by justink

you have a google machine, don't you?

in short, it's why 80% of the population sleeps on their sides and not their back or chest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positional_asphyxia

dude is too fat to be active like resisting arrest and be laying in certain positions.

coupled with the ME's definition of "homicide" when one person causes another's death. including a when police shoot and kill a suspect legally. it's still ruled a "homicide". homicide does not mean murder.

or when a police officer handcuffs a suspect on the ground and that person's body can't take it. would that person die standing in place un handcuffed? no. did he die on the ground handcuffed (sop for a person refusing arrest)? yes.

so, who's fault is this death?

this is far from the first time this has happened. like i've said earlier... i've seen it happen myself once. and i've prevented at least a few that i can remember.

Positional asphyxia, also known as postural asphyxia, is a form of asphyxia which occurs when someone's position prevents the person from breathing adequately. A significant number of people die suddenly during restraint by police, prison (corrections) officers and health care staff.[1] Positional asphyxia may be a factor in some of these deaths.

Positional asphyxia is a potential danger of some physical restraint techniques,
People may die from positional asphyxia by simply getting themselves into a breathing-restricted position they cannot get out of, either through carelessness or as a consequence of another accident.
Prone restraintEdit

Research has suggested that restraining a person in a face down position is likely to cause greater restriction of breathing than restraining a person face up.[2] Multiple cases have been associated with the hogtie or hobble prone restraint position.[3][4] Many law enforcement and health personnel are now taught to avoid restraining people face down or to do so only for a very short period of time.[1]

Risk factors which may increase the chance of death include obesity, prior cardiac or respiratory problems, and the use of illicit drugs such as cocaine.[5] [5] Other issues in the way the subject is restrained can also increase the risk of death, for example kneeling or otherwise placing weight on the subject and particularly any type of restraint hold around the subject's neck. Research measuring the effect of restraint positions on lung function suggests that restraint which involves bending the restrained person or placing body weight on them, has more effect on their breathing than face down positioning alone.[6]

[justink]

accidental suicide is most accurate. too bad that's not an option the me has.

[justink]

Originally Posted by gripes81

Positional asphyxia, also known as postural asphyxia, is a form of asphyxia which occurs when someone's position prevents the person from breathing adequately. A significant number of people die suddenly during restraint by police, prison (corrections) officers and health care staff.[1] Positional asphyxia may be a factor in some of these deaths.

Positional asphyxia is a potential danger of some physical restraint techniques,
People may die from positional asphyxia by simply getting themselves into a breathing-restricted position they cannot get out of, either through carelessness or as a consequence of another accident.
Prone restraintEdit

Research has suggested that restraining a person in a face down position is likely to cause greater restriction of breathing than restraining a person face up.[2] Multiple cases have been associated with the hogtie or hobble prone restraint position.[3][4] Many law enforcement and health personnel are now taught to avoid restraining people face down or to do so only for a very short period of time.[1]

Risk factors which may increase the chance of death include obesity, prior cardiac or respiratory problems, and the use of illicit drugs such as cocaine.[5] [5] Other issues in the way the subject is restrained can also increase the risk of death, for example kneeling or otherwise placing weight on the subject and particularly any type of restraint hold around the subject's neck. Research measuring the effect of restraint positions on lung function suggests that restraint which involves bending the restrained person or placing body weight on them, has more effect on their breathing than face down positioning alone.[6]

yes sir. 999999

[Kevaroo]

Originally Posted by ExistenceNow

"If he hadn't been in poor health he'd be alive" isn't a right wing talking point.
"If he hadn't been in a career criminal he'd be alive"
"If he hadn't been Resisting arrest he'd be alive"
"If he had a job he'd be alive"
It's fact.

Added a few more.

This general idea of Amoral Opportunism is getting really scary. It's exactly what has happened in South Africa and that place is a disaster.
Keep it up America, keep pissing off the people that risk their life every day. Turn the whole nation into a Chicago and keep making excuses for fat, uneducated, thugs and criminals to the point where no one wants to be a cop.

[Lee3691]

Originally Posted by justink

where? from what i've read is he's said it's "lawful but awful".

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...-take-4-months

He acknowledged that the chokehold “looks awful,” but stressed that the grand jury found that it was not illegal.

Obviously Bratton said the chokehold was not illegal per sei, but we already know it was not allowed at the NYPD.

[M. Steng]

Saying it was only the cop who killed Garner, or only his medical condition that killed him are both too extreme and are asinine positions to take.

So many things had to go wrong in order for him to die:

1. Breaking the law
2. Being uncooperative with police
3. Resisting arrest
4. The headlock/chokehold/method of takedown
5. Being in a position physically that constricted his breathing
6. Garner's medical problems/obesity
7. Lack of awareness by police that Garner was actually having difficulty breathing
8. Inadequate EMT response

I think that list is pretty exhaustive and objective. Given that, half of these are attributable to choices Garner made. Three can be attributed to the police, and one to the medical response team. If anyone has any other objective contributing factor, please feel free to expand on this list, and please don't put any anti-establishment or blind pro-police bullshit in there like "the cop's vendetta against blacks" or "resisting arrest is the only thing that killed him".

On that list above, assuming all things are equal, Garner is 50% responsible for his own death, the police are 37.5% responsible, and the medical response is 12.5% responsible. Now, there's obviously some room to debate (as evidenced by the length of this thread) that some factors contributed more to his death than others. But, assuming reasonableness and equality in the factors, Garner was the most at fault for his own death. Now, this is obviously subject to some criticism, so I'd love to hear it, but I really am trying to be as objective and reasonable as possible.

[Lee3691]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

On that list above, assuming all things are equal, Garner is 50% responsible for his own death, the police are 37.5% responsible, and the medical response is 12.5% responsible. Now, there's obviously some room to debate (as evidenced by the length of this thread) that some factors contributed more to his death than others. But, assuming reasonableness and equality in the factors, Garner was the most at fault for his own death. Now, this is obviously subject to some criticism, so I'd love to hear it, but I really am trying to be as objective and reasonable as possible.

Assuming equality in the factors makes the statistics you just mentioned flawed. I'm not sure how you can acknowledge these factors, and then just ignore it, and think people won't notice or care. The three biggest factors were the chokehold, the lack of EMT response and his body type - in that order.

[M. Steng]

Originally Posted by Lee3691

Assuming equality in the factors makes the statistics you just mentioned flawed. I'm not sure how you can acknowledge these factors, and then just ignore it, and think people won't notice or care. The three biggest factors were the chokehold, the lack of EMT response and his body type - in that order.

I legitimately have no idea what this means. Do you not understand what "assuming equality" means in relation to the percentages I posted?

Just to help you out, it means "if we pretend all the factors are equally weighed, then here's the measure of responsibility to assign to each party involved".

What exactly am I ignoring after acknowledging the various factors contributing to Garner's death?

[DMBZeppelin]

Originally Posted by Kevaroo

Added a few more.

This general idea of Amoral Opportunism is getting really scary. It's exactly what has happened in South Africa and that place is a disaster.
Keep it up America, keep pissing off the people that risk their life every day. Turn the whole nation into a Chicago and keep making excuses for fat, uneducated, thugs and criminals to the point where no one wants to be a cop.

All of the things you added, why do they justify a police officer killing someone? I don't care if Garner was a complete piece of shit. I expect officers to treat every non-violent/unarmed person equally. You should be arresting the thug the same way you would some dumb college kid who'd take off on foot. Police are not the judge, jury, and executioner. People shouldn't be killed while being arrested (unless they are endangering others), and this the ends justify the means mentality is scary to me. We have rules and laws for a reason.

The way you seemingly want police is a part of a large oppressive government. Which is fine until people revolt, and there are already tons of protest over this crap in major cities. Chicago isn't a result of what police can and can't do. I don't see officers here calling for more power. Instead it's a lesson in what happens when drugs, guns, poverty, and a bad education system all get together.

[gocubsgo3822]

Dealt with my first group of protesters the other night. They were none too pleased when i hoped aloud that they were run over by tanks

[cazzie34]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

Because lots of people that get arrested don't resist. I'm not trying to imply that simply due to resistance that the level of force used was necessarily justified, or and I certainly don't believe he deserved to die (contrary to Lee#'s quickly-growing-old, unoriginal catchphrase).

Originally Posted by M. Steng

I understand that this is probably as a result of your not having backread, which is obviously not a big deal. But we talked a lot several pages ago about an officer's choices when effectuating an arrest with an uncooperative suspect of Garner's size. Lsculla had a pretty good post about how to get a guy of that size to the ground. I have no doubt that the officer never intended to kill Garner. [B]I think a headlock was probably the best method of takedown in that circumstance, all things considered. Again, I'm not as alright with the police action in this case as I was in the Michael Brown case, and I'm not trying to argue that his death was warranted in any way. My point all along has been that there were many contributing factors to his death and that people are pinning too much of the blame on the police.

These seem like you agree that a reasonable person wouldn't find the LEO's actions reasonable and therefore some criminal liability might be found.

Originally Posted by justink

who said it's a chokehold?

(based on the facts, it wasn't)

I've already defined what the NYPD considers a chokehold for you. What the LEO did was a chokehold. Complete restriction of the airway is not required to be considered a chokehold according to NYPD protocol.

At the end of the day I'm disappointed with the grand jury not indicting because the LEO using a chokehold seems like per se negligence which seems like per se reckless endangerment or involuntary manslaughter. That probable cause standard should be pretty easy to reach IMO.

Do I think the cop is guilty of Murder 1 or 2? no way. But there are definitely some lesser charges that should have been brought in front of a jury and it is disappointing those weren't.

[DMBZeppelin]

Originally Posted by gocubsgo3822

Dealt with my first group of protesters the other night. They were none too pleased when i hoped aloud that they were run over by tanks

This country was founded by protesters.

I could care less what they do, but I just wish they would stop screwing up traffic in Chicago. Not sure how blocking Lake Shore Drive gets people behind your message.

[M. Steng]

Originally Posted by cazzie34

These seem like you agree that a reasonable person wouldn't find the LEO's actions reasonable and therefore some criminal liability might be found.



I've already defined what the NYPD considers a chokehold for you. What the LEO did was a chokehold. Complete restriction of the airway is not required to be considered a chokehold according to NYPD protocol.

At the end of the day I'm disappointed with the grand jury not indicting because the LEO using a chokehold seems like per se negligence which seems like per se reckless endangerment or involuntary manslaughter. That probable cause standard should be pretty easy to reach IMO.

Do I think the cop is guilty of Murder 1 or 2? no way. But there are definitely some lesser charges that should have been brought in front of a jury and it is disappointing those weren't.

It's a gray area. At the end of the day, I do not agree that a reasonable jury could be persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt. I think my post above did a decent job laying out all the different factors that contributed to his death, and simply based on the fact that all those factors existed, I don't think criminal liability would follow. Again, not condoning his death, but trying to think objectively as possible I don't think it would be reasonable to hold him criminally responsible for a death where there were at least 8 different factors in play that contributed to the death.

[M. Steng]

Originally Posted by DMBZeppelin

This country was founded by protesters.

I could care less what they do, but I just wish they would stop screwing up traffic in Chicago. Not sure how blocking Lake Shore Drive gets people behind your message.

Please, spare me the ridiculous comparison that the protests from the 1760's-70's were anything even remotely resembling the crap that's going on now. If you're in the middle of a highway you should be fair game to be run over. Plus, a lot of these sheep don't even know what they're protesting and are doing it just to do it.

[M. Steng]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keMad9KCvQs

Oh look, they placed a guy on his stomach when effectuating an arrest and attempted a head lock to take him down. Looks like pretty standard protocol when a suspect is resisting arrest.

I wonder if this guy was 400+ pounds and died if there would be protesters marching with signs?

[gocubsgo3822]

Originally Posted by DMBZeppelin

This country was founded by protesters.

I could care less what they do, but I just wish they would stop screwing up traffic in Chicago. Not sure how blocking Lake Shore Drive gets people behind your message.

false. It was founded by patriots who werent afraid to get their hands dirty and fight the redcoats.

These protesters are whiny liberals.

[Lee3691]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

I legitimately have no idea what this means. Do you not understand what "assuming equality" means in relation to the percentages I posted?

You can't just assume equality when things are not equal

EX - I am driving 200 miles today. My buddy is driving 500 miles. Assuming we are driving an equal distance, we'll both be in the car for 4 hours.

Originally Posted by M. Steng

Just to help you out, it means "if we pretend all the factors are equally weighed, then here's the measure of responsibility to assign to each party involved".

What exactly am I ignoring after acknowledging the various factors contributing to Garner's death?

When you are done pretending that all factors are equally weighted, and want to share something meaningful, I look forward to it.

[M. Steng]

Originally Posted by Lee3691

You can't just assume equality when things are not equal

EX - I am driving 200 miles today. My buddy is driving 500 miles. Assuming we are driving an equal distance, we'll both be in the car for 4 hours.

When you are done pretending that all factors are equally weighted, and want to share something meaningful, I look forward to it.

Well a grand jury decided the police action wasn't severe enough to be the most important contributing factor. So, your hyper-sensitive personal feelings aside, the only way to determine fault would be to assume equality since it's an impossible thing to measure objectively. If you can take a shot at it without being clouded by your anti-establishment BS seeping through, take a shot.

The list I made wasn't ranking the importance of the factors, FYI, just listing them in the order that they happened.

[DMBZeppelin]

Originally Posted by gocubsgo3822

false. It was founded by patriots who werent afraid to get their hands dirty and fight the redcoats.

These protesters are whiny liberals.

Patriots because they won. If a bunch of people overthrew the current government everyone would talk fondly about them. If they failed and this was the United States of Great Britain everyone would talk about the time the whiny liberals tried to overthrow the king. That's just how history works.

Chances are with how ultra conservative you are the Jon of the 1700's would be a die-hard redcoat. I couldn't see you getting behind protesters and rebels. Especially ones who used guerrilla warfare and would be savages in your eyes.

[M. Steng]

Originally Posted by DMBZeppelin

Patriots because they won. If a bunch of people overthrew the current government everyone would talk fondly about them. If they failed and this was the United States of Great Britain everyone would talk about the time the whiny liberals tried to overthrow the king. That's just how history works.

Chances are with how ultra conservative you are the Jon of the 1700's would be a die-hard redcoat. I couldn't see you getting behind protesters and rebels. Especially ones who used guerrilla warfare and would be savages in your eyes.

The protesters of the 1700's were doing so because they couldn't get fair representation, weren't being able to pass laws necessary to govern the people of the Colonies, and were being denied the right to counsel at judicial proceedings in England, among other things (see: the list of grievances presented to King George III)

Today's protesters are doing so because a felon who attacked a cop inside his car was shot in self-defense and because a fat guy choked to death. (see: rioting store fronts in Ferguson and causing traffic jams in every major city in America).

Seems pretty comparable, though.

[gocubsgo3822]

Originally Posted by DMBZeppelin

Patriots because they won. If a bunch of people overthrew the current government everyone would talk fondly about them. If they failed and this was the United States of Great Britain everyone would talk about the time the whiny liberals tried to overthrow the king. That's just how history works.

Chances are with how ultra conservative you are the Jon of the 1700's would be a die-hard redcoat. I couldn't see you getting behind protesters and rebels. Especially ones who used guerrilla warfare and would be savages in your eyes.

Nah those protesters were fighting about shit that mattered.

It is quite possible i would have sided with King George. Doubtful since i am not a fan of taxation in just about any form but possible.

[gripes81]

Originally Posted by DMBZeppelin

All of the things you added, why do they justify a police officer killing someone? I don't care if Garner was a complete piece of shit. I expect officers to treat every non-violent/unarmed person equally. You should be arresting the thug the same way you would some dumb college kid who'd take off on foot. Police are not the judge, jury, and executioner. People shouldn't be killed while being arrested (unless they are endangering others), and this the ends justify the means mentality is scary to me. We have rules and laws for a reason.

The way you seemingly want police is a part of a large oppressive government. Which is fine until people revolt, and there are already tons of protest over this crap in major cities. Chicago isn't a result of what police can and can't do. I don't see officers here calling for more power. Instead it's a lesson in what happens when drugs, guns, poverty, and a bad education system all get together.

It's fine until things like this start hitting closer to home
i.e. white people, then I bet some peoples opinions on police killing would change

[jrkarger]

Originally Posted by gripes81

It's fine until things like this start hitting closer to home
i.e. white people, then I bet some peoples opinions on police killing would change

I haven't heard of the people in Utah protesting.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58...-gill.html.csp

[DMBZeppelin]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

Today's protesters are doing so because a felon who attacked a cop inside his car was shot in self-defense and because a fat guy choked to death. (see: rioting store fronts in Ferguson and causing traffic jams in every major city in America).

Seems pretty comparable, though.

That's how you view what happened. As much as you believe he was just a fat guy and the other thing was self-defense. Other people saw the same thing, were given the same evidence, and based on their own experience came to a completely different conclusion that it was racially motivated.

It's hard for me personally to understand them because race isn't something I've ever had to deal with. I'm white so I have the option to live my life as a law abiding citizen, and chances are the cops will never bother me. My worst experience with a cop was in 2006 coming back from a Dave & Tim show. He was pissed we were driving across country for a concert. I've never been put in a position or felt discriminated against for my skin color. Just because I haven't experienced it doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Originally Posted by gocubsgo3822

Nah those protesters were fighting about shit that mattered.

Obviously for everyone living here that shit did indeed matter, but this stuff going on matters to those people protesting. Just because it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it's not important to other people. You should support people's right to peacefully protest because... merica'. (i.e. the "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it")

[Lee3691]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

Well a grand jury decided the police action wasn't severe enough to be the most important contributing factor. So, your hyper-sensitive personal feelings aside, the only way to determine fault would be to assume equality since it's an impossible thing to measure objectively. If you can take a shot at it without being clouded by your anti-establishment BS seeping through, take a shot.

The list I made wasn't ranking the importance of the factors, FYI, just listing them in the order that they happened.

So you're still going to use stats to make up a point with you admit the data is 'pretending' - gotcha....

Spare me the grand jury lecture - it's almost impossible to indict a LEO for anything. That's just statistics, without pretending.

[Lee3691]

Originally Posted by M. Steng

Today's protesters are doing so because a felon who attacked a cop inside his car was shot in self-defense and because a fat guy choked to death. (see: rioting store fronts in Ferguson and causing traffic jams in every major city in America).

Seems pretty comparable, though.

If you really think that all of those protestors were just protesting over those specific cases, you're very naive. I do agree that the way these people are protesting is counter productive to the point they are trying to make.

[zajDmB1]

Originally Posted by Kevaroo

Added a few more.

This general idea of Amoral Opportunism is getting really scary. It's exactly what has happened in South Africa and that place is a disaster.
Keep it up America, keep pissing off the people that risk their life every day. Turn the whole nation into a Chicago and keep making excuses for fat, uneducated, thugs and criminals to the point where no one wants to be a cop.

Ironically, this also describes a chunk of the NYPD.