BREAKING: No Charges in Eric Garner Chokehold Case for Officer

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

And why should that non-violent, petty charge result in arrest? Why not a fine?

Because we live in a Police State...because prisons are privatized for profit, because the police have been militarized by the DoD since 9/11, because all citizens are now potential suspects.

a reply to: thrustbucket

If used when they didn't need to use it....yes.

The guy did not need that level of aggression used on him, illegal aggression that should not have been used since 1993.

originally posted by: TiedDestructor
Read the 1st post I wrote on on page 12

Link

Seems as though people have forgotten what thugs are. Aside from how the asshat police treat them of course.

The dictionary definition of "thug" involves criminal activity with violence.

Selling stuff illegally isn't violent. Dig up some violent charges first.

About 1000 people being kettled (deemed unlawful by NY Supreme Court), potential mass arrest.

Stopmotionsolo

Nvm looks like the cops opened up the back end and now protesters are marching back the way they came.

The officer in question has a sordid history. He has twice in the past been sued for alleged racially motivated misconduct while on the job.

Source

Pantaleo was sued twice in the past for alleged racially motivated misconduct while on the job. Two black men accused him in 2012 of subjecting them to an illegal strip search in broad daylight.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: thrustbucket

If used when they didn't need to use it....yes.

The guy did not need that level of aggression used on him, illegal aggression that should not have been used since 1993.

Well I was already glad I wasn't a cop. This past month and people with opinions like yours make me SUPER glad I'm not a cop.
I'm not sure who would want to be a cop these days. You think we have terrible cops now - we've now created an environment where only the truly insane would want to be a cop.

Another bad day for the legal system. Use of grand juries is a cop out by state prosecutors.

a reply to: thrustbucket

The cop should definitely have faced some kind of internal harsh review of how he handled the situation. But he didn't commit a crime, and he shouldn't be treated as a criminal.

Yeah lets scold the police and slap them on the wrist when they murder civilians, that will show them.. He should absolutely be treated like a criminal.

Regardless, you guys need to consider that this Cop's life is ruined now. Neither he or his family is safe in the short term. They'll likely have to move to another state and he'll probably never be in law enforcement again. He'll have to go be a waiter or something somewhere. It's too bad that isn't enough to appease those of you on the cop witch hunt. You won't rest until he's behind bars as some kind of message sent to all underpaid and over worked cops in the country, right?

Oh my, I am weeping. Someone who resists (or simply encounters) police should worry about being killed because the police have such a hard job. While police that murder civilians should worry they might not sleep well at night and be inconvenienced for the remainder of their life.

originally posted by: thrustbucket


Serious question: Every time someone dies after a tazer gun is used on them, should the cop face criminal charges?

IMO, due to the numerous unfortunate deaths attributed to LEO taser use, shouldn't that option be removed from being an option since it is not 100% confirmed to be a non lethal option?

makes sense to me... as to facing criminal charges for using one, I would have to say no, that liability would fall on the department that issues them, in a wrongful death suit...

More reason to remove them from service due to unreliability...

a reply to: thrustbucket

Hey I like the police I used to hang out with the London murder squad when I ran a pub down there.
What I don't like is badly trained police who cause a persons deaths.
Remember they work for us the police and I fear they have forgotten that.

originally posted by: FraggleRock

I'm sorry but you don't get to use the word "murder" unless you really believe the cop wanted to kill him.

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Well, the whole marketing angle of the taser was as a device to use instead of a gun or baton in situations that would have otherwise warranted the use of a gun or baton. Tasing someone instead of shooting them or whacking them with a stick. That sort of thing.

Police shifted it more towards a compliance tool, inflicting pain for the barest of reasons. Remember the "Don't Tase Me Bro" guy? That wasn't how a taser is supposed to be used.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: TiedDestructor

Yes lets roll out the fact he had a criminal history,of course he had a criminal history a guy selling cigarettes is obviously a grifter on the outer but isn't it the fact hes also supposed to be a human being with certain human rights,or is it ok to kill if they've shoplifted and have a dui?

Because you didn't read my post on page 12 where I clearly stated I did not condone the behavior of the police. I was referring to a statement by Greven with stated that...

It seems to me that a lot of people, not saying here necessarily but definitely elsewhere, are using the word "thug" as a substitute for the N-word.

Also to a response by vor78 which stated...

Sorry, but I really don't see anything here to suggest that the man was a 'thug'. A petty criminal? Perhaps. A thug? That's quite a stretch given the alleged crime here.

I hope I'm moving slow enough for you...

In case you didn't know a lot these "thugs" originated from gangsters who made quiet a profit selling and smuggling illegal Cigarettes .

So when people say thug to me; I don't picture a black man with sagging pants and a distaste for authority. I picture a well dressed thug donning the step side of an old ford v-8; tommy gun in hand...screaming come and get it "coppers".

I get tired of the ignorance. Tired of the assumptions. Tired of people calling callous, repetitive and criminal acts petty.

So damn it, pardon me for actually using my head and addressing all the ignorant nuisances spat in the name of racism.

originally posted by: JacKatMtn

originally posted by: thrustbucket


Serious question: Every time someone dies after a tazer gun is used on them, should the cop face criminal charges?

IMO, due to the numerous unfortunate deaths attributed to LEO taser use, shouldn't that option be removed from being an option since it is not 100% confirmed to be a non lethal option?

makes sense to me... as to facing criminal charges for using one, I would have to say no, that liability would fall on the department that issues them, in a wrongful death suit...

More reason to remove them from service due to unreliability...

Perhaps. You might have a point. But remember that one of the main reason tazers are employed is to keep perps from being shot. So you kind have to look at that side as well. Would you rather cops use real guns or tazers?

originally posted by: thrustbucket
I'm sorry but you don't get to use the word "murder" unless you really believe the cop wanted to kill him.

The moment he ignored this mans pleas that he couldn't breathe is the moment it became intentional in my eyes. So please, in the future, refrain from telling me which words I may or may not use.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: JacKatMtn

Well, the whole marketing angle of the taser was as a device to use instead of a gun in situations that would have otherwise warranted the use of a gun. Tasing someone instead of shooting them. That sort of thing.

Police shifted it more towards a compliance tool, inflicting pain for the barest of reasons. Remember the "Don't Tase Me Bro" guy? That wasn't how a taser is supposed to be used.

All good points. Tazing was suppose to be used instead of firing a gun when possible. It probably still should be.

It's a very difficult discussion. What do you allow cops to do and not do to people resisting arrest? It's a debate that will never be finished.

a reply to: thrustbucket

Do what I do everyday at work.

Restrain but not harm.

a reply to: Greven

Totally agree, same with mace... what's next? who knows...

TO be honest it must be a hell of a lot more difficult for LEO's to make decisions post haste...

Was easy in the past, billy club & sidearm... what does this situation level rise to?

Now? so many options, so little time...

I think the current dilemma can be solved with less arming, and more communication with the folks they are there to serve...

True respect comes from communicating and understanding, not who holds the biggest arsenal of weapons?

originally posted by: FraggleRock

originally posted by: thrustbucket
I'm sorry but you don't get to use the word "murder" unless you really believe the cop wanted to kill him.

The moment he ignored this mans pleas that he couldn't breathe is the moment it became intentional in my eyes. So please, in the future, refrain from telling me which words I may or may not use.

Touche. You can use whichever words you like. Just keep in mind that some words one chooses to use amplifies or diminishes one's credibility.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: thrustbucket

Do what I do everyday at work.

Restrain but not harm.

And in doing that, when someone ends up dead, I won't try to claim you meant it or should go to jail for it.