Shootings - Is Protesting Fair?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Seth, Apr 16, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. You do NOT have the constitutional right to resist arrest. A police officer is not only justified in using force but obligated to use it. The officer is granted this power by the state constitution of NY
     
  2. When is enough enough?
    Stupidity is no excuse.
     
  3. The cop used a BANNED maneuver.

    BANNED.
     
  4. Phil your turn again for semantics
     
  5. It doesn't matter AJ. He could articulate the totality of the circumstances and was found to be justified.

    You left out that the coroner also said compressions of the chest while prone. It was proven that he didn't apply the choke but had him around the neck
     
  6. Gardner was actively resisting and was grabbed down from behind. It was found that he did not apply the choke.

    He would also have been justified to hit Gardner with a baton and if he accidentally slipped and hit Gardner in the head, well, he would have been justified. Even if Gardner died from blunt force trauma to the head
     
  7. Sounds like his buddies found him justified

    http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/24/nyreg ... icers.html

    I posted a link for a reason.
     
  8. If the officer really choked him to death.. In an unjustified way... Then why was he exonerated?
     
  9. Are you saying the medical examiner is wrong?

    Gee. Can I see your degrees
     
  10. Produce them Dr Phil 
     
  11. His buddies? The DOJ is run by a black man named Eric Holder. He investigated the Furgusion shooting and the NYC choking death.

    Guess what Eric Holder found?

    It's called justifiable homicide. This is how the law is set up. If those men were not "actively resisting" they would still be alive. Mike Brown brought deadly force to the table when he went for the gun once and charged again.

    Gardner allowed "hands on compliance" when he swatted away the officers hands.
     
  12. The medical examiner says compression to the neck and chest. NOT asphyxiation
     
  13. "No damage to the windpipe was found"
     
  14. You go around the facts to justify your arguments. You don't even see one problem wrong with this. Me? I know the man did wrong. But, there are better ways to subdue a man. And if the police of the USA can't do it, then we need better cops.
     
  15. Life is cheap for u Phil.
    No compassion whatsoever.
    No respect for what is reasonable force.
    U advocate death n not life.
    Hope karma bites ur ass.
    That would be justifiable forces at work
     
  16. He was legally justified and the fact that there was no damage to the windpipe(FACT). Means he wasn't being choked.

    He should not have resisted. Don't blame the cops because he didn't comply.

    I'm not twisting any facts. The media twisted the facts for you to believe that this man died just because he was black.

    The facts are simple.

    1. The officer was found justified in his use of force.
    2. Asphyxiation was NOT the cause of death
    3. No damage to the windpipe.
    4. Gardner has a preexisting condition
    5. Gardner was actively resisting
     
  17. Reasonable force? Read the force continuum that guides LEOs in what they do. When you actively resist you risk serious bodily injury to yourself. What should the officer have done to the man that was actively resisting?
     
  18. Food killed him? Nobody is liable then.
    The guide is perfect?
     
  19. I have explained it to you in every way I can. Read the force continuum. The media is lying to you
     
  20. I don't listen to media spins. I think for myself just fine n an unnecessary death occurred. He's dead no lie.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.