Question of logic

[MuggyWuggy]

I disagree, media is what allowed us to witness someone killing another person in public over the supposed cause of selling untaxed tobacco.

Don't respond as Taylor, respond as the people who founded this country to leave behind oppression from the English. Untaxed tobacco sales should not lead to your death and the phrase "Resisting arrest" is the most over used phrases by all law enforcement. When someone questions their arrest, shouldn't they understand why and be presented with evidence of their wrong doing?

"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't the case anymore. "Guilty because I say so." is the trend. Did you know DUI checkpoints are not a legal stop? They do it anyways.

A man in TX (or another state where you can carry) was wearing his gun in holster and a cop asked to take it, but why? The cop said he was being suspicious. The guy then replied to recite the law and requested the officers superior who immediately told the officer who was harassing the citizen to give him back his gun.

We have people joining the police force who THINK they know the law, but really they just act above it. We as the people of the USA have seen this for so long and we are tired of criminals being represented as local heros. I'm not saying all cops are bad, but the bad ones are awful and it's 30% or more acting in corruption , not 1% of the police population.

LAPD was found guilty of officers tampering with recording gear, the police chief even knew about it and did nothing. It was reported by an officer who quit/resigned after being tired of working in the hostile environment the .politics. allow.

We would not know any of this if it wasn't for media.

[MuggyWuggy]

Killing someone else who is not attempting to harm anyone is not an act out of concern for safety

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

I go on a mass murdering spree then the police arrive.  I drop my gun and put my hands up.  The police should not shoot me?

Yes, because the police are not omnipotent. Their duty is to bring you to a trial, and you are presumed innocent until proven guilty (that's kind of how our legal system works bud....)

[MuggyWuggy]

You're just being random and not actually looking at what this thread was based upon.


I'm talking about a man who was killed for supposedly selling cigarettes and you take it out of context completely by putting up a magic Christmas land scenario.

Actually add to the debate instead of spinning everything.

Your tactics are weak and this isn't about winning a debate, this is talking about the value of human life. Which I believe you don't even value, if someone is not directly connected to you, you don't care.

I go on a mass murdering spree then the police arrive.  I drop my gun and put my hands up.  The police should not shoot me?

And if you're a mass murderer, you shouldn't be put to death but to sit in isolation for the rest of your miserable existence. Death is too easy.

The police who shoot the guy in passion act above the law, instead of letting judges and the court system do their job, the cop feels he is entitled to finish the job, his job is simply to apprehend someone so that our justice system can figure out an appropriate punishment, his job is not the judge, jury and execution. He is not judge dredd

[Distriimuir]

Muggy, and posters of the like, thank you for showing me not all Americans think cops have the right to end life when unthreatened. They are trained for these situations and still fail to do their jobs right. Tays stop using hypotheticals that don't pertain to the case. He didn't murder people, he sold cigs. Brown didn't kill anyone he punched a cop, looking at te hospital pics of willsons face all he had was some "red" bruising. Seems he over reacted, and now a unarmed man is dead. You miss or willfully are leaving out vital points on these cases that show these cops and others are abusing their positions.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

My point being that if someone just shot 50 people, why should the police believe that he won't try something else?  Or run away?

He punched the cop, resisted arrest, etc.  Even though the cop isn't innocent, he wasn't either.

I feel like these cops should be hit with something, but I don't think it should be as serious as manslaughter because the victims weren't innocent.

Firstly, practically no one is innocent, and secondly, the police were not given the right to end a life unless their life was directly in danger. The only way the legal system works is if the police give people a fair trial, this isn't .loving. Dredd.

[MuggyWuggy]

What qualifies as resisting arrest is absurd

[MuggyWuggy]

You did not prove your point

[Wingnut]

And I just want to clarify here for a minute, this cop did not murder this man, the cop did something stupid that caused him to die. The same as someone dying from an accident with alcohol involved, or texting and running someone over, murder required the intent to end life. I'm 99.999999999999999% sure the cop NEVER intended for the guy to die. That being said, if someone dies because your texting or driving drunk, there are repercussions, as there should be in this case.

[Distriimuir]

And I just want to clarify here for a minute, this cop did not murder this man, the cop did something stupid that caused him to die. The same as someone dying from an accident with alcohol involved, or texting and running someone over, murder required the intent to end life. I'm 99.999999999999999% sure the cop NEVER intended for the guy to die. That being said, if someone dies because your texting or driving drunk, there are repercussions, as there should be in this case.

It's not accidental using an illegal chokehold in a city that has banned the policy by law ( and rightfully so).

[Distriimuir]

An now thanks to tays we know resisting arrest justifies shooting or killing people.  The threat to the officer must be life threatening, not on no he can punch me or something of the like. Tays they are TRAINED for this, no excuse to .love. up as much they do.they are not normal people, hence why we hold them to a higher standard, they help enforce law. They know better and should do better.

[NovusOrbis]

I get that it's an exageration.  My point was to show that just because someone's hands were up don't necessarily mean they aren't threatening.

Again, that's what training is for.

Nobody is perfect and hindsight is always 20/20

[NovusOrbis]

You're just being random and not actually looking at what this thread was based upon.


I'm talking about a man who was killed for supposedly selling cigarettes and you take it out of context completely by putting up a magic Christmas land scenario.

Actually add to the debate instead of spinning everything.

Your tactics are weak and this isn't about winning a debate, this is talking about the value of human life. Which I believe you don't even value, if someone is not directly connected to you, you don't care.

I go on a mass murdering spree then the police arrive.  I drop my gun and put my hands up.  The police should not shoot me?

And if you're a mass murderer, you shouldn't be put to death but to sit in isolation for the rest of your miserable existence. Death is too easy.

The police who shoot the guy in passion act above the law, instead of letting judges and the court system do their job, the cop feels he is entitled to finish the job, his job is simply to apprehend someone so that our justice system can figure out an appropriate punishment, his job is not the judge, jury and execution. He is not judge dredd

Countering a logical fallacy with a logical fallacy; I like it. Regardless, you are correct. The man did die and the officers actions led to the event that caused his death, not the actual death. If you can still breathe, you aren't being choked. Source: I've been in an actually choke hold. The definitely should be a civil charge here for violating city code and whatever else the family wants to sue him for, but that's up to them.

Even then, it would be up to the jury. He was breaking a stupid law selling cigs, and no matter how stupid a law is, there's still a punishment (not death obviously). So the way they sort the negligence (if they are unbiased) wouldn't be 100% officer/%0 dude.

[Wingnut]

And I just want to clarify here for a minute, this cop did not murder this man, the cop did something stupid that caused him to die. The same as someone dying from an accident with alcohol involved, or texting and running someone over, murder required the intent to end life. I'm 99.999999999999999% sure the cop NEVER intended for the guy to die. That being said, if someone dies because your texting or driving drunk, there are repercussions, as there should be in this case.

It's not accidental using an illegal chokehold in a city that has banned the policy by law ( and rightfully so).

So texting during and drunk driving is legal? The officer did not put the man into a choke hold with the intention of causing him to have a heart attack. Do you seriously believe he intended to kill the guy? Honest answer now. This would be manslaughter, negligent homicide, but not murder. I completely agree the cop was out of line, and should absolutely spend years in jail. I think zero repercussions is bull sheep and possibly a cover up.

Edit: sorry, not a cover up, but giving the cop a pass which happens way to much and needs to be stopped.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

Also, interesting fact, Very few officers listen to the ban on chokeholds.  There have been literally thousands of documented uses in the past couple years.  Not saying it's good, but he probably figured it was one of those rules that no one cares about (like open toe-ed shoes at school.  That's technically a dress code violation, but no one cares)

Yes because wearing flip-flops and killing people using illegal chokeholds are two comparable things. You are reading the stupid things you are typing, right?