J
JimG
Guest
Yes, but it seems now that no one waits for a trial. We have indictment by media and conviction by the mob.
25 unarmed Whites and only 14 unarmed Blacks were fatally shot by police in 2019. Do the data suggest that police deserve an apology from those who vi
- Status
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Did the ME say that George Floyd would have died that day even if he had not been arrested?
What potential evidence do you mean? Do you think that their actions can be excused just by their not knowing he was in excited delirium?
Re: Daniel Prude:
It seems you excusing any killing in which there was a significant contributing factor to their dying when acted upon by the police. Is that what you are saying? I don’t think only the “most proximate” cause should be counted (whatever that means).
A
Annie
Guest
Why is this relevant?
Incriminating or exculpating.
What I suggested they did not know was that Floyd had taken fentanyl. One of the effects of this drug is to depress the respiratory system.
Just to clarify, I am not saying that this is the case; however, if Floyd’s death was caused by the combination of the two acts, neither one of which alone would have killed him, then, yes, this would be relevant.
The officers would not have committed an act which would have killed Floyd; Floyd would not have killed himself by taking the fentanyl.
Taking the issue of ED off the table, if one can condemn (metaphorically speaking) an officer for killing a bad guy because he didn’t know he was a bad guy at the time the event occurred, then one could acquit (again, speaking metaphoically) since the officer did not know the victim had taken a drug which inhibits respiration.
This is my point.
In the precise case of George Floyd, there are other issues, such as Floyd’s saying before the restraint began, that he couldn’t breathe. But then we also have the issue of people who are being arrested lying about this or that in an attempt to escape or to somehow de-escalate the situation. And then there is also the issue of Floyd’s state vis a vis excited delirium.
In fact, these issues and others we may not have considered or even know about all count as what you called potential evidence.
A
Annie
Guest
You brought up Daniel Prude, not me. You brought his depression in as an example of how depression could play into someone’s being more hysically vulnerable to dying as a result of a police restraint in the same way asthma or narcotic intoxication could.Annie:
It seems you excusing any killing in which there was a significant contributing factor to their dying when acted upon by the police. Is that what you are saying? I don’t think only the “most proximate” cause should be counted (whatever that means).
I am simply pointing out that that is not the case.
S
Steeevyo
Guest
I notice that the United States is moving away from searching for truth. It is all about picking narratives and believing in them. It is a sad state of affairs. I have a little hope though that after Trump won a clear election victory in November the Democrats and their associated mainstream media and radical leftist groups will have to make adjustments to their current tactics. Maybe then things will soften a little.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Because you said “the dose itself could kill him”. That implies the he would have died that day even if he was not arrested. But if the implication is not true, the antecedent cannot be true.LeafByNiggle:
Why is this relevant?
Yes, but specifically what would exculpating evidence look like?
That is exactly what I am disputing - the relevance of that information. Replace “having taken fentynal” with “having asthma” and see if the same logic holds. If the police choke someone with asthma and he dies because of his weakened condition, you have exactly the same scenario of two factors, neither of which alone would have killed him, but together they do. Are you prepared to excuse the action of the police in that scenario too?
I’m not sure I understand how that would happen. If the officer didn’t know he was a bad guy at the time he killed him, why was he killing him? I don’t think we would excuse an officer for killing someone that was only discovered to be a bad guy after the fact. Imagine, for example, a peddler of child pornography that just happened to be stopped for a broken tail light and the officer decided for racist reason to escalate the confrontation to the point where he would kill him. Is that the kind of scenario you are talking about? In that case I don’t think the fact of the man being a child pornographer would even figure in to the decision to discipline him. We don’t support meeting out justice accidentally.
P
phil3
Guest
I am very serious, This can be measured. When I read those document written by the bishops and you can do those things for 100 years and it might or it might not solve things.
But I do not suggest taking away someones personal wealth to give to another. One of the biggest things I hear on the reparations site is that slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule.
I had no idea on how to calculate what that would be worth today. But in lots of places I look land is going for about $10,000 so figured about $400,000 per each black.
But looking at the way you did it, about $302,000 per black but there would have to be a born date. nine months from the date the law is passed.
put it directly in their checking accounts or saving account or investment accounts.
Then it is done. American paid it debt for slavery and such so it is over.
But I do not suggest taking away someones personal wealth to give to another. One of the biggest things I hear on the reparations site is that slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule.
I had no idea on how to calculate what that would be worth today. But in lots of places I look land is going for about $10,000 so figured about $400,000 per each black.
But looking at the way you did it, about $302,000 per black but there would have to be a born date. nine months from the date the law is passed.
put it directly in their checking accounts or saving account or investment accounts.
Then it is done. American paid it debt for slavery and such so it is over.
A
Annie
Guest
LEO sees guy running a red light and pulls him over. During the course of this encounter, the guy does something which the officer perceives as sufficiently threatening to fatally shoot him.
People say that you shouldn’t be killed for running a red light; other people say he turned out the be a serial killer the police have been searching for; first group says yeah, well, but the police officer didn’t know that at the time.
This is the type of conversation I have heard over several of these shootings, and I agree, the fact that he was a serial killer doesn’t play into the shooting as long as the LEO didn’t know about it at the time.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
If the circumstances justified the use of deadly force, then they justified the use of deadly for. If the circumstances did not justify it, then they don’t justify it. The fact that the guy was actually a bad guy would not enter into the decision of whether to punish the officer. Similarly, the fact of a prisoner having asthma does not enter into the decision of whether the officer acted correctly. Same with fentynal. The officer should not do something that would kill someone with asthma unless it was absolutely necessary to protect other lives. There is no excuse to doing something that would kill someone with asthma.LeafByNiggle:
LEO sees guy running a red light and pulls him over. During the course of this encounter, the guy does something which the officer perceives as sufficiently threatening to fatally shoot him.
That’s essentially what I am saying too. So why are we arguing?
T
Theo520
Guest
I think you are projecting, and not speaking from experience.
I work in the justice system, with youths arrested for violence in the home.
Many have been diagnosed, prescribed meds, and have a therapist. For others we initiate mental health assessment and access to treatment resources.
It helps but it’s not the panacea you imagine.
A
Anrakyr
Guest
Projecting what?
You know what would help? Not having a fifty percent untreated rate for mental illness.
A
Annie
Guest
Because I think that an unknown unusual circumstance such as a heavy dose of fentanyl should not be held against the officer anymore than an unknown badness in the guy should mitigate his responsibility.
V
VonDerTann
Guest
A heavy dose of fentanyl works in the officers’ favor - legally speaking.
If there is doubt about whether the police or the fentanyl killed George Floyd, the officers can’t be convicted of at least some of the charges they face, and perhaps all of them.
If there is doubt about whether the police or the fentanyl killed George Floyd, the officers can’t be convicted of at least some of the charges they face, and perhaps all of them.
Last edited:
A
Annie
Guest
There were two autopsies done; to me it seems like there were several factors leading to his death.
A good article
A good article
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
It is not the circumstance that is held against the officer. It is the fact that he didn’t allow for the possibility, just as you would expect if the prisoner had severe asthma. Please tell me if the officer should be excused for causing the death of someone with severe asthma.LeafByNiggle:
Because I think that an unknown unusual circumstance such as a heavy dose of fentanyl should not be held against the officer anymore than an unknown badness in the guy should mitigate his responsibility.
J
JimG
Guest
Perhaps when police are making an arrest, where the suspect is non-compliant, they should first check his medical history, and have a physician evaluate his current condition before proceeding with the arrest. But in actual police calls, things don’t happen that way.
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
Read the data in comment #s 4, 6, and 7, and your fear will subside. (The leftist media is doing immeasurable damage by withholding the facts from good people.)
Black Lives Matter is calling on the defunding of police—which is just silly. While we all agree that unjustified police brutality is bad, is there really an “epidemic” of racial bias in police brutality? It only takes one incident to go viral and serve as a call to arms for thousands of people to protest, but is it a really as big of a problem as people suggest it is?
Looking at the data, the answer might actually be no. According to a 2019 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, there is “no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities across shootings, and White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers. This suggests that increasing diversity among officers by itself is unlikely to reduce racial disparity in police shootings.”
In 2019 police officers fatally shot 1,004 people, most of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous. African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, African-Americans made up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.
The police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019 (data as of June 2nd, 2020, prior to the Washington Post’s updates after they observed that conservative media was quoting their study), down from 38 and 32, respectively, in 2015, when Barack Obama was President. A police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.
Several involved high-speed car chases, fights with officers, or had weapons recovered at the scene.
According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR), there were 686,665 sworn police officers in the United States in 2018. That’s one unarmed black male shot and killed for every 49,047 sworn police officers.
In 2018, police made 10,310,960 arrests, according to the FBI.
According to the US census, in July 2019, an estimated 328,239,523 people resided in the US. Blacks comprise 13.4%, or 43,984,096 people. Police shot and killed one unarmed black male out of every 3,141,721 black Americans. Does that sound like an epidemic of police murders?
1
1cthlctrth
Guest
As if the job of a policeman wasn’t difficult enough, releasing criminals and rioters gives the bad guys a sense of invincibility, that attacking police bears no consequences. The mayors are not doing their citizens any favors by permitting lawlessness.
By the way, with all the low-information athletes who like to blindly attack police as a whole, here’s a toast to the good guys:
https://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/j...ve-police-stories-that-will-change-your-mind/
https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/police-bro-tality-cops-caught-on-camera-doing-good-deeds/
A
Anrakyr
Guest
Yes.
What people fail to understand is defund means take the money from police who are armed to services better equipped to deal with mental health. If mental health was properly diagnosis and addressed maybe we wouldn’t need cops for every disturbance.
- Status