Trump tries to smear Martin Gugino, Catholic Peace Activist

  • Thread starter Thread starter vivsim
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
VonDerTann said:
Many police departments disallow the “knee to neck” move Derek Chauvin used - but Minneapolis PD allowed its use and sanctioned it.
Click to expand...
No, they just neglected to explicitly disallow it. It is difficult to anticipate and disallow every abusive use of force. I would be shocked to see a current MPD training manual with instructions on how to do what Chauvin did.
 
Last edited:
NO, with due respect, you DON’T know what you saw, because you know when you watch the video how it turned out. You didn’t hear what the cops heard as the event unfolded; feel warm spittle on your face from a protester; or, in this case,
see a man rush up to you with an electronic device and reach in the direction of your gun and wonder what he was doing in the split second you have to react.

So, No, you really know nothing at all about what happened.
 
Last edited:
MikeInVA said:
40.png
LilyM:
If your training is that it is appropriate to put your knee on the neck of someone.who is compliant and not resisting, under any circumstances, the training is the problem and not a justification.
Click to expand...
I think you’re replying in the wrong thread. The man was pushed and fell. Nobody kneeled on his neck.
Click to expand...
I was using George Floyd as an example of where “I was following orders/training” is clearly not an acceptable excuse. This is quite possibly another, although admittedly less clear.
 
You do?

You were there?

If not , your conjecture is just as good as mine.
 
But since you’ve never made any effort to obtain the manual, you don’t know what it says.

It’s all one big rush to judgment.
 
To be honest, I thought that choke holds had been prohibited years ago. Either way, the policeman was out of line. In this case the policeman acted appropriately, but the result was not what was intended.
 
Brionna Taylor’s killers are still walking free. “Let’s not make her into something she’s not.”
 
tomarin said:
I think this is unrealistic, sad though it is to say. This is precisely why the 52 officers resigned. When they are given orders to clear the area, that is what they do, regardless of the age or frailty of the civilians in the area. They’re not there to offer medical assistance. They would probably knock over a disabled person in a wheelchair if told to clear the area (and that person was in the way).
Click to expand...
If so, that surely only lends support to the calls for major changes in police training at the least, and possible restructuring of municipal services (the full meaning of “defund the police”) to change what sort of response such a situation gets, beyond that.
 
Usagi said:
40.png
tomarin:
I think this is unrealistic, sad though it is to say. This is precisely why the 52 officers resigned. When they are given orders to clear the area, that is what they do, regardless of the age or frailty of the civilians in the area. They’re not there to offer medical assistance. They would probably knock over a disabled person in a wheelchair if told to clear the area (and that person was in the way).
Click to expand...
If so, that surely only lends support to the calls for major changes in police training at the least, and possible restructuring of municipal services (the full meaning of “defund the police”) to change what sort of response such a situation gets, beyond that.
Click to expand...
Exactly!!!
 
MikeInVA said:
To be honest, I thought that choke holds had been prohibited years ago.
Click to expand...
We are forbidden from using them unless the situation calls for “deadly force.” The only scenario I can imagine actually attempting a choke hold is some sort of active shooter situation where I am unarmed.
 
Pulling out a cell phone is not accosting an officer.

Society has defended rapists for raping, not just the rapists themselves. I stand by my statement: Defending these officers is tantamount to defending any other abuser.
 
OurLadyofSorrows said:
s not, he is pro choice. That would have to be the biggest misleading myth ever generated about the man IMHO. It got me for a while.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU! I keep seeing this “pro-life” nonsense about him, but he’s not. He’s whatever will pander to his base or be politically expedient in a given moment. And I do mean moment, no person in the oval office has ever acted with such rashness.

The Pro-Life movement among others got on board with 45 and made a literal deal with the devil.
 
I didn’t claim that.

I claimed to know what I saw on the video.

You claimed the old man was reaching for the officer’s weapon. Like you knew what the man’s intentions were. What I saw was a man tapping the officers arm, cell phone in hand.

You commented on the man’s purported intentions, I commented on the officer’s actions.

Big difference.
 
Last edited:
VonDerTann said:
Something that bothers me: several times police have been attacked but the media reports the attack occurs at what they term a “peaceful protest.” A policeman was shot in the head in Las Vegas and may need to be on a ventilator for the rest of his life; the media says it happened at a “peaceful protest.”

No, it wasn’t “peaceful” if a cop got shot at it.
Click to expand...
I looked this one up to make sure I knew what I was talking about.

The guy who actually shot the officer was arrested and charged with attempted murder. Obviously no one is saying that guy was peaceful.

It is also unclear, though, whether the shooter was part of the protest (he claimed to be firing to “scare off protesters,” though that’s obviously a highly questionable claim by someone who’s just shot a man). So it can be entirely true that the protest itself was a peaceful one. And thankfully, neither protesters nor police seem to have taken the shooting as an excuse to escalate to more general violence.
 
This is precisely the sort of attitude I was referring to above, taken to its logical extreme: “no matter what Trump says or even does he’s not pro life because he’s just pandering to his base.”

–you’ve decided that because you hate the man (I mean, you compare him to the devil!), he can’t ever be pro life, no matter what he does.
 
Last edited:
Trump is the devil the guy in the story a saint. Got the narrative. Yawn.
 
The guy in the story is an injured old man. The other one picked up his phone to tweet conspiracy theories about him.

The injured old man is still injured.

This bizarre that not only is this poor man injured, the president brings him up, not to wish him well and a quick recovery, but to slander him.

Imagine that was your loved one, in the hospital and he’s getting slandered by the president.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top