Trump tries to smear Martin Gugino, Catholic Peace Activist

[RobertAdams]

I admit enjoying being set up for the Aristophanes dunk

 

[Sarcelle]

All these wouldn’t have happened if one police officer hadn’t put his knee on the neck of an already clearly incapacitated man and held it there long enough for the man to die.

All this in front of bystanders. This same cop who has had several complaints lodged against him. Brazenly killing someone in front of witnesses while staring at the camera. If that isn’t brazen, I don’t know what is. This is not just the case of one bad apple but the entire police department who is more than willing to cover up and enable this cop to go on until he commits murder.

This is also a link of a long chain of police abuses that are committed by bad cops who often times have a police department who continue to overlook and enable these misdeeds.

So no, the few bad apples argument no longer work when we see the system is a big part of the problem. This is not an individual problem but a systemic problem.

Remember the bad priests who were enabled by the higher ups to continue abusing? Didn’t end well for the church now did it?

 

[VonDerTann]

Just some thoughts:

1. Complaints are meaningless: anyone can make a complaint about anyone.
   Adjudications of wrongdoing are very different.
2. The issue of Derek Chauvin’s actions is problematic at many levels, but again, we need to wait to see what the facts show as the basis for why Floyd was on the ground. Reports are that he was irate and was banging his head on the wall of the police car, which is how Freddy Gray died in Baltimore. My private conjecture is that the police were basically almost trying to knock him out as a means of keeping him safe from himself (corroborated by the fact that he had multiple drugs in his system).
3. IMHO there is no “systemic problem” in policing; rather there are a few bad cops (and they are sadly out there, as there’s bad people in every profession).
   But systemic problems? I’m unconvinced.

 

[VonDerTann]

You can say it to your pal all you want - but it sure looked different on video; the police didn’t know what he was doing; he was the one who confronted them;
His actions were similar to those of antifa operatives who try to skim or jam police communications.

The totality of the circumstances that I know now convince me these officers acted appropriately and the fault was on the agitator, particularly given the split second they had to act.

 

[neophyte]

It is reasonable to assume the police officers were operating with the following knowledge:

-Protests have been taking place across the United States, with the police themselves being one of the primary targets of this anger.

-Some of these protests have turned violent, whether organically or by provocateurs deliberately trying to stir up trouble.

-Multiple people have been

^(this!)

Couldn’t be said any better.

 

[commenter]

How.about simply “peacefully arresting” vs “shoving aside”? If he is indeed agitating.

Do you really think an arrest would have been peaceful? Given his long history of trying to get arrested, pathological hatred of police expresed on internet? Police are supposed to use the least invasive response, they didn’t know a shove (push back, to someone provoking) would lead to head injury.

A better question is why the legitimate protesters didn’t remove him. They were there right up to curfew, they likely recognized him from his long history (Buffalo’s African American, Democratic mayor labelled him a well known instigator, before CNN caused him to flip flop).

The protesters complain the agitators make them look bad, so why didn’t they drag off this frail, odd behaving man? For his own protection, and for the protesters’ credibility? Why didn’t his photographer friend remove him?

 

[commenter]

leg irons aren’t used on a paraplegic, except maybe they are in Buffalo.

I’ve read countless posts by you. Some I agreed with, some disagree with, but generally well thought out.

The above post?

 

[goout]

Just like the Covington teens, there is more to this story than the 3 second media clip that is used to inflame people.

Should we be surprised? Well rounded and complete reporting doesn’t contribute to clear heads and chaos, so…give em the inflammatory. We need some chaos to get people angrier than they already (and justifiably) are.

 

[pnewton]

You can say it to your pal all you want -

My pal? Didn’t you just complain about an ad hominem. As to whether the force was justified, I would say hospitalization and brain damage would argue against that. I would say those best in a position to analyze the performance of their officers suspending them and charging them with assault would argue against your opinion. Also, I would rely on my own experience in using force to say that it was excessive.

 

[VonDerTann]

You can’t gauge the reasonableness of an action because of what results.

 

[Nepperhan]

For that matter, he never did answer them, because he manifestly couldn’t . How can a police officer “chill out” when attacked by bullets or gasoline bombs? They can’t. His answers stopped, and he began accusing me of facetiousness, because I probed him in a direction that was exposing his statements as unhelpful.

For what it’s worth, any lawyers in the peanut gallery saw exactly what I was doing: Employing a law school questioning tactic called the “socratic method” of asking questions as a means of making a point: Which I did, namely, no one can “chill out” in the face of such conduct.

Finally he admitted that police can in fact shoot rioters under some circumstances - which is most assuredly not “chilling out.”

You flatter yourself. Socratic dialogue is a teaching method, not for debates. Then you claim you were asking your questions in all seriousness? You contradict your own self.

Time to move one.

 

[commenter]

those best in a position to analyze the performance of their officers suspending them and charging them with assault would argue against your opinion.

The video was shown to authorities.
No charges.
Gugino called agitator by mayor.
Later…

Video Aired on cnn.
Now charges.
Gugino promoted to Catholic Peace activist.

 

[pnewton]

The video was shown to authorities.
No charges.

So you are saying that charges that take a few days to issue are somehow what, not valid? That is a rather interesting assumption since charges issued other than on sight require probable cause to be presented to a magistrate and approved.

He was a Catholic volunteer and had been for years.

 

[Shakuhachi]

I think mainly this just demonstrated how easily Trump gets distracted from he real job. Doesn’t he have better things to do?

 

[Randolph]

Let us look at the Catechism:

The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” “We must obey God rather than men”:

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the law of the gospel. (2242)

The Catechism does not endorse anarchy. Gugino is a well known and long time agitator. He is a white man who knows nothing about experiencing racism as George Floyd and other blacks and minorities have. It was Gugino who approached the police and provoked the confrontation.

The family and loved ones of George Floyd have pleaded the public for peaceful protests. Gugino’s act of provocation is certainly not that. It seemed that Gugino wanted to insert himself into the headlines.

Whenever the catechism speaks of conscience, it refers to informed conscience—not any form of conscience. The mis-use of the Catechism to basically allow for any destructive actions is wrong.

 

[StudentMI]

The Catechism does not endorse anarchy.

At this point I’m not surprised to see the Catechism used to justify everything under the sun.

 

[pnewton]

The Catechism does not endorse anarchy.

No, but then that is not what I quoted or what I responded to. Civil disobedience has at its core a respect for justice and the right of society to enforce justice.

There has been a lot of violence and a lot of corresponding arrests, as is appropriate for violence. This man did not commit an act of violence. He threw nothing, he never drew his hand back to strike. I do not think it is clear he even touched the officers, though if he did, it was not enough of a touch to be clearly touched. That is not anarchy.

Is Gugino well known to you, or are you repeating what others have said?

Yes, he approached the officers, and yes he initiated the confrontation. Arresting him would have been one possible action, or going around him, or escorting him forward. One principle of civil disobedience is that one must be prepared to be arrested in defense of one’s principles, if that is what happens.

At this point I’m not surprised to see the Catechism

Please do not despise Catholic teaching, even if you do not agree. In this instance, we must not forget what history has taught us about the danger of following orders to the point of violence.

 

[StudentMI]

Please do not despise Catholic teaching, even if you do not agree. In this instance, we must not forget what history has taught us about the danger of following orders to the point of violence

You cut off the rest of my post which was kind of the central point. I do not despise Catholic teaching. I am tired of seeing it misused.

 

[pnewton]

Okay. May I ask how it is misused here?

 

[Randolph]

Is Gugino well known to you, or are you repeating what others have said?

Neither is he to you. You are also going by what has been reported…Mind you that Gugino has a long history of hating the police . He once posted “F*ck the police” on his social media. Looking at his long history of provocative behaviors, anti-police and anti-government comments, you may not want to defend Gugino. He is no innocent old white man…

What business does Gugino have approaching and provoking the police?? Gugino’s provocation is not what peaceful protest is about—which the Church supports and which most of the protests have been about in the past 2 weeks. Most fair minded Americans would agree that most policemen are doing their jobs of serving and protecting people. People protest against the rotten small percentage of policemen who abuse their authority and hurt and kill innocent people.

Yes, reform the police and root out and punish the rotten ones. Fair minded people want fair and just police system. But don’t use the catechism to provide cover for provocative acts against the police while they are doing their jobs of maintaining laws and orders. Anarchy is not a part of the Catechism. It’s just wrong.