Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As expected, riot v2.0

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    Something else other than an illegal chokehold, I'm sure.

    In any case why should the officers have needed to get him on the ground? I wasn't aware that he got physical or in any way endangered FOUR officers surrounding him.
    so you aren't going to comment on what you think the officers should have done different to get a 6-4 or so 350 lb man on the ground?

    as to why they needed to get him on the ground?

    to put him in handcuffs.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by bfng3569 View Post
      so you aren't going to comment on what you think the officers should have done different to get a 6-4 or so 350 lb man on the ground?

      as to why they needed to get him on the ground?

      to put him in handcuffs.


      Let's not put the cart before the horse and watch the actual video of this happening. There were plenty of actions the officers could have taken before resorting to slamming his face into the ground and putting him in a chokehold.

      Officers had substantial numerical superiority, a few could have gone for both arms (and appeared to be in the process of doing so) and pulled him to the ground with enough force. Multiple takedowns in the police toolbox (armbars, wristlocks, hammerlocks etc.) focus on the arms and legs to catch a perp off balance without the need to go into a chokehold. See the following:



      Also why the decision to maintain the chokehold when he started yelling out "I can't breathe?" If at that point he was no longer resisting and declaring injury why not disengage the chokehold in in favor of applying pressure on an arm or back?

      Of all people police should not only know how to apply force appropriately, but also de-escalate and bring a situation under control to prevent further injury. Clearly, they failed in both regards.
      "Draft beer, not people."

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Red Team View Post


        Let's not put the cart before the horse and watch the actual video of this happening. There were plenty of actions the officers could have taken before resorting to slamming his face into the ground and putting him in a chokehold.

        Officers had substantial numerical superiority, a few could have gone for both arms (and appeared to be in the process of doing so) and pulled him to the ground with enough force. Multiple takedowns in the police toolbox (armbars, wristlocks, hammerlocks etc.) focus on the arms and legs to catch a perp off balance without the need to go into a chokehold. See the following:



        Also why the decision to maintain the chokehold when he started yelling out "I can't breathe?" If at that point he was no longer resisting and declaring injury why not disengage the chokehold in in favor of applying pressure on an arm or back?

        Of all people police should not only know how to apply force appropriately, but also de-escalate and bring a situation under control to prevent further injury. Clearly, they failed in both regards.
        i'm not putting the cart before the horse at all here, its a legit question.

        i have no training or knowledge of such training so no, i really don't know what the options are in these scenarios.

        i do know a few people in law enforcement, and i have heard the same from them, that when it comes to resisting arrest, more likely than not, they are going to take you to the ground, control you, and get you in cuffs.

        and this could very well be a poor example, but after watching 'Cops' a few times, it seems that most cases were someone is resisting, they get taken to the ground and controlled, and usually its a violent event.

        and lots of times you see the guy going down complaining of being hurt, choked, breaking something etc etc etc and they typically don't stop and let up until they have the person in the cuffs.

        the training aspects and the options that are available i think are a legit topic on this.
        Last edited by bfng3569; 07 Dec 14,, 02:44.

        Comment


        • #94
          What I think is interesting is that Eric is complaining that every time the cops see him they arrest him. I guess it never occurred to him that if he stopped being a criminal the cops would leave him alone. As for the takedown I see nothing wrong with it. If anything that was far more gentle than the ones I have seen first hand. Honestly, Eric was clearly agitated and gave every indication he would put up a fight.
          Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

          Comment


          • #95
            Selling loose cigarettes that already had their tax stamp paid should not be a criminal offense. Just because someone is breaking the law, it does not mean they are a criminal. Everyone in the US breaks some law everyday, we simply have too many laws to honestly say we are law abiding.

            Comment


            • #96
              Really, the main reason I and many other New Yorkers are pissed at this is simply the fact that the punishment did not fit the crime. The application of force by the NYPD in this case was both excessive and illegal, and the fact that this officer got away with what amounts to negligent homicide without even a slap on the wrist is egregious. There's absolutely no reasonable justification for Mr. Garner to be dead right. Being fined or in jail perhaps, but not dead.
              "Draft beer, not people."

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Red Team View Post
                Really, the main reason I and many other New Yorkers are pissed at this is simply the fact that the punishment did not fit the crime. The application of force by the NYPD in this case was both excessive and illegal, and the fact that this officer got away with what amounts to negligent homicide without even a slap on the wrist is egregious. There's absolutely no reasonable justification for Mr. Garner to be dead right. Being fined or in jail perhaps, but not dead.
                so when he said 'no, i am not going to let you arrest me right now', should the police have just said 'ok' and walked away?

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by bfng3569 View Post
                  so when he said 'no, i am not going to let you arrest me right now', should the police have just said 'ok' and walked away?
                  No, I'm saying trained officers should know better in the application of force than what was shown in this case.
                  "Draft beer, not people."

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Red Team View Post
                    No, I'm saying trained officers should know better in the application of force than what was shown in this case.
                    watching the video, i am not so sure i agree.

                    the other vids posted, ya, they all look good on practice, but i am not so sure about how they would have worked in that situation with that individual.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                      Selling loose cigarettes that already had their tax stamp paid should not be a criminal offense. Just because someone is breaking the law, it does not mean they are a criminal. Everyone in the US breaks some law everyday, we simply have too many laws to honestly say we are law abiding.
                      That is the definition of a criminal. He did break the law and he was knowingly doing it. Furthermore he had a history of doing it and getting arrested for doing exactly the same thing. Not agreeing with the law is irrelevant.
                      Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X