Black Lives Matter Rally goes as expected
-
Swinging his arms? You mean, gesturing?
-
The video is quite clear. Seems he broke up a fight; the police decided to focus on him rather than the people fighting; he protests, saying he did nothing wrong; more discourse to that effect; choke hold; "I can't breathe"; dead.
He didn't try to run away, he didn't hit out at anyone, he's just standing trying to ask why they were arresting him, and apparently not getting an answer.
I'm sure he should have complied and gone 'downtown' for questioning, but does not immediately complying warrant deadly force?
He was acting aggressively by swinging his arms, and the fact that he is huge I'm sure had something to do with it.
He was acting aggressively by swinging his arms, and the fact that he is huge I'm sure had something to do with it.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
-
He was acting aggressively by swinging his arms, and the fact that he is huge I'm sure had something to do with it.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
So, what I said, without the insults?
-
bottom line in this blt case is that the police have an undeniable responsibility to find out and disclose why someone died in their custody. Period, end of discussion stop the blithering. If it had come out that in the process of tackling him some kind of freak accident happened, FINE SAY SO!!! This almost nonchalant attitude when someone died in their custody is why these people are rioting. It's like they're saying we dunno what happened, we'll eventually get to it but we got a lot of donuts and coffee to eat so...you know...c'mon cut us a break that's a lot of work.
-
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
So, what I said, without the insults?
So, what I said, without the insults?
Yes...sorry I cant help it at this point. The willfull ignorance and stupidity is stunning.
-
bottom line in this blt case is that the police have an undeniable responsibility to find out and disclose why someone died in their custody. Period, end of discussion stop the blithering. If it had come out that in the process of tackling him some kind of freak accident happened, FINE SAY SO!!! This almost nonchalant attitude when someone died in their custody is why these people are rioting. It's like they're saying we dunno what happened, we'll eventually get to it but we got a lot of donuts and coffee to eat so...you know...c'mon cut us a break that's a lot of work.
He was put in a choke hold which I can understand them using since he was resisting.
bottom line in this blt case is that the police have an undeniable responsibility to find out and disclose why someone died in their custody. Period, end of discussion stop the blithering. If it had come out that in the process of tackling him some kind of freak accident happened, FINE SAY SO!!! This almost nonchalant attitude when someone died in their custody is why these people are rioting. It's like they're saying we dunno what happened, we'll eventually get to it but we got a lot of donuts and coffee to eat so...you know...c'mon cut us a break that's a lot of work.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
Swinging his arms? You mean, gesturing?
Whats gesturing to you might have been threatening to the officer.
"You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970. -
Yes...sorry I cant help it at this point. The willfull ignorance and stupidity is stunning.
Yet somehow you can look yourself in the mirror day after day......
-
He was put in a choke hold which I can understand them using since he was resisting.
bottom line in this blt case is that the police have an undeniable responsibility to find out and disclose why someone died in their custody. Period, end of discussion stop the blithering. If it had come out that in the process of tackling him some kind of freak accident happened, FINE SAY SO!!! This almost nonchalant attitude when someone died in their custody is why these people are rioting. It's like they're saying we dunno what happened, we'll eventually get to it but we got a lot of donuts and coffee to eat so...you know...c'mon cut us a break that's a lot of work.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
Swinging his arms? You mean, gesturing?
Whats gesturing to you might have been threatening to the officer.
He was put in a choke hold which I can understand them using since he was resisting.
except he wasn't resisting, the video shows that undeniably. You're just fantasizing now. Literally weaving your own reality.
-
Yes...sorry I cant help it at this point. The willfull ignorance and stupidity is stunning.
To what end though?
-
He was put in a choke hold which I can understand them using since he was resisting.
bottom line in this blt case is that the police have an undeniable responsibility to find out and disclose why someone died in their custody. Period, end of discussion stop the blithering. If it had come out that in the process of tackling him some kind of freak accident happened, FINE SAY SO!!! This almost nonchalant attitude when someone died in their custody is why these people are rioting. It's like they're saying we dunno what happened, we'll eventually get to it but we got a lot of donuts and coffee to eat so...you know...c'mon cut us a break that's a lot of work.
He wasn't swinging his arms you muppet. Gesturing is not swinging idiot.
Swinging his arms? You mean, gesturing?
Whats gesturing to you might have been threatening to the officer.
He was put in a choke hold which I can understand them using since he was resisting.
Whats gesturing to you might have been threatening to the officer.
Do you really think he was trying to be intimidating? And even so, is the only way to proceed to kill him? Let's dial that back a notch, I'm guessing (hoping) the cop didn't mean to kill him. Is the only way to proceed a physical way? Imagine the frustration of the guy, who is being arrested for basically breaking up a fight. Not an angel, sure, but in this instance he's done nothing wrong. He's trying to protest his innocence with the police, and is trying to remain calm. When the guy blind-chokes him from behind, he doesn't even try to fight it off, holding his hands out to show surrender.
Is this the best course of action for the police to take?
-
The intent was not to kill him. You keep pretending it was.
WSS
-
"Let's dial that back a notch, I'm guessing (hoping) the cop didn't mean to kill him" - me, one post back
"The intent was not to kill him. You keep pretending it was." - you, just now.
-
The intent was not to kill him. You keep pretending it was.
WSS
The intent was not to kill him. You keep pretending it was.
WSS
No but it was gross negligence. And the cop tried to hide his pry arm behind Garners back, something I know because I've taken BJJ. The choke is not supposed to be done that way. So why was he trying to hide the fact he was pulling on the lever arm? Cause he's a huge cocksucker that literally deserves to be beaten near an inch of his life. That choke "should" be available to cops when they need it, not when they're 7 on 1. Any one of you drunk potato queens would suffer severely if 6 cops were sitting on you and on was prying his forearm across your adams apple. I'm guessing none of you have ever trained in any kind of grappling otherwise you would have caught on to what the guy tried to do. It's a brutal choke that can take out even the fittest man in moments once it's buried deep. Which is why you see MMA guys tap out quick from a rear naked if they didn't get their chins down in time.
-
Clev, we're on the same page, but the insults are getting tiring. I know there's a lot of bad stuff going on around here with people viewing the events the way it's been fed to them by the media and whatever else, but take a moment to find your inner calm. Resorting to insults - as I said to Stuart - is petty and immature, and gives the impression you can't win an argument by using facts.
-
Clev, we're on the same page, but the insults are getting tiring. I know there's a lot of bad stuff going on around here with people viewing the events the way it's been fed to them by the media and whatever else, but take a moment to find your inner calm. Resorting to insults - as I said to Stuart - is petty and immature, and gives the impression you can't win an argument by using facts.
Clev, we're on the same page, but the insults are getting tiring. I know there's a lot of bad stuff going on around here with people viewing the events the way it's been fed to them by the media and whatever else, but take a moment to find your inner calm. Resorting to insults - as I said to Stuart - is petty and immature, and gives the impression you can't win an argument by using facts.
You're right.
-
The intent was not to kill him. You keep pretending it was.
WSS
No but it was gross negligence. And the cop tried to hide his pry arm behind Garners back, something I know because I've taken BJJ. The choke is not supposed to be done that way. So why was he trying to hide the fact he was pulling on the lever arm? Cause he's a huge cocksucker that literally deserves to be beaten near an inch of his life. That choke "should" be available to cops when they need it, not when they're 7 on 1. Any one of you drunk potato queens would suffer severely if 6 cops were sitting on you and on was prying his forearm across your adams apple. I'm guessing none of you have ever trained in any kind of grappling otherwise you would have caught on to what the guy tried to do. It's a brutal choke that can take out even the fittest man in moments once it's buried deep. Which is why you see MMA guys tap out quick from a rear naked if they didn't get their chins down in time.
No but it was gross negligence. And the cop tried to hide his pry arm behind Garners back, something I know because I've taken BJJ. The choke is not supposed to be done that way. So why was he trying to hide the fact he was pulling on the lever arm? Cause he's a huge cocksucker that literally deserves to be beaten near an inch of his life. That choke "should" be available to cops when they need it, not when they're 7 on 1. Any one of you drunk potato queens would suffer severely if 6 cops were sitting on you and on was prying his forearm across your adams apple. I'm guessing none of you have ever trained in any kind of grappling otherwise you would have caught on to what the guy tried to do. It's a brutal choke that can take out even the fittest man in moments once it's buried deep. Which is why you see MMA guys tap out quick from a rear naked if they didn't get their chins down in time.
You need to ask your ward nurse for more computer time, or is it time for meds yet?
-
No but it was gross negligence. And the cop tried to hide his pry arm behind Garners back, something I know because I've taken BJJ. The choke is not supposed to be done that way. So why was he trying to hide the fact he was pulling on the lever arm? Cause he's a huge cocksucker that literally deserves to be beaten near an inch of his life. That choke "should" be available to cops when they need it, not when they're 7 on 1. Any one of you drunk potato queens would suffer severely if 6 cops were sitting on you and on was prying his forearm across your adams apple. I'm guessing none of you have ever trained in any kind of grappling otherwise you would have caught on to what the guy tried to do. It's a brutal choke that can take out even the fittest man in moments once it's buried deep. Which is why you see MMA guys tap out quick from a rear naked if they didn't get their chins down in time.
You need to ask your ward nurse for more computer time, or is it time for meds yet?
You need to ask your ward nurse for more computer time, or is it time for meds yet?
ok, have fun sitting on your couch and drinking tonight.
-
Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny,” writes Newsmax’s Jim Meyers, taking his information from the WSJ report.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1659026/eric-garner-criminal-past-emerges-30-arrests-in-34-years-including-assault/#02xJsroXrg1d5E3T.99garner your defending was a career criminal lol
-
Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny,” writes Newsmax’s Jim Meyers, taking his information from the WSJ report.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1659026/eric-garner-criminal-past-emerges-30-arrests-in-34-years-including-assault/#02xJsroXrg1d5E3T.99garner your defending was a career criminal lol
Garner, 43, had history of more than 30 arrests dating back to 1980, on charges including assault and grand larceny,” writes Newsmax’s Jim Meyers, taking his information from the WSJ report.
garner your defending was a career criminal lol
For the last two decades his arrest, if I recall correctly, were"all" for the cigarettes. Again his arrest record does not matter. What matters is what happened that day. The cops were NOT CALLED to the scene for anything Garner did. In fact he was the good guy that day. And HE WAS NOT seen selling cigarettes that day either. And what happened on the video, and the after video which none of you seem to care to watch....speaks for itself.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login