Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

mike brown vs. eric garner

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by ftp View Post
    All of this over the man selling a loose ciggarette, it's sad what has happened to this country.
    Keep in mind, he was selling loose cigarettes while being black. That's a crime upgrade.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Sean88gt View Post
      Keep in mind, he was selling loose cigarettes while being black. That's a crime upgrade.
      Well in that case they should of tased him from a drone and the ground units run him over with the MRAP.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by ftp View Post
        All of this over the man selling a loose ciggarette, it's sad what has happened to this country.
        It's also sad that he'd already been arrested 30+ times and resisted previously as well. Career criminals should be in jail, not on the street peddling cigarettes.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Sean88gt View Post
          Keep in mind, he was selling loose cigarettes while being black. That's a crime upgrade.
          F1, for sure.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by dcs13 View Post
            Yeah, don't let facts get in the way. When facts don't work on the side of your argument, start calling names and foul... That's one of the problems with some of you guys. Can't have an adult conversation with actual opinions.
            Tell me again why he needed to be arrested in the first place. I still don't see it.
            ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by YALE View Post
              Tell me again why he needed to be arrested in the first place. I still don't see it.
              Selling loosies is serious coin. I saw a Ferrari in the cops rayban reflections who had him in a chokehold, it must have been Garners sick ass whip from flipping cigs 24/7. I think this case is all about civil asset forfeiture, they wanted that rari.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by YALE View Post
                Tell me again why he needed to be arrested in the first place. I still don't see it.
                Just because you disagree with a law doesn't mean it shouldn't be upheld. I think the speed limit on the tollway should be 85, but that doesn't mean I can go that without risk of a ticket...

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by juiceweezl View Post
                  Just because you disagree with a law doesn't mean it shouldn't be upheld. I think the speed limit on the tollway should be 85, but that doesn't mean I can go that without risk of a ticket...
                  But you can certainly go 85 on the tollway without risk of being arrested, bullied by several aggressive cops, choked, thrown to the ground, killed, etc. Well, at least in theory.
                  Last edited by jluv; 12-04-2014, 10:34 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by juiceweezl View Post
                    Just because you disagree with a law doesn't mean it shouldn't be upheld. I think the speed limit on the tollway should be 85, but that doesn't mean I can go that without risk of a ticket...
                    It's all about prioritizing. 85 on tollway could kill someone, selling loose ciggarettes not so much. Oh wait...

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by YALE View Post
                      Tell me again why he needed to be arrested in the first place. I still don't see it.
                      I agree there. I think that's not a crime they need to be dealing with. However it is a crime and they chose to arrest him. Garner decided not to cooperate.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by juiceweezl View Post
                        Just because you disagree with a law doesn't mean it shouldn't be upheld. I think the speed limit on the tollway should be 85, but that doesn't mean I can go that without risk of a ticket...
                        Where does officer discretion come into play?
                        ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Sean88gt View Post
                          Don't spout terms if you don't know what they mean.
                          "...
                          Here is what NY has a Negligence. We're talking Criminal here, not civil. They going to lose a civil case. But for a grand jury to file charges they have to say he at least was negligent. You tell me where it fits under here:
                          Criminal negligence." A person acts with criminal negligence with
                          respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining
                          an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable
                          risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. The
                          risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to perceive it
                          constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a
                          reasonable person would observe in the situation.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by dcs13 View Post
                            Here is what NY has a Negligence. We're talking Criminal here, not civil. They going to lose a civil case. But for a grand jury to file charges they have to say he at least was negligent. You tell me where it fits under here:
                            Criminal negligence." A person acts with criminal negligence with
                            respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining
                            an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable
                            risk that such result will occur or that such circumstance exists. The
                            risk must be of such nature and degree that the failure to perceive it
                            constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a
                            reasonable person would observe in the situation.
                            It came into play with Mr. Garner gasping and saying that he couldn't breathe... repeatedly. The hold could have loosened once he was on the ground and other officers on scene.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by jluv View Post
                              But you can certainly go 85 on the tollway without risk of being arrested, bullied by several aggressive cops, choked, thrown to the ground, killed, etc. Well, at least in theory.
                              100%

                              god bless.
                              It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men -Frederick Douglass

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Denny View Post
                                It came into play with Mr. Garner gasping and saying that he couldn't breathe... repeatedly. The hold could have loosened once he was on the ground and other officers on scene.
                                At the second he said he can't breathe is the same exact time the officers arm was removed and he put both hands on Garners head.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X