Alternate Ending to The Eric Garner Situation

Ramone45

Literotica Guru
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Posts
5,745
The video snapshot of the encounter was disturbing, but it was just a snapshot. Even his wife knew he was a lazy, shiftless, waste of space. No one would want him to be a part of their community. He was not a good person. Did he deserve to die? Of course not. Should he have been in jail? Absolutely. He had a long history as a petty criminal and was well known to police. He was also a heart attack waiting to happen. So, from a police perspective, how do you get this guy off the street. He was a criminal, so we all agree that the police had a legitimate reason to interact with him. There is no question about that. I think the incident we all witnessed was the culmination of a long line of offenses on the part of Mr. Garner, and the police finally had enough of his bullshit. They probably used a great deal of discretion with him over a long period of time, but that is not documented for us to see. They could have given him a ticket, but since Mr. Garner was a sociopath, he probably would have ignored it. So, at some point, the police would have to apprehend Mr. Garner. What options are available to the police to effect an arrest. Mr. Garner was not going to cooperate. We saw that on the video. I think the outcome was going to be bad no matter what because of mr. Garner's poor health. Tazer? Pepper spray? Same result. These lily-white suburban high school girls basketball teams running around with their "I can't Breathe" T-shirts? Let's bring lots of low lifes like Mr. Garner into their communities and see if they feel the same way.
 
The cops used an improper hold. Blaming the victim here is just as bad as those that canonize the aggressor in Brown vs Wilson.
 
The cops used an improper hold. Blaming the victim here is just as bad as those that canonize the aggressor in Brown vs Wilson.
I'm not as sure as you are that it was an improper hold. It is hard to imagine an experienced cop surrounded by many other experienced cops (whom all have a lot to lose) would use a banned technique. Mr. Garner was speaking, so by definition, he was getting air. But, what level of force is acceptable to apprehend a person who does not want to be placed into custody? My position is that practically ANY level of force might have had bad consequences for Mr. Garner due to his compromised health. Pepper spray? Tazer?
 
I'm not as sure as you are that it was an improper hold. It is hard to imagine an experienced cop surrounded by many other experienced cops (whom all have a lot to lose) would use a banned technique. Mr. Garner was speaking, so by definition, he was getting air. But, what level of force is acceptable to apprehend a person who does not want to be placed into custody? My position is that practically ANY level of force might have had bad consequences for Mr. Garner due to his compromised health. Pepper spray? Tazer?

it's not as if he was going to run very far, he was a big guy that got winded fast bro!

Stew
 
“It is hard to imagine an experienced cop surrounded by many other experienced cops (whom all have a lot to lose) would use a banned technique.”

With all due respect, try emerging from your cocoon.
 
I'm not as sure as you are that it was an improper hold. It is hard to imagine an experienced cop surrounded by many other experienced cops (whom all have a lot to lose) would use a banned technique. Mr. Garner was speaking, so by definition, he was getting air. But, what level of force is acceptable to apprehend a person who does not want to be placed into custody? My position is that practically ANY level of force might have had bad consequences for Mr. Garner due to his compromised health. Pepper spray? Tazer?

It doesn't matter in the least whether you or anyone else here is certain or uncertain as to whether appropriate or inappropriate force was applied to Mr. Garner. The commanding officers within the NYPD are fully capable of viewing the video tape (which we have all seen) and making an informed judgment based on department policy.

The use of prohibited restraint techniques are in no way mitigated by your unfounded speculation as to what other legal applications of force Mr. Garner may have succumbed to.
 
It doesn't matter in the least whether you or anyone else here is certain or uncertain as to whether appropriate or inappropriate force was applied to Mr. Garner. The commanding officers within the NYPD are fully capable of viewing the video tape (which we have all seen) and making an informed judgment based on department policy.

The use of prohibited restraint techniques are in no way mitigated by your unfounded speculation as to what other legal applications of force Mr. Garner may have succumbed to.


Clearly the protesters don't hold said commanding officers in as high a regard as you do.
 
The cops used an improper hold. Blaming the victim here is just as bad as those that canonize the aggressor in Brown vs Wilson.

Actually they didn't use an improper hold. And your response begs the question about what to do when people resist arrest. Cops don't make law, pols make law.

I participated in a 1000 take downs, and it looked good to me. When people resist arrest put them on the ground, ass up, face down, so you can restrain them and fill their ass with sleepy juice. And you don't send 100 pound girls to do it.

Sometimes takedowns are funny. One time a piece of shit barricaded himself inside an exam room. So several of us big guys put our shoulders against the door and pushed it and all the furniture back enough to get in the room. Then we piled on the patient. And when he was face down on the floor two of our nurses removed his wooden legs. Fuck you asshole, lets see you kick ass with no legs.
 
John 8:3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
 
It doesn't matter in the least whether you or anyone else here is certain or uncertain as to whether appropriate or inappropriate force was applied to Mr. Garner. The commanding officers within the NYPD are fully capable of viewing the video tape (which we have all seen) and making an informed judgment based on department policy.

The use of prohibited restraint techniques are in no way mitigated by your unfounded speculation as to what other legal applications of force Mr. Garner may have succumbed to.
I don't think there is any doubt that Mr. Garner was refusing the lawful
request of an officer. We agree that the officer had to do something. You are right, we don't know what would have happened if some other technique was used. I tend to think the cops made a good take down in perhaps the mildest way possible, and the guy still died. I don't think it was a choke hold.
 
perception.

this is not about a choke hold or proper technique, this is about perception. I am sure things like this is happening in every community but what do we see on the news you see young black American's dying in the streets, so what is the perception on minorities commit crimes? well we all know better than that. I am sure young white men are injured and or shot also but that's not what we see on the news. just saying people react to what they see...
 
In the Garner case, it was bad police work that caused his death. They are all lucky they didn't go through the store window. There was no need to jump on his back to apply a choke hold. He resisted arrest and all they had to do was cuff him. They didn't need to take him to the ground but they could have done so by taking out his legs from behind.

Bad police work.....and don't get me started on the 12 year old who was killed for playing with a toy gun at daytime in a public park or the poor sonofabitch who made the mistake of being black and walking around Walmart with a BB gun.
 
In the Garner case, it was bad police work that caused his death. They are all lucky they didn't go through the store window. There was no need to jump on his back to apply a choke hold. He resisted arrest and all they had to do was cuff him. They didn't need to take him to the ground but they could have done so by taking out his legs from behind.

Bad police work.....and don't get me started on the 12 year old who was killed for playing with a toy gun at daytime in a public park or the poor sonofabitch who made the mistake of being black and walking around Walmart with a BB gun.

Naaah, Bleeding Heart.

Cops aren't trained for half measures and 2nd guessing. When you resist arrest you go down in one form or another. What you advocate is game playing. You don't know if the silly mother fucker has a gun or a blade or what. Idiot cops usta bring mother fuckers to the hospital who had guns and knives and swords and hand grenades and razors...cuz Officer Friendly was a fool.
 
Back
Top