Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

[Heathen Hammer]

So now it is confirmed that he had a knife in his car and was, well, reaching to his car while resisting arrest. Surely a good enough reason for BLM and antifa to start another wave of violent deadly race riots over a a felon committing suicide-by-cop.

[Muizer]

So now it is confirmed that he had a knife in his car and was, well, reaching to his car while resisting arrest. Surely a good enough reason for BLM and antifa to start another wave of violent deadly race riots over a a felon committing suicide-by-cop.

You know, I was wondering if some people might take that line of thinking. You didn't disappoint.

Indeed, why take a couple of steps backwards if you can also ensure your safety by firing 7 bullets into someone's back at point blank range! I wish we had more cops like that here. I would feel soooo much safer!

[Heathen Hammer]

You know, I was wondering if some people might take that line of thinking. You didn't disappoint.

Indeed, why take a couple of steps backwards if you can also ensure your safety by firing 7 bullets into someone's back at point blank range! I wish we had more cops like that here. I would feel soooo much safer!

Indeed, cops using force against a felon violently resisting arrest is good enough reason to burn and loot more property that belongs to black business owners.
Also taking steps back in such situations doesn't really work. Cops get stabbed on duty all the time.

[Love Mountain]

Discarding your view that Floyd wasn't resisting arrest necessitates accepting the view that he was. I suggest you find some expert testimony (but only if it conforms to your preexisting biases).

I suggest you do that yourself, since it is you, and others, who alleges he resisted arrest.

The reverse of what you claim is almost certainly much closer to the truth: Floyd's death was likely caused by cardiopulmonary arrest, stemming from arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease combined with methamphetamine and fentanyl abuse "in the setting of" police subdual. Newer evidence indicates that the examining doctor believed Floyd had died from a fentanyl overdose.

That's not newer evidence, this is evidence that's already been linked in this thread, myself included. Nor did the doctor say he died from fentanyl overdose. And as the documents and the commentary surrounding them, repeatedly state, "His death was caused by the police subdual and restraint in the setting of severe hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and methamphetamine and fentanyl intoxication." This is especially damning considering that, "Under MPD policies in effect at the time of Floyd’s death, the most extreme uses of force—Maximal Restraint Technique (MRT), Neck Restraints, and Deadly Force—are reserved for the most extreme situations."

This makes sense, as police departments around the country routinely deal with the homeless, the poor, and recreational drug users. Good judgement is required for police officers to avoid killing people who are on the lower-end of the socio-economic scale and have poor health conditions. Keep defending Chauvin and his posse though, really reveals who you are.

Accuracy only ever matters up until the point you make a false claim. Then it can be dismissed as "semantics" or "optics". Had Floyd actually been choked, the physical evidence of trauma would add significant weight to the theory that excessive police force had been used during the arrest. Which is exactly what you want us to believe.

It's a good thing that no false claim was made, and that your entire argument up to this point, has been concerned with "semantics" or "optics". As the medical report clearly demonstrates, the force and techniques employed by Chauvin materially contributed to Floyd's death. Which, yes, I would like for people to believe. Truth matters, and so do the deaths of other high-profile Black victims at the hands of police brutality, and a culture of negligence that can be accurately described as racism.

A point plainly disproven by your insistence on exaggerating it in the first place.

Yeah, I really exaggerated Chauvin's knee ending a man's life, but don't let me stop you from making another comment about the irrelevant, rather than the substance of the matter.

[Sir Adrian]

Bruh, I showed you a clip on youtube which clearly showed him resisting being put in the police car, him trying to get away from cops restraints and generally struggling against the cops.

[Cope]

It's a good thing that no false claim was made, and that your entire argument up to this point, has been concerned with "semantics" or "optics". As the medical report clearly demonstrates, the force and techniques employed by Chauvin materially contributed to Floyd's death. Which, yes, I would like for people to believe. Truth matters, and so do the deaths of other high-profile Black victims at the hands of police brutality, and a culture of negligence that can be accurately described as racism.
Yeah, I really exaggerated Chauvin's knee ending a man's life, but don't let me stop you from making another comment about the irrelevant, rather than the substance of the matter.

Yet you have made false claims about the cause of Floyd's death (and lied about it); you have made false claims about the neck restraint; you have made false claims about the nature of Floyd's arrest; you have made false claims about the incident being motivated by racial malice (no evidence of this has ever been found); you have made false claims about my intentions; and you have made false claims about my view of Chauvin's culpability (which you would know if you bothered to read the thread).

So as before, I have no interest in engaging further with your contrarian, consciously provocative drivel.

[Muizer]

Also taking steps back in such situations doesn't really work. Cops get stabbed on duty all the time.

No man, this is stretching a claim to self defense so far it becomes ludicrous. That officer has either mentally de-humanised his target, or simply didn't have his nerves under control and panicked at the slightest hint of danger, or both. Only in a sick society would people think that's acceptable for a police officer.

[Sir Adrian]

Honestly I think it's the latter. Police training is ridiculously short in the US and definitely not enough to teach leadership and cool under pressure.

[Aexodus]

You know, I was wondering if some people might take that line of thinking. You didn't disappoint.

Indeed, why take a couple of steps backwards if you can also ensure your safety by firing 7 bullets into someone's back at point blank range! I wish we had more cops like that here. I would feel soooo much safer!

Would you resist arrest and reach for a lethal weapon?

Are you seriously suggesting the police officer should step back from a suspect posing a threat to said officer? To wait for himself to be attacked? Please.

The policeman had his hand on the man’s shoulder, he was right on top of him. How was he supposed to make a distance between himself and the man, and why should law enforcement back down in the face of an imminent threat? Sure, sometimes they need to wait for backup etc, but this wasn’t one of those situations.

[Heathen Hammer]

No man, this is stretching a claim to self defense so far it becomes ludicrous. That officer has either mentally de-humanised his target, or simply didn't have his nerves under control and panicked at the slightest hint of danger, or both. Only in a sick society would people think that's acceptable for a police officer.

Both of your version are poor attempts at divination.
The guy was resisting arrest, had history of violence and was reaching for his car. There was a knife here, for all cops knew it could have been a gun - in an area where they are surrounded by other citizens who could have been harmed.
Don't get me wrong - I do think government has too much authority in US (cops getting away with unprofessional behavior and even murder and enforcement of unconstitutional "red flag" laws), but there are better hills to take on this issue then taking side of an irrational felon that was resisting arrest.

[Vanoi]

Resisting arrest isn't a death sentence. Reasonable force must be applied that also doesn't endanger the lives of others.

[Heathen Hammer]

Resisting arrest isn't a death sentence. Reasonable force must be applied that also doesn't endanger the lives of others.

If you convince cops that you are reaching for a weapon, they are liable to shoot you. Like I said, there are plenty of more valid cases of police use unjustified use of lethal force, and the only thing this virtue signalling is doing is discrediting the reasonable calls for reforming some aspects of policing in US.

[Pontifex Maximus]

So it turns out St. Floyd died of a self inflicted drug overdose and the left is unrepentant of their flagrant lies. Hands up please, for anyone surprpised?

[Vanoi]

If you convince cops that you are reaching for a weapon, they are liable to shoot you.

Still requires reasonable use of force.

[Cope]

Resisting arrest isn't a death sentence. Reasonable force must be applied that also doesn't endanger the lives of others.

The use of deadly force is justified "as a last resort in the defense of oneself, when there is reasonable cause to believe that the officer is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm". There is no legal theory (of which I have heard) which would prevent an officer from using deadly force if the aforementioned conditions were met; under such circumstances, any risk posed to others by the defending party's use of force would cease to be unreasonable.

[Vanoi]

The use of deadly force is justified "as a last resort in the defense of oneself, when there is reasonable cause to believe that the officer is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm". There is no legal theory (of which I have heard) which would prevent an officer from using deadly force if the aforementioned conditions were met; under such circumstances, any risk posed to others by the defending party's use of force would cease to be unreasonable.

Notice the use of the word "reasonable". Pretty vague right? Really allows it to be open to interpretation. And in this case it can be easily argued firing 7 shots at a man leaning into a car full of children is excessive.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/wisconsin...001400642.html

Wisconsin AG confirms Jacob was near a knife but will not confirm if he was carrying it. Sounds like the knife was in the car but not in Jacob's actual physical possession.

[Cope]

Notice the use of the word "reasonable". Pretty vague right? Really allows it to be open to interpretation. And in this case it can be easily argued firing 7 shots at a man leaning into a car full of children is excessive.

Of course there is a question as to whether Sheskey actually had reasonable cause to believe that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. That is clearly worth investigating. However, if it cannot be proven that Sheskey held no such reasonable belief, or that, taking the immediacy of the situation into account, he had no viable alternatives, then whether there were children in the vicinity ceases to be relevant.

Wisconsin AG confirms Jacob was near a knife but will not confirm if he was carrying it. Sounds like the knife was in the car but not in Jacob's actual physical possession.

According to the WDoJ, Blake admitted to having "a knife in his possession" at the time of the shooting (as we've already discussed). Unless the WDoJ, Blake or those reporting on the case were/are lying, then the AG's refusal to confirm that Blake was carrying the weapon bears no particular relevance.

[Vanoi]

Of course there is a question as to whether Sheskey actually had reasonable cause to believe that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. That is clearly worth investigating. However, if it cannot be proven that Sheskey held no such reasonable belief, or that, taking the immediacy of the situation into account, he had no viable alternatives, then whether there were children in the vicinity ceases to be relevant.

We'll just have to wait for the investigation.

According to the WDoJ, Blake admitted to having "a knife in his possession" at the time of the shooting (as we've already discussed). Unless the WDoJ, Blake or those reporting on the case were/are lying, then the AG's refusal to confirm that Blake was carrying the weapon bears no particular relevance.

In his possession. You do know that could mean his vehicle? He never actually said he was carrying the knife on him.

[Gromovnik]

So owning a knife is a death sentence now?

[Muizer]

Honestly I think it's the latter. Police training is ridiculously short in the US and definitely not enough to teach leadership and cool under pressure.

So it seems. But I also get the impression that the (predominantly white) police go into black neighbourhoods with a mindset of soldiers entering enemy territory: ready to shoot at the slightest hint of danger. It is not hard to see how that is an expression of a vicious cycle. There's obviously a bigger problem of trust between especially the black community and police being totally broken.

If you convince cops that you are reaching for a weapon, they are liable to shoot you. Like I said, there are plenty of more valid cases of police use unjustified use of lethal force, and the only thing this virtue signalling is doing is discrediting the reasonable calls for reforming some aspects of policing in US.

If it were a gun, perhaps. Anything less, and the worst use of violence would be to shoot them in the legs. Even if you say 'there was no time to step back' that is a situation this officer could and should have avoided. He was already pointing his gun at the suspect, there was no reason to move into point blank range. He was not making any attempt to forcibly restrain the suspect beside a feeble pull at his shirt.

As an aside, it should be possible here to remark this officer performed poorly without being assumed to take side with looters or a particular ideological groupings. As far as politics is concerned, a hard look at police practices does not amount to assigning blame one-sidedly. It's just reality that's the side government has the most direct control over and is directly responsible for.