Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

[Infidel144]

609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
Subdivision 1.Substantial bodily harm. Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
Subd. 2.Past pattern of child abuse. Whoever assaults a minor may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both, if the perpetrator has engaged in a past pattern of child abuse against the minor. As used in this subdivision, "child abuse" has the meaning given it in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (5).
Subd. 3.Felony; victim under four. Whoever assaults a victim under the age of four, and causes bodily harm to the child's head, eyes, or neck, or otherwise causes multiple bruises to the body, is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.

[Subd. 7a.Substantial bodily harm. "Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member.]

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or
(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Well, one can always ask for the obvious one supposedly doesn't see.

If I thought it was obvious I wouldn't be asking. So why is it? I've seen no evidence of racism.

[Mithradates]

No, absolutely not. He could have been (and probably was) proud of what he's doing. Possibly to show off with it in front of his peers. The only way this could be somewhat excusable is, if there really ways a restraining order in Minnessota, which encourages this kind of crap. But seriously: just watch the video, it's all over the place. The guy was not even taking his knee from Floyd's neck when the ambulance arrived..

Which one is more likely:
1. He was proudly humiliating/killing a black guy while being filmed, his plan was to get fired/go to prison

2. He restrained the guy in a way he restrained dozens before, none of those cases ended in a tragedy, thats why his colleagues didnt try to stop him. (I bet thats gonna be their defence)

[swabian]

If I thought it was obvious I wouldn't be asking. So why is it? I've seen no evidence of racism.

A 6 year old child could hold down a handcuffed man it that position. What could he have done? Magically rise up to his knees and batter everyone and their mothers with his forehead?

And it doesn't really matter much if it was racism or not. A democratic country where police is permitted to act like this deserves riots!

[Gaidin]

2. He restrained the guy in a way he restrained dozens before, none of those cases ended in a tragedy, thats why his colleagues didnt try to stop him. (I bet thats gonna be their defence)

Of the 44 chokeholds in Minneapolis in the past 5 years you think most of them were his?

[swabian]

Which one is more likely:
1. He was proudly humiliating/killing a black guy while being filmed, his plan was to get fired/go to prison

If he's certain that he's being protected by a corrupt system, why not?!

2. He restrained the guy in a way he restrained dozens before, none of those cases ended in a tragedy, thats why his colleagues didnt try to stop him. (I bet thats gonna be their defence)

[/QUOTE]

He and his colleagues are idiots and have been for a long time. Time to change that!

[nhytgbvfeco2]

A 6 year old child could hold down a handcuffed man it that position. What could he have done? Magically rise up to his knees and batter everyone and their mothers with his forehead?

What does this have to do with racism?

And it doesn't really matter much if it was racism or not. A democratic country where police is permitted to act like this deserves riots!

...But he's being prosecuted. So clearly he's not permitted to act like this.

[swabian]

Yes, he's being prosecuted. Are you his lawyer? Again: watch the ing video, he's clearly enjoyng what he's doing. The accusation of racism is not far fetched, but yeah, maybe i was wrong. Maybe he's just a sadistic :wub: who needs to be taken out of the police forces and punished.

[Infidel144]

Of the 44 chokeholds in Minneapolis in the past 5 years you think most of them were his?

44 that rendered a person unconscious, but at least 237 used in that time (and Chauvin has been in the police force for a lot longer, as well as being a bouncer/security as I understand it).

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Yes, he's being prosecuted. Are you his lawyer?

I know I'm a Jew, but that doesn't mean I'm everyone's lawyer

Again: watch the ing video, he's clearly enjoyng what he's doing. The accusation of racism is not far fetched, but yeah, maybe i was wrong. Maybe he's just a sadistic :wub: who needs to be taken out of the police forces and punished.

Sadistic asse is more likely, the guy had 18 previous complaints about him, though we don't know why. It's quite possible that he has done this exact thing before, but the victims survived. His wife (now ex-wife) was Asian, so we can safely rule out white-supremacy, and apparently he and Floyd worked together as security guards in the same place before, so it's possible he had some kind of personal problem with him.

[swabian]

I know I'm a Jew, but that doesn't mean I'm everyone's lawyer

LOL, ok

Sadistic asse is more likely, the guy had 18 previous complaints about him, though we don't know why. It's quite possible that he has done this exact thing before, but the victims survived. His wife (now ex-wife) was Asian, so we can safely rule out white-supremacy, and apparently he and Floyd worked together as security guards in the same place before, so it's possible he had some kind of personal problem with him.

I heard about 17 complaints... so you know, however. I know my emotional rants are not waterproof. If that is what you're aiming at: fine, you win. Have a good one.

[Common Soldier]

Of the 44 chokeholds in Minneapolis in the past 5 years you think most of them were his?

It technically was not a choke hold, but anyways where did you get the 44 figure from? Your cerebellum? I really doubt the police department keeps.a record of every hold they use in every arrest. There may be an "official" tally, but I very seriously doubt such a tally is even close to accurate.

Still, you made rhe claim of 44, so provide a source for that number.

In anycase, it is likely that the officer used that hold more than once befors without any long term ill effect, and just as likely the suspect then also complained. What is completely ignored by the media is the effect of drug use. The report I saw listed recent amphetamine use, hypertension heart disease, ans fentanyl intoxication as factors in the death. I wonder if the fentanyl was prescription or not. If there was drug use, that could be a major contributing factor in the death.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Looting is not the decision of those peacefully protesting. Poor response of authorities, is often linked to the leadership of LEO organizations and is one of the reasons the protests started in the first place. There is no false dichotomy, you're just not capable of understanding why the two are different.

Of course people who choose to peacefully protest so choose not to loot. That doesn’t validate the false dichotomy you’ve set up to extenuate the looting and violence in cities across the country as an unavoidable “byproduct” of legitimate protest (lol) in contrast to the avoidable “conscious choice by police” to behave violently. It is as transparent as your appeal to ridicule.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

I heard about 17 complaints... so you know, however. I know my emotional rants are not waterproof. If that is what you're aiming at: fine, you win. Have a good one.

It wasn't so much aimed at you, I wanted to understand why people claim racism without any evidence pointing to it and you were the most recent person to make the claim (and called it obvious). I'm genuinely curious, and you seemed very convinced. Sorry if you took it as a personal attack, or if I came off as too aggressive.

[Gaidin]

It technically was not a choke hold, but anyways where did you get the 44 figure from? Your cerebellum? I really doubt the police department keeps.a record of every hold they use in every arrest. There may be an "official" tally, but I very seriously doubt such a tally is even close to accurate.

Sti, you made rhe claim of 44, so either provide a source for that number.

RTFT

[Infidel144]

It technically was not a choke hold, but anyways where did you get the 44 figure from? Your cerebellum? I really doubt the police department keeps.a record of every hold they use in every arrest. There may be an "official" tally, but I very seriously doubt such a tally is even close to accurate.

Sti, you made rhe claim of 44, so either provide a source for that number.

44 that rendered a person unconscious. At least 237 were used in that time. My source was listening to the news while driving. I don't know what Gaiden's source was.

[Common Soldier]

Zimmerman is an idiot and refused to follow the dispatcher advice to not confront Trayvon who was not doing anything illegal.

There is no law you have to follow what a dispatcher says. Trayvon was infinitely the bigger idiot to attack someone armed with gun. Martin had a cell phone, remember, so he could and should havs called 911 instead of attacking someone, which was both illegal and stupid.

Since Martin did not call 911, he was not afraid for his life, and you don't have the right to beat someone up just because they are following you. Yes, the biggest idiot was Martin - if you attack someone, they have the right to shoot you in self defense.

[B. W.]

BLM was an organic protest movement which was co-opted by the Clinton campaign in the run up to the 2016 election. After Trump's victory it fell into obscurity. It is now being resurrected and endorsed by corporate America because it is seen as a safe, establishment option for, as Vanoi stated, "taking advantage" of the current situation.

Here is a former BLM organizer explaining how the movement was compromised by incumbent interests.

Doesn't negate the fact that it is a political tool Of the DNC.

Isn't anyone interested in who wrote and who signed off on the Minneapolis police training manual that authorized the use of neck restrain. Most police departments outlaw its use.

In other news, rioters defaced a civil war monument; the monument was dedicated to black soldiers who fought on the side of the Union.

[Infidel144]

There is no law you have to follow what a dispatcher says. Trayvon was infinitely the bigger idiot to attack someone armed with gun.

Martin did not know Zimmerman had a gun. Which is probably why he came back after running home.

[Gaidin]

In anycase, it is likely that the officer used that hold more than once befors without any long term ill effect, and just as likely the suspect then also complained. What is completely ignored by the media is the effect of drug use. The report I saw listed recent amphetamine use, hypertension heart disease, ans fentanyl intoxication as factors in the death. I wonder if the fentanyl was prescription or not. If there was drug use, that could be a major contributing factor in the death.

I already responded to this. This is irrelevant. When you are arresting somebody and they stop breathing and go still and your knee is on their throat you don't just sit there. You do something. You don't kneel on a non-breathing person for three minutes. You respond to the situation as it evolves. If he goes unconscious you do not keep your leg on his throat. If he stops breathing you do not keep your leg on his throat. If somebody points it out to you, you most definitely do not keep your leg on his throat.

Here's the truth you are not understanding. If he responded to the fact that George Floyd went non-responsive and attempted to revive him then there might be something to the idea that he just was interested in arresting him because he also theoretically maybe tried to save him. But he didn't. When Floyd went non-responsive he sat there leg on his throat for three full minutes. Hence, he was fired, he was arrested, he was charged. His charge was even upgraded.