When someone had massive amounts of a drug cocktail that is well known to stop your heart and your breathing, it's asinine to suggest that isn't a reasonable doubt worthy of a not-guilty verdict.That's a different moment than the one I posted, and yes, they can use semantics to distort when they are talking about on the timeline. Go back go my video to 0:53 and look at it carefully. The dude's knee WAS on his neck and your defense of the officer is sickening.
I'm done arguing with you because I believe you're a fool.
I agree 100% that individuals are responsible, but that's not my argument. My argument is that we know how the OTHER side argues, and we have to be more circumspect not to feed them, and we KNOW that's what they are doing, as seen above, so we have no excuse to not be aware. Excusing other forum members for not having situational awareness doesn't help. This isn't a real life gunfight with bullets, but that kind of blindness and lack of SA kills and assuming we are all buddies here, we need to encourage actions and perspective to keep the whole team alive.Well, that's sort of the anti-racist argument isn't it... if you're not against it then you're for it?
It would also seem to me that there are PLENTY of people that posted in this thread in support of Mr. Floyd and against what happened to him.
Additionally, if the internet and PR work to take the comments of a few and apply them to an entire community, then the general public sucks. I don't have to go along with that. I believe INDIVIDUALS are responsible for what they say as well as for their actions. Society's departure from this belief is part of the answer to how we got to where we are.
Karma paid him back, not the cop... no one is suggesting anyone should "pay back" past wrongs.So if you've done something in the past, it's ok to kill you now for something that isn't a capital crime? Awesome.
This thread is my new exhibit A why the gun community has credibility and PR issues.
1. There are prescription drugs and medical conditions that can make a person just as confused or aggressive. Not buying that, and the officers weren't omniscient about the drugs.When someone had massive amounts of a drug cocktail that is well known to stop your heart and your breathing, it's asinine to suggest that isn't a reasonable doubt worthy of a not-guilty verdict.
He followed department policy and therefore is presumed to have acted in good faith.
This is a perversion of justice when multiple political leaders make statements encouraging violence if there isn't a guilty verdict.
He may be a dirt bag and he might not should be a cop, but that doesn't justify a guilty verdict just because you are afraid or riots and don't like him.
Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk
1. There are prescription drugs and medical conditions that can make a person just as confused or aggressive. Not buying that, and the officers weren't omniscient about the drugs.
2. Then that department policy sucks and needs to go.
3. Agreed, totally.
4. Depends on the charge. I believe manslaughter should have stuck at a minimum based on the evidence.
The jury disagreed, and I would've as well. If he had OD'd, and died later, it is what it is.The criminal had OD'd on an opiate polydrug cocktail, End of story.
That ignores the video and the bystanders legitimately questioning what was happening. If the officer had taken his knee off and acted a bit more humanely the opinions of him that have swept the country wouldn't be causing harm.It is reasonable to doubt the officers actions directly caused the death...
(snip)meaning manslaughter wouldnt even be an option (even if the drug overdose wasn't a factor)
"It would also seem to me that there are PLENTY of people that posted in this thread in support of Mr. Floyd" Most of the posts here have been about the flaws in the system.. I haven't read one yet that supports the criminal Mr. Floyd.
I agree 100% that individuals are responsible, but that's not my argument. My argument is that we know how the OTHER side argues, and we have to be more circumspect not to feed them, and we KNOW that's what they are doing, as seen above, so we have no excuse to not be aware. Excusing other forum members for not having situational awareness doesn't help. This isn't a real life gunfight with bullets, but that kind of blindness and lack of SA kills and assuming we are all buddies here, we need to encourage actions and perspective to keep the whole team alive.
Since the jury wasn't sequestered the entire time, I think their verdicts were definitely swayed by the protestors. Chauvin was tried by more than a jury of 12. Basically, mob justice. That's why they threw the book at him. I suspect there would have been reprisals against the jury members if found not guilty or guilty of manslaughter 2 only.Fear of the FSA that were given their marching orders from Auntie Maxine and Uncle Potato prior to jury deliberations.
The jurors were either on the same mental level as the potato in chief, or they were too terrified of the mob to render any other verdict(s) so they convicted for everything thrown out there.
That's a different moment than the one I posted, and yes, they can use semantics to distort when they are talking about on the timeline. Go back go my video to 0:53 and look at it carefully. The dude's knee WAS on his neck and your defense of the officer is sickening.
I'm done arguing with you because I believe you're a fool.
Since the jury wasn't sequestered the entire time, I think their verdicts were definitely swayed by the protestors. Chauvin was tried by more than a jury of 12. Basically, mob justice. That's why they threw the book at him. I suspect there would have been reprisals against the jury members if found not guilty or guilty of manslaughter 2 only.
The judge needs to decide which charge he is guilty of. You can't be guilty of 2nd degree murder if you are guilty of 2nd degree manslaughter. One or the other.
Stop being emotionally manipulated by the media.
No, but I'll listen to what his superiors said, that he use improper techniques, and if his lack of judgment resulted in the death, then he is at least guilty of manslaughter.Stop being emotionally manipulated by the media.
Bears repeating.