Brutal Video of Police Officers Shoving an Elderly Man

game over wrote:

not an infraction worthy of a fractured skull or worse

it was an unarmed 75 year old man facing dozens of roided up meatheads with guns.

SLC police knocked down another elderly man a few days ago.

Trump's orders are are for military and police to "dominate the battle space".

Apparently, this involves trapping a crowd on NY bridge, pummelling women with riot clubs, arresting journalists, pushing down old men, and gassing and firing on peaceful protesters for a photo op.

Here you can see and hear the poor man's head bounce off the sidewalk.

Even the cops on the other side of the street heard it and turned to see what happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JurZKU9Uu64

Well stated.

game over wrote:

Graffiti Ghost wrote:

I think I watched the same video as you and see it much differently. Bottom line, it was after curfew and if he needed to speak to one of the Police Officers , why didn't he do it prior to curfew?

not an infraction worthy of a fractured skull or worse

it was an unarmed 75 year old man facing dozens of roided up meatheads with guns.

It’s easier to identify someone as unarmed after the encounter.

game over wrote:

lol...just remain quite and say nothing while we beat the sht out of civilians and tread on your rights......is that what you would have advised the Minuteman during the American revolution???

this video makes it clear the police are thugs.

Thank you. This is the point I have been making.

Does anybody remember exactly how the U.S.A. came into existence? Does anybody remember the oppressive abuses of power that led to the Revolution?

Why are some U.S. citizens, the inheritors of that legacy, now supporting the same sorts of abuses of power? Amazing.

U.S. citizens should not be subject to:

- illegal abuses of power

- assault,

- violations of constitutional rights

- extrajudicial killings

at the hands of government authorities or employees.

Everybody -- Agree? Disagree? Let's hear it. Where do you stand?

More bad police behavior wrote:

Felony assault charges? ?

You just can't tolerate this kind of police brutality. The 75 yr old man was no threat - they didn't need to shove him!

Yet they feared for their life most likely.

needle in the hay wrote:

The video that ended racism

Could be. I think its more a police problem than a race problem.

former West Pointer wrote:

Thank you. This is the point I have been making.

Does anybody remember exactly how the U.S.A. came into existence? Does anybody remember the oppressive abuses of power that led to the Revolution?

Why are some U.S. citizens, the inheritors of that legacy, now supporting the same sorts of abuses of power? Amazing.

U.S. citizens should not be subject to:

- illegal abuses of power

- assault,

- violations of constitutional rights

- extrajudicial killings

at the hands of government authorities or employees.

Everybody -- Agree? Disagree? Let's hear it. Where do you stand?

Agree but I do not believe this(Buffulo) instance involved any of those items.

Guarantee that old guy ended up hospitalized for this. Probably suffered a brain bleed. May end up with significant morbidity or even death. I don’t think the punishment fit the crime here.

ReallybroReally wrote:

Agree but I do not believe this (Buffulo) instance involved any of those items.

This instance included:

- illegal abuses of power ------------------ Yes.

- assault, ------------------------------------ Yes.

- violations of constitutional rights ------ Yes.

- extrajudicial killings --------------------- To be determined.

at the hands of government authorities or employees ----------- Yes.

Last I checked in America when you violate a law you are arrested not tossed to the ground and left to bleed out of your brain.

On June 2, I posted on another thread a comment about how military personnel are compelled by duty and by their sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution, and about how our elected leadership is actively undermining the Constitution and its freedoms.

On June 4, it was reported that on June 3, General Mattis expressed a similar stance:

"I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words “Equal Justice Under Law” are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation."

"When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside."

"We must reject any thinking of our cities as a “battlespace” that our uniformed military is called upon to “dominate.” At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them."

Did everybody get that last part?

"Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them."

Read: Government authorities and government employee are not above the law, and they must not violate the Constitution. Power rests in the hands of the citizens. This is government of the people, by the people, for the people. Full Stop.

Real issue is the police releasing a statement that the man slipped and was injured.

Everyone wants to claim “one bad apple” but 20 cops witnessed this assault and not one of them wrote their own report of what actually happened.

dunes runner wrote:

Here you can see and hear the poor man's head bounce off the sidewalk.

Even the cops on the other side of the street heard it and turned to see what happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JurZKU9Uu64

This view makes it look worse than the look from a closer angle. What a bunch of pussies these cops are and now they're pouting because two or three of them were suspended.

former West Pointer wrote:

no one cares bout you wrote:

shouldn't have got into their faces if you cant deal with the consequences. America no longer cares about your stupid riots. Get off our streets. We all with the police would shoot you at this point.

You are the problem.

Watch the video. An elderly white man standing nonviolently in front of some police was roughly shoved to the ground by police officers. In falling, the old man smashed the back of his head into the concrete sidewalk. Blood spreads on the sidewalk as the officers continue walking forward without stopping.

You, supporting this action taken by government employees, are the problem.

The streets don't belong to the police, they belong to the people. The police get a nice paycheck and absurd pension benefits paid for by the people they serve. I t is about time the police show some respect for the people.

The old man didn't attack the police. If the police decided that the man was impairing their mission, the answer is to cuff him and take him into custody. There is no excuse for responding to disobedience with violent physical force before other measures have been used.

gjk Tri ijn be to k wrote:

Guarantee that old guy ended up hospitalized for this. Probably suffered a brain bleed. May end up with significant morbidity or even death. I don’t think the punishment fit the crime here.

Also, it is not the job of the police to dole out punishment. If this citizen was breaking the law, he should have been arrested, been able to contact his attorney, requested bail, and had a trial where a jury of his peers would find him guilty or not guilty of the charges, based on evidence presented.

NOT assaulted by the police. That was an illegal act by government employees who WORK FOR the citizens.

Obvi wrote:

1) Enforcing the law would mean arresting him.

2) Shoving him to the ground is not only failing to enforce the law (see point 1), it is breaking the law/assault. The policeman should have been arrested on the spot. As such, it must be asked of you: Do you not want laws enforced? Do you believe in laws at all?

1) How would they go about arresting him? He had failed to comply with all lawful orders through that point in time. Is it your belief that he would suddenly have had a change of heart and complied with an order to turn around and peaceably place his hand behind his back to be handcuffed? Why do you believe that based on the available evidence? Assuming he would not, would force then need to be utilized? If he resisted, what force would be acceptable for police to use then? Grabbing? Pushing? Pepper spray? Tasing? If he fell to the ground while attempting to be handcuffed, would that be materially different in your eyes than what happened here? Why?

2) Police are duly authorized by the laws in that state to employ the force necessary to gain compliance with lawful orders. To any claims that, "if you or I pushed a 75 year old man down we'd be arrested immediately" that is correct. You would also be arrested for wearing a badge and gun in public, while police would not. Are you aware that laws exist which cover this dichotomy? Are you stating that pushing is not an authorized use of force? Are you basing that on any actual case law or is it a gut feeling based on emotion?

If your complaint is that police are enforcing laws you disagree with, your beef is with the elected officials who passed the curfew law. Elect leaders who better represent you

If you think the police should have moved around him, what then is the point of the curfew law? Should they only allow people 75 and older to continue to reside in the area past curfew? All people? No people? Is that not then selective and therefore discriminatory enforcement of laws and inherently unequal?

If your complaint is that, "just following orders" isn't a valid defense, are you saying that police should selectively ignore laws your own democratically elected officials pass? Which ones? Would you protest if police decided not to enforce any laws as a matter of personal reasoning, but still continued to be paid? How many laws could they reasonably ignore before you would begin to be upset that they are no longer carrying out their functions?

Graffiti Ghost wrote:

this is our moderator wrote:

F*ck you, pigs

and it's those with attitudes and anger like you that get yourself killed by the police for acting irrationally

please apply to volunteer as part of a neighborhood watch group and help the police if you don't like how they handle themselves, or better yet become a real police officer and be the change you want to see

Actually, what gets people killed is the small percentage of thug cops and the large percentage of their fellow cops who cover up for them, So the thug cops know they can get away with it. Just consider this incident -- until the video surfaced the cops claimed the old man just tripped. In addition to a disproportionate response to the old man, the cops should be punished for lying to their superiors, and the other cops should be liable as accessories to the lie.

Every cop should be wearing a body camera. Then if they act appropriately, they can easily defend themselves.