Graffiti Ghost wrote:
There are curfews in place for a reason.
That reason is to control the protest and give the authorities an excuse to use force and blame it on the protesters.
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
There are curfews in place for a reason.
That reason is to control the protest and give the authorities an excuse to use force and blame it on the protesters.
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
What could they do to help at that point? If they move them or touch them wrong they will be crucified more than if they leave them for the trained medical professionals. I wonder if their firing was for the push or lack of attempt to help....looks like more bad training and lack of understanding what they actually should do when such a situation presents itself.
It is a felony crime to leave the scene of an accident with an injury. This is understood by car drivers, but the applies to any accident you are involved with.
You have posted on this thread so many times it is obvious that you have an agenda. An agenda besides just being a troll.
VroomVroom wrote:
Seen this already. Honestly looks like an accident to me. What his old ass was doing I don't know. The cop does shove him, not very hard, and the old man cannot kept back peddling fast enough and falls. Thought it was fake at first but a strong puff of wind would of blown him over. Anyway it looks like he may have hit his head on the corner there. That sucks. Hope he's alright but jesus man have a little sense. You're supposed to be old and wise.
This was my take. The cop probably should not have shoved him, but it looks like a pretty mild "shove," and the old guy was so physically weak that he couldn't rebalance himself. Not saying it was right at all, but it's also clear to me the officer did not intend for him to fall at all. I can't tell from the video wth the old guy was trying to do either.
I don't think airing this video helps ANYTHING right now.
people are nuts wrote:
VroomVroom wrote:
Seen this already. Honestly looks like an accident to me. What his old ass was doing I don't know. The cop does shove him, not very hard, and the old man cannot kept back peddling fast enough and falls. Thought it was fake at first but a strong puff of wind would of blown him over. Anyway it looks like he may have hit his head on the corner there. That sucks. Hope he's alright but jesus man have a little sense. You're supposed to be old and wise.
This was my take. The cop probably should not have shoved him, but it looks like a pretty mild "shove," and the old guy was so physically weak that he couldn't rebalance himself. Not saying it was right at all, but it's also clear to me the officer did not intend for him to fall at all. I can't tell from the video wth the old guy was trying to do either.
I don't think airing this video helps ANYTHING right now.
Hiding evidence so that more bad cops can be retained is not helping ANYTHING right now.
cvb wrote:
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
You are correct. But my main point is if the older guy would have done his protesting during the set protesting hours and not confronted the police officer when he was supposed to be off the street, none of this would be an issue.
Haha, and if George Floyd had not tried to pass a counterfeit bill he would have never been killed. The reason we have cops is to handle people not abiding by the rules or laws. Is it too much to expect them to do their jobs without killing and injuring people unnecessarily.
And with a few rare exceptions that is happening. Look att he number of arrests last year and number of deaths...amazing to me that there aren't way more.
White man's eyes see all wrote:
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
There are curfews in place for a reason.
That reason is to control the protest and give the authorities an excuse to use force and blame it on the protesters.
Yeah, it has nothing to due with the deaths, property damage, and looting!
accident scene wrote:
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
What could they do to help at that point? If they move them or touch them wrong they will be crucified more than if they leave them for the trained medical professionals. I wonder if their firing was for the push or lack of attempt to help....looks like more bad training and lack of understanding what they actually should do when such a situation presents itself.
It is a felony crime to leave the scene of an accident with an injury. This is understood by car drivers, but the applies to any accident you are involved with.
You have posted on this thread so many times it is obvious that you have an agenda. An agenda besides just being a troll.
Do yo really think they left that guy to get eating by rats?
I have an agenda because I question the obvious and ask a few questions ti get clarity on what other people think?
needle in the hay wrote:
The video that ended racism
But the media tells us that cops only treat minorities poorly...........Good thing for that guy's white privilege otherwise they would take taken a crap on him once he was down.
answers we need wrote:
There was a 7pm curfew in effect. It was announced to the general public. Anyone remaining present was in violation of that curfew. Police began clearing the area. They moved forward in a slow, uniform wave, loudly announced that people had to disperse, and gave repeated verbal commands to do so. They did not shoot him, they did not strike him with a baton, they did not tase him, they did not pepper spray him
He could see that they were in uniform, duly authorized, enforcing a law enacted by elected officials. What is the expectation here: Do you not want laws enforced? Do you believe in laws at all? How do you expect police to both maintain the laws enacted by your own elected representatives while simultaneously never having to use force during non-compliant transactions? How much more warning could reasonably be provided before you would deem any force acceptable? At what age is it acceptable to protest but not to be subject to laws?
Are citizens who fail to participate in local, state, and federal elections repeatedly over their lifetimes in any way responsible for the elected officials who poorly represent them as a result? Do you believe in democratic processes or do you believe elections are illegitimate when they fail to conform to your particular political stances? If your political representative is elected in the next election cycle and passes laws that you agree with, do you expect law enforcement to enforce those laws or not? How: with force or with no force? Please explain, thank you
Exactly my take on this. And I'm an old white guy who wouldn't want to be manhandled like that. If I were in his situation I would not have planted myself DIRECTLY in the path of a line of police officers moving slowly along the street. Dumb hurts.
bangdingow wrote:
answers we need wrote:
There was a 7pm curfew in effect. It was announced to the general public. Anyone remaining present was in violation of that curfew. Police began clearing the area. They moved forward in a slow, uniform wave, loudly announced that people had to disperse, and gave repeated verbal commands to do so. They did not shoot him, they did not strike him with a baton, they did not tase him, they did not pepper spray him
He could see that they were in uniform, duly authorized, enforcing a law enacted by elected officials. What is the expectation here: Do you not want laws enforced? Do you believe in laws at all? How do you expect police to both maintain the laws enacted by your own elected representatives while simultaneously never having to use force during non-compliant transactions? How much more warning could reasonably be provided before you would deem any force acceptable? At what age is it acceptable to protest but not to be subject to laws?
Are citizens who fail to participate in local, state, and federal elections repeatedly over their lifetimes in any way responsible for the elected officials who poorly represent them as a result? Do you believe in democratic processes or do you believe elections are illegitimate when they fail to conform to your particular political stances? If your political representative is elected in the next election cycle and passes laws that you agree with, do you expect law enforcement to enforce those laws or not? How: with force or with no force? Please explain, thank you
Exactly my take on this. And I'm an old white guy who wouldn't want to be manhandled like that. If I were in his situation I would not have planted myself DIRECTLY in the path of a line of police officers moving slowly along the street. Dumb hurts.
Proud of cowardice?
Sheesh
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
accident scene wrote:
You have posted on this thread so many times it is obvious that you have an agenda. An agenda besides just being a troll.
I have an agenda because I question the obvious and ask a few questions ti get clarity on what other people think?
Trolling 101
Giles Corey wrote:
bangdingow wrote:
Exactly my take on this. And I'm an old white guy who wouldn't want to be manhandled like that. If I were in his situation I would not have planted myself DIRECTLY in the path of a line of police officers moving slowly along the street. Dumb hurts.
Proud of cowardice?
Sheesh
The poor police who shoved him down were incapable of going around him.
fact checker 642572498 wrote:
needle in the hay wrote:
The video that ended racism
But the media tells us that cops only treat minorities poorly...........Good thing for that guy's white privilege otherwise they would take taken a crap on him once he was down.
We condemn this action because it is bad policing. But if the gentleman had been black it would have been due to racism. One should conclude that it is unlikely that all wrong police actions on blacks are necessarily racist. Or that these officers eyesight is very poor.
Nonayme wrote:
Street referee wrote:
Actually I don't have a problem with this one. The old man aggressivly approached the police. He didn't move back and was shoved back.
It's unfortunate that he fell and hurt himself, but is was at his own risk.
Are you kidding me? How was a 75-year old unarmed man a threat to a mob of 100+ fully armed policemen? This was ATTEMPTED MURDER. Exactly the same as Chauvin. Pushing back a 75-year old person and sending them with their back of the head (MMA guys aren't even allowed to punch that region) on concrete is as lethal as it can get.
Not sure if it's 2nd degree or 3rd degree in that state, but it is MURDER just like Floyd was. I'm starting more and more to think this isn't about race, but about police and their training in general. Happens in different states, absolutely no regard for the life of people. The people sworn to protect us are killing us.
The blue resistance to learning is in part due to knowing they will have to deal with very dangerous and highly drugged or just violent people. They are scared. They keep all their own 'stop them by all means' ideals a little too close at hand just in case. It's too close to the surface for them and comes out too easily. I don't know what to do about that , how to make them better at keeping themselves in check and not looking like stupid cowards so often. How can you teach them not to be bullies and still get the job done ?
he advance to the officers and began talking to them. He did not back up until after they pushed him, and then he went back several steps and then fell. Maybe they pushed to hard - but the police line was advancing and he had come up and was obstructing them. Bad decision by everyone involved.
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
White man's eyes see all wrote:
That reason is to control the protest and give the authorities an excuse to use force and blame it on the protesters.
Yeah, it has nothing to due with the deaths, property damage, and looting!
You can manage that without a curfew. It happens in protests all the time.
The curfew is justification for enforcing a curfew.
fact checker 642572498 wrote:
needle in the hay wrote:
The video that ended racism
But the media tells us that cops only treat minorities poorly...........Good thing for that guy's white privilege otherwise they would take taken a crap on him once he was down.
Actually, you're right. If he was black he would have likely taken a baton to the head.
streak wrote:
answers we need wrote:
There was a 7pm curfew in effect. It was announced to the general public. Anyone remaining present was in violation of that curfew. Police began clearing the area. They moved forward in a slow, uniform wave, loudly announced that people had to disperse, and gave repeated verbal commands to do so. They did not shoot him, they did not strike him with a baton, they did not tase him, they did not pepper spray him
He could see that they were in uniform, duly authorized, enforcing a law enacted by elected officials. What is the expectation here: Do you not want laws enforced? Do you believe in laws at all? How do you expect police to both maintain the laws enacted by your own elected representatives while simultaneously never having to use force during non-compliant transactions? How much more warning could reasonably be provided before you would deem any force acceptable? At what age is it acceptable to protest but not to be subject to laws?
Are citizens who fail to participate in local, state, and federal elections repeatedly over their lifetimes in any way responsible for the elected officials who poorly represent them as a result? Do you believe in democratic processes or do you believe elections are illegitimate when they fail to conform to your particular political stances? If your political representative is elected in the next election cycle and passes laws that you agree with, do you expect law enforcement to enforce those laws or not? How: with force or with no force? Please explain, thank you
How’s that boot taste? And how about that cop d*ck? Seems you like it a lot
and YOU wonder why there is a problem?!?!?
Graffiti Ghost wrote:
You are correct. But my main point is if the older guy would have done his protesting during the set protesting hours and not confronted the police officer when he was supposed to be off the street, none of this would be an issue.
But that can be said about any criminal that got severely hurt or killed by police. No one deserves to be murdered/manslaughtered for whatever crime they are doing, not Floyd and also not the 75-year old guy.
Pushing a 75-year old guy with a lot of force while moving so he lands with the back of the head on the ground is at least attempted manslaughter, if not attempted murder (3rd degree). Police didn't care about his life. They even kept moving after he landed didn't move and blood came out. Unlike Floyd, he is lucky to have survived but he will never forget the trauma and might have long-lasting injuries.
Ask yourself - was it really absolutely necessary to push the man there, knowing that 75-year olds are fragile and have weaker bones and muscles than 30-year olds? Was it the "least amount of force" required to dissolve the situation with someone being outside when he shouldn't have?
Maybe he didn't even know about the restriction because he is not watching news. That poor guy just lost a lot of brain cells and got a heavy wound in his head for absolutely no reason.
Option 1: Ignore the guy and walk around him Option 2: Shove guy to the ground, causing loss of consciousness and bleeding. Step over him not knowing whether or not he is alive or dead. The actions following the shove are more revealing that the initial act. Airing this video is extremely helpful because it identified people who don't have the judgement or disposition to be law enforcement officers.
people are nuts wrote:
VroomVroom wrote:
Seen this already. Honestly looks like an accident to me. What his old ass was doing I don't know. The cop does shove him, not very hard, and the old man cannot kept back peddling fast enough and falls. Thought it was fake at first but a strong puff of wind would of blown him over. Anyway it looks like he may have hit his head on the corner there. That sucks. Hope he's alright but jesus man have a little sense. You're supposed to be old and wise.
This was my take. The cop probably should not have shoved him, but it looks like a pretty mild "shove," and the old guy was so physically weak that he couldn't rebalance himself. Not saying it was right at all, but it's also clear to me the officer did not intend for him to fall at all. I can't tell from the video wth the old guy was trying to do either.
I don't think airing this video helps ANYTHING right now.