I guess it is OPEN SEASON to kill black men in America...no one seems to care.

It depends on several things, for example, justification. Are you legally justified in doing what you are doing? Also, it depends on if a "reasonable person" would think that your actions would cause death.

 

Apparently NYPD doesn't think it's reasonable to put people in a choke hold anymore, otherwise it wouldn't be against their policies.

 

OP must really be seething with rage huh. If "no one seems to care", why do these cases get so much media coverage?

With that said, this should have been manslaughter. No questions.

 

Again, we're talking about a reasonable person thinking that it would cause death, that has nothing to do with the NYPD banning the method. I'm sure there are lots of things that are against their policies that don't kill people. You can't conflate the two things. If you see a video of someone in a choke hold, do you automatically think that they are going to die?

 

Yet reasonably Garner didn't expect to get killed by a cop on that day but he was still murdered. Where is the justice?

 

They should arm cops with syringes of whatever it is that puts people under almost instantly and a lot of these travesties... which are largely self-induced by some idiot... would be avoided.

 

It's not murder and your rhetoric is ridiculous.

 

Not as ridiculous as your dogmatic trust and belief in the police force and the "system".

Tell me, how is there "Justice for all" when the people being violated are disproportionately minorities and black?

 

And in your mind, this case is an example of "people being violated"?

 

You don't have to do something that is guaranteed, or even *somewhat possible* to kill someone, in order to break the law.

 

When it's not a legally justifiably act, sure, but in this case, it almost certainly was as per NY code article 35.30.

 

Per that code, a choke hold was not justified or necessary in that situation.

 

Yes. The officer should have been held accountable legally for his negligence which resulted in somebody's death.

But this is just another one of the "questionable" cases in which the black person gets the short end of the stick. How do you have faith in such a system. Look at incarceration rates for similar crimes.

Maybe it's not a race issue, maybe it's socioeconomic status. Either way the system has failed. You don't have to keep defending it. People like you are what is hindering and slowing the possibility of reform.

 

What are we reforming exactly?

That people should stop feel threatened by a big guy coming at them?

That poor people with rookie lawyers should get reduced sentences?

 

I say the same thing about Bundy. But I'm just being sarcastic when I say it though. Not enough black people in this country for that. White people make up 63% of the population and there's a percentage of that who think along the lines of Bundy and he had supporters throughout the country. Plus it's a lot of militias in this country and there are even white people who want their states to break away from the union so the government isn't going to do Bundy and his people like they do black people (just like many police handle white men and black men differently). But if that would have been a group of black folks _ they would all be dead and America wouldn't blink twice about it.

 

The NYPD procedures have nothing at all to do with that part of the NY penal code. I actually pointed that out earlier, but I'll do it again. Here's the applicable part.

Notice how it says "may use physical force when and to the extend he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary" and not "may use physical force when and to the extent that the NYPD allows in their procedures".

I think if he violated the law, he should be punished for it, but it appears that he didn't according to the laws on the books. He did violate NYPD procedure though, and I think he should be fired for it.

In the end, the person REALLY to blame for this whole thing is the moron who resisted arrest. That's ALWAYS a bad idea, especially when you are a really big guy and that's really the lesson to be learned from Furguson and this case in NY. When you fight cops or resist arrest, bad things happen.

 

Free Mumia!

 

Surrreeee... Lol. Now that's funny.

 

I was referring to the NY code article 35.30, not the NYPD code.

Like I said, the use of a chokehold, especially for the duration it was used, was not justified or necessary in this instance, and therefore NY code article 35.30 does not protect this officer in this instance.

 

If he can argue that grabbing him like he did was necessary to get the big guy down, then it is legally justified in NY. It was used for 14 seconds and was released pretty quickly once the guy was on the ground. The problem here is that you are saying your opinion of what is justified and necessary and not paying any attention to the legal definitions at play. If the officer reasonably feels like it's necessary, it's justified. The guy was huge, much bigger than the officers that were trying to arrest him, it's not a stretch to say that the officer had to jump on him like that to get him to the ground, also he can make the case that he was trying to use a headlock and not a choke hold.