Saddened by NY Grand Jury Decision To NOT Indict - Page 18

Pressing-On · #**171** 12-13-2014, 11:42 AM

Mr. Asthmatic Garner, selling Loosies, who didn't care about his breathing problems nor yours. Irony...

n david · #**172** 12-13-2014, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You'd being dishonest. I said it was not a chokehold and explain that to mean it was not the ILLEGAL chokehold being talked about.

I NEVER once denied one arm was around the neck

What I said was THE OTHER arm was UNDER Eric's arm. That is a move about leverage not to choke his wind pipe

BTW..that's like the 5th time now you misrepresented me...

No, you continue deemphasizing the arm around the neck. Anytime I mention it, you downplay the significance and claim it wasn't really a chokehold, but rather a legal takedown move.

Look at the picture. That is a chokehold. There is no arm under Garner's arm; in fact, Garner is on the ground and not fighting back. Yet still the cop is choking the man to death. That bit on the ground is what cause the compression of the neck, which is the official and primary cause of death, along with compression of the chest from a cop kneeling on him while he was cuffed and on the ground.

That's why I agree with Judge Napolitano and a host of others who say this was criminally negligent homicide.

n david · #**173** 12-13-2014, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Mr. Asthmatic Garner, selling Loosies, who didn't care about his breathing problems nor yours. Irony...

He didn't die from an asthma attack.

Smh

n david · #**174** 12-13-2014, 11:49 AM

Every rag I've read uses the word "chokehold." You'd think if the cop really believed he didn't do such a thing, his lawyer would be demanding retractions or corrections and threatening defamation suits against these publications. I would, if I were accused of something I didn't do.

BrotherEastman · #**175** 12-13-2014, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Mr. Asthmatic Garner, selling Loosies, who didn't care about his breathing problems nor yours. Irony...

I know, the picture was wrong. lol

Sasha · #**176** 12-13-2014, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

So, we resort to killing a man when they resist arrest?????? Okay. Sasha go back to post #133 so that you can know where the numbers come from, the court got it wrong based upon the percentage.

You are trying to prove intent. You will never be able to do that.

You were a military guy, weren't you? Tell me, would you have let someone who you were trying to subdue go if he told you he couldn't breathe? Was that part of your training?

Sasha · #**177** 12-13-2014, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Mr. Asthmatic Garner, selling Loosies, who didn't care about his breathing problems nor yours. Irony...

Good point! LOL!

Sasha · #**178** 12-13-2014, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david

No, you continue deemphasizing the arm around the neck. Anytime I mention it, you downplay the significance and claim it wasn't really a chokehold, but rather a legal takedown move.

Look at the picture. That is a chokehold. There is no arm under Garner's arm; in fact, Garner is on the ground and not fighting back. Yet still the cop is choking the man to death. That bit on the ground is what cause the compression of the neck, which is the official and primary cause of death, along with compression of the chest from a cop kneeling on him while he was cuffed and on the ground.

That's why I agree with Judge Napolitano and a host of others who say this was criminally negligent homicide.

A picture can't tell you what is really taking place. I have seen that hold done on people in the movies, yet they weren't really in a chokehold. It looked like one for the intent of the movie, but it wasn't really being done, obviously.

In real life, people who resist arrest are taken down in the same manner every day. There are people who have had heart attacks and died while being arrested, even those who went peacefully. That's not the cops fault. If you are committing a crime, the officers concern is NOT your medical issues or condition of health. That's the problem of the criminal.

jfrog · #**179** 12-13-2014, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by n david

Every rag I've read uses the word "chokehold." You'd think if the cop really believed he didn't do such a thing, his lawyer would be demanding retractions or corrections and threatening defamation suits against these publications. I would, if I were accused of something I didn't do.

Oftentimes the best thing to do is to get out of the public mind. Threatening to sue others and demand retractions and corrections on something as subjective as a chokehold is a faster way to incite hate of yourself than just keeping your mouth shut

BrotherEastman · #**180** 12-13-2014, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sasha

You are trying to prove intent. You will never be able to do that.

You were a military guy, weren't you? Tell me, would you have let someone who you were trying to subdue go if he told you he couldn't breathe? Was that part of your training?

Sasha, this is an idiotic statement. As a soldier you fight to kill, as a police officer you subdue and arrest (not kill). BIG DIFFERENCE my friend. The only time a police officer has the right to kill is when their own life is in jeopardy and in this case no ones life was in jeopardy. As I have said before, pictures say a thousand words and 4 police officers could've done a job of subduing one man without killing him. PERIOD!