December 25, 2014 11:44 pm at 11:44 pm #614560
I was just wondering what people’s feelings are on an idea that I had. I think that we should take away police protection for a week for all those neighborhoods that are currently protesting the police. After that they will perhaps get a better look at what the police do for them and maybe they would have second thoughts of protesting!December 25, 2014 11:49 pm at 11:49 pm #1051494golferParticipant
If there’s anyone left breathing to have a second thought.
Or any thought at all.December 25, 2014 11:51 pm at 11:51 pm #1051495
But police don’t protect those people.December 25, 2014 11:54 pm at 11:54 pm #1051496
There is a film which explores this inyan.December 26, 2014 12:03 am at 12:03 am #1051497
so in your view the choices are a Police force that kills unarmed felons with no consequences or nothing?December 26, 2014 3:21 am at 3:21 am #1051498
Unarmed felons threatening the life of a police officer cause their own death.December 26, 2014 7:06 am at 7:06 am #1051499
L’ma’aseh, one of these cases was a clear murder (we have it on tape) where the policeman was under no threat at all before putting someone in a fatal chokehold. I don’t care that the guy had breathing/heart conditions, that’s still murder in any other case.
On the other hand, there are smart ways to protest and there are not smart ways. Many are choosing the not-smart.December 26, 2014 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #1051501
Sam2, the following is from an excerpt from an article I found which may make you change your opinion.
2.The NYPD was responding to calls in the case of Eric Garner based on complaints from black business owners
4. Garner had been arrested 31 times and eight of those had been for selling loosies. His rap sheet goes back decades and includes arrests for assault and grand larceny
5. At the time of his death, Garner was out on bail after being charged with multiple offenses, including illegal sale of cigarettes, marijuana possession, false impersonation and driving without a license.December 28, 2014 12:08 am at 12:08 am #1051503
YW fan there is nothing there to change anybody’s mind. I hope.
The video of Garner being killed is widely available. If not enought o convict, at the least it shouldve led to a trial that it didnt is a travesty of justice that should lead all to protest.
This line “he died as a result of poor health and cardiac arrest. Mr. Garner was obese and had a history of asthma, diabetes, and other health issues resulting from his poor medical condition.” is even more nonsense, so using this “logic” if I kill someone who is oxygen dependent by say clamping on his O2 supply, I am not culpable since if the victim dint require a steady oxygen supply, my clmaing a tube wouldnt have harmed him. That he suffered from chronic ailments is reason for the police to have been even more cautious in how they subdue the non-violent felon, not less so!December 28, 2014 2:24 am at 2:24 am #1051504
YW Fan: I never said race, though there are clear studies about the influence of race in police decisions. And while several things skew some of those numbers, it does seem like some portions of this country have a race issue with police.
That article was absurd, as ubiquitin pointed out. Al Pi Halacha, that was Retzicha. By law, what happened there was murder. The lack of an indictment is a tragedy. He didn’t resist. Watch the video. He stood there with his hands up and was jumped on by behind and choked to death. So it was easier to choke him to death because of his health problems? That doesn’t change the fact that he was choked to death.December 28, 2014 6:11 am at 6:11 am #1051505oomisParticipant
Bottom line, had Eric Garner been compliant, he probably would still be alive. Instead, he had attitude, and did not do what the officer told him. If you were stopped by a cop on the street, what would you do? I know I would be EXTREMELY respectful. He did not deserve to die for his crime, but he was certainly complicit in his own death. His actions were the proximate cause of the way in which he was handled by the police. Sad, and tragic for him and for his family, but still the result of his own initial response to the police.
I would not want to be a police officer for any amount of money.
G-d bless them for the good that they do, risking their lives to protect us. And if some of them are merely donut eaters and nothing more, I am fairly certain they are in the minority.
The only thing with which I agree with many people, is that I was a bit surprised the grand jury did not vote to indict the officer. This case was totally different from the one in Missouri, where the officer really had no choice. The officer in the Garner case could have been found not guilty in trial, but I think there should have been a trial.December 28, 2014 8:25 am at 8:25 am #1051506sm29Participant
I understand that the protesters want to be heard. But they should do it in a productive way, instead of taking revenge. – Police shoot when they feel threatened. Yes, there are individual officers who might go too far, but most police are good officers trying to protect the community.
I can imagine a BDS on police oyDecember 28, 2014 5:48 pm at 5:48 pm #1051507
ubiquitin, how could is it possible to talk without being able to breathe???December 28, 2014 6:15 pm at 6:15 pm #1051508
YW Fan, “I cant breathe” , If somebody is maintaining an oxygen saturation of 80% and breathing at a rate of 50 breaths/minute. You can bet the person will be gasping and saying I cant breathe. This would indicate impending respiratory failure. To say “well, obviously you can breathe since you are able to talk, so let me just stand around doing nothing, or better yet, keep choking you” Is simply absurdDecember 28, 2014 9:29 pm at 9:29 pm #1051509picturesqMember
Eric Garner resisted arrest forcing the officer to subdue him so he is responsible for his own demise.December 28, 2014 10:40 pm at 10:40 pm #1051510
ubiquitin, if someone can breathe 50 breaths in a minute it means he could breath!December 28, 2014 10:47 pm at 10:47 pm #1051511
Even if he could breathe, that doesn’t mean he can breathe enough to live, which is kind of the point.December 28, 2014 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #1051512bekitzurParticipant
This is from a site I saw explaining it.
“The lungs have what are called “Volumes” and “Capacities”. The link describes all of them. For our purposes, you need to understand these two phrases: Functional Reserve Capacity (the amount of air left in the lungs after a normal exhalation) and Expiratory Reserve Volume (the amount of air you can still force out of your lungs after a normal exhalation).
When you take a normal breath you breathe in and out you are breathing about 500ml of air. After breathing out, you are left with ~2400ml of air inside your lungs, this is the Functional Reserve Capacity. If you try to force out as much air as possible, you can still force out ~1200ml more air. This is the Expiratory Reserve Volume. This is air you are able to speak with even if you cannot take a normal breath. Important Note: Notice that the Expiratory Reserve Volume is more than twice the size of a normal breath. That is a lot of air you are able to force out, and a lot of speaking you can do even if you can’t breathe.
The lungs work on negative pressure. So, your lungs, when you breathe in, are at a lower pressure than the outside air. This draws the air into them. This is caused by your diaphragm and intercostal muscles. Your lungs are very elastic, and will move back to their normal size during exhalation. This is where the problem begins for officers. If you are kneeling on a suspect, or you have them handcuffed on the ground so that they are on their chest, there is a strong possibility that you can cut off their ability to breathe. Once the lungs begin to exhale, they collapse, but if you they are being pressed down on by body weight, they may not be able to re-expand. They then continue to collapse, forcing out the Functional Reserve Capacity of air, but not drawing in a new breath. So, your suspect may be pleading for breath, they may actually be incapable of drawing one in, and the reason is you. If someone is saying they cannot breathe, you need to believe them, because you might be killing them. Furthermore, during any kind of physical altercation, that person may be breathing deeply and rapidly, making their lungs collapse faster when you are kneeling on them or holding them on the ground.”December 28, 2014 11:45 pm at 11:45 pm #1051513
YW are you serious? It means he is about to stop breathing A body cant sustain breathing @ 50 for too long, especially if in spite of that he isnt oxygenating well.
So let me get this straight, if im choking somone he says I cant breathe I cant breathe then passes out and dies. I didnt kill him, since obviously he was able to breathe while I choked him (since he was talking), and then he just happned to pass out for some other reason nothing to do with my chokehold on his neck. Do you actually beleive this?
Picturesq, resisting arrest doenst carry the death penaltyDecember 29, 2014 12:11 am at 12:11 am #1051514
So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD, and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.December 29, 2014 12:30 am at 12:30 am #1051515
In English that is called choking to deathDecember 29, 2014 12:39 am at 12:39 am #1051516
What was the officer supposed to do when Garner resisted arrest? Let go of him so he could run off?December 29, 2014 12:51 am at 12:51 am #1051517
Lior: Watch the video before you comment.December 29, 2014 12:57 am at 12:57 am #1051518
There are plenty of ways of keeping people from running away without choking them.December 29, 2014 12:57 am at 12:57 am #1051519
Sam: I’m not claiming to be an expert on the sequence of events and thus am asking a question that you can kindly answer rather than referring me to external content. Please share your knowledge of what occurred and how my question would be answered by that.December 29, 2014 1:07 am at 1:07 am #1051520
RY23: And if the officer used his baton to subdue his resisting arrest, or used mace, and as a result of his feeling the baton or mace he croaked partially as a result of his unhealthy lifestyle, the same protesters would be faulting the officer for having subdued him for resisting arrest in whatever manner he did so.December 29, 2014 1:10 am at 1:10 am #1051521000646Participant
This idea that if someone gives a cop an attitude they deserve to die or be beaten up is sickening. The only time a Cop can kill someone and not be a murderer is if it was reasonable for him to assume that his life was in danger and the only way that danger could be averted would be by using deadly force.
There is no way on earth that this was the case in the Eric Garner case, and there was no reason at all for the Cop to come up behind someone who had their hands in the air and choke them the way that cop did. I don’t care if he was calling the cops all sorts of names (it just happens that he wasn’t) or whatever, Cops do not have any more of a right to beat people up for disrespecting them then any other civilian does. At most Eric Garner is complicit in his own death to the extent that someone who insults someone who then proceeds to kill them is complicit in their own death, and I don’t think he was even disrespecting the officers.December 29, 2014 1:11 am at 1:11 am #1051522
They were almost certainly guilty of being too violent. Violence per se, when arresting someone who is not coming willingly, should be considered acceptable in most cases, but in this case it was too much.
But to label the officers as murderers is a gross overstatement. They had no way of knowing that this tactic, the chokehold, would kill. For the vast majority of people, a chokehold is not life threatening. He may have been obese, but they had no way of knowing that he had asthma, sleep apnea, etc, that he was fragile in any way. They may have been guilty of manslaughter, but anything more is just being ridiculous.
And to tar all police with one brush is similarly stupid. Not all officers are the same, and most are responsible and hardworking. The officers involved in this case were definitely stupid, following what they probably thought was procedure, were overzealous, and at that moment they suffered a common sense failure. But to say they wouldn’t have done the same in an identical scenario in which the participants were all white is way too far.December 29, 2014 1:37 am at 1:37 am #1051523
Lior, how far could he run?
To quote YW fan “He wheezed when he talked and could not walk a block without resting, they said”December 29, 2014 1:42 am at 1:42 am #1051524
So the officer should have let him run how long? Should he have then maced him to apprehend him?December 29, 2014 2:38 am at 2:38 am #1051525
Lior, my comment was in jest.
To be honest I’m not sure what they should have done, it isnt relevant. Bottom line is an non-violent man dies at the hands of the police, and it was deemed so acceptable that the case wont even go to trial.
It is perfectly reasonable to protest this gross miscarriage of justice, I don’t know what they shouldve done (for arguments sake) let their lawyers make their argument in front of a jury, and they Garner will never have theoppurtunity, is a compelling reason to protest (peacefully)
Do you and YW fan really find the above to be so unreasonable?December 29, 2014 3:08 am at 3:08 am #1051527
Sam2 -“Al Pi Halacha, that was Retzicha.”
ubiquitin -“This is true in halacha as well, to be chayev for killing a blow has to be “kedei lehamisso” able to kill, if the victim had predisposing conditions, it takes less to kill him making them MORE liable for the same action than had they done it to a healthy person”
The problem here is that the US doesn’t keep the 7 Mitzvos Bnai Noach. The posters should be happy that the cop did what he did, instead we have the posts above that it was wrong “Al Pi Halacha”! Whether the Goyim could have him found guilty, but didn’t, it’s great. Even so-called “Frum” Jews, aren’t.December 29, 2014 3:19 am at 3:19 am #1051528
ubiquitin: Most certainly it *is* relevant. And no, I fully support anyone’s right to *peacefully* and lawfully protest anything under the sun, however reasonable or unreasonable it is. But Garner resisted arrest. The officer had an *obligation* to subdue him in order to place him under arrest. If the officer acted lawfully in enforcing the arrest he was placing the alleged perpetrator (Garner) in, then there is no reason to put the officer on trial for doing his duty as a law enforcement officer. Note that putting innocent folks on trial is akin to putting the person through hell, with the months and years the trial will consume of his life and the fortune it will cost his non-rich bank account in legal fees even if he is ultimately exonerated.December 29, 2014 3:34 am at 3:34 am #1051529
Why should we be happy the cop did what he did?December 29, 2014 4:03 am at 4:03 am #1051530
NeutiquamErro, you made some VERY good points!December 29, 2014 4:14 am at 4:14 am #1051531
RebYidd23 -“Why should we be happy the cop did what he did?”
Because he did the Rozon (Will) of Hashem!December 29, 2014 4:21 am at 4:21 am #1051532
Then we should never disagree with anything, because everything that happens is the Rozon of Hashem!December 29, 2014 4:37 am at 4:37 am #1051533
YWFan, thanksDecember 29, 2014 5:00 am at 5:00 am #1051534🐵 ⌨ GamanitParticipant
Ummm… I just watched the video. He was clearly resisting arrest. After he said “I can’t breathe” the police officer removed his arm from around the neck. He then stuck to restraining the arm after which Eric was still speaking meaning he was breathing. So based on the video I would say no, he was not choked to death. The protesters keep showing the still of the chokehold- they don’t show that he was alive and alert after that.December 29, 2014 5:21 am at 5:21 am #1051535
Lior: The video would explain it more than I ever could in writing. Basically, he just stands there with his hands in the air, saying he didn’t do anything and asking the officers not to touch him. Then he is jumped from behind and choked, which directly led to his death.December 29, 2014 7:23 am at 7:23 am #1051536
RebYidd23- “Then we should never disagree with anything, because everything that happens is the Rozon of Hashem!”.
Tell me something, What Yeshiva did you learn in? You have Bechira, but what the cop did was
very good! Not only did G-d like his actions, even the government found nothing wrong with them. The posters here & the demonstrators are just being PC!December 29, 2014 12:52 pm at 12:52 pm #1051537
So we agree, this discussion was if there is a right to protest. Yw fan in the op says no.
Are you serious “very good” that a person was killed. I can disagree with those who say it was sad but unavoidable and the police shouldnt be held accountable. You don’t deserve talking to. Killing unarmed, harmless people for crimes that dont carry the deatg penalty, is never “very good” and I dont see how a good person can call it such.
Not good enough, after holding his breath causing him to gasp for air, they shouldve provided oxygen and probably albuterol and steroids too. Not doing so is part of their act of murder.
Neutiquam does not agree with you “in this case it (violence) was too much”
Yw fanDecember 29, 2014 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #1051538
I am not going to reread the entire thread to check the exact posts where YWfan made his posts, I just acknowledged a compliment. But what I have said is that there is no way it could have been called murder, and on this point I am sure there is agreement.
Violence may have been used excessively, by which I mean that had they simply pushed him, twisted his arms, whatever, and used reasonable force, I would believe they were completely justified, even had he died, as he was resisting arrest. However, re watching the video, I believe the measures they used were excessive. Because whilst they were right to restrain him, as he was not coming quietly, they went a bit too far.
Repeat, a bit too far. Not way too far, not a public execution. Just that had they used common sense, they would have realised that a chokehold was not necessary to restrain him. So yes, I believe there is a measure of culpability there not for being killers or thugs (I do not know whether the chokehold is permitted, but that’s all just academic), but for, at that moment, having a common sense failure, and going over the top in restraining a man who would probably have dealt with it better had they used less dramatic tactics. If you watch the video, he begins struggling properly as soon as the arms go around his head, whilst before that he was just being evasive. Simply twisting his arms around would have been easier for both parties. But Garner himself was lying to the police and being difficult, so it’s not as if they could have been much less physical.
So, to sum up, there was culpability on both sides. Garner was being needlessly difficult, so the police had to restrain him in some way, but the police went too far in the measures they used, although I am certain they, at that moment, intended to do their job, and to call them malicious is ridiculous. As is saying it was a racism issue, which it clearly wasn’t.
Furthermore, they had no way of knowing the large man not coming quietly before them had asthma or sleep apnoea, or whatever, so they could hardly be expected to even consider that a method that does not generally pose a risk to life would kill a man, if it was that which killed him (It is entirely possible it wasn’t, I am not sure). So there should be no question of them standing before a murder trial, especially if the methods used were in compliance with regulations.
So to sum up, they may have been stupid at the time, and went too far in doing their job, a common scenario in police work as wnybody who has been pulled over by them probably knows, but they had no way of knowing there was any risk of death, as the fact that he later died, if related, was certainly unforeseeable at the moment the force was applied. And Garner, being as fragile as he was, should have come quietly initially, as, observing the video, he leaves them little choice but to restrain him, even if they did go too far in doing so.
One of the reasons I mistrust this whole ‘murder’ narrative is that there is a cut in the middle of the movie. If you watch any Palestinian propaganda videos, where Israeli brutality is supposedly shown, there are always cuts, which mean the video leaves out the part where the supposed victim was violent or difficult. Does anybody know why there is a cut in the Garner video? Because to me it looks suspicious.December 29, 2014 3:56 pm at 3:56 pm #1051539
nequetaim, wether or not it can be called murder is a (relevant) side issue.
the main issues are: 1) is there enough to go to trial, from your post “there was culpability on both sides” “the measures they used were excessive.” I would think you’d agree, What should be done with “culpable” police who use measures that are “excessive”?
and more to the point, can you agree that the video is ambiguous enogh justify (peacful) protest, and those who protest do not deserve to “lose police protection for a week” (that is what this discussion is about, no need to read the entire thread it is in the OP)?
This part is incorrect: “was certainly unforeseeable at the moment the force was applied” It should have been forseebele, th guy looks like a walking health disasterDecember 29, 2014 6:16 pm at 6:16 pm #1051540
Gamanit: So? If you shoot someone and he lays on the ground screaming in pain and takes an hour for him to finally die, is that not murder? This is no different.
NE: If I had to guess, that cut in the video made it inadmissable as evidence which is probably why there was no indictment. I would love to hear what the cops involved said under oath. Unfortunately, we never will.December 29, 2014 6:44 pm at 6:44 pm #1051541
Ubiquitin – “Are you serious “very good” that a person was killed. I can disagree with those who say it was sad but unavoidable and the police shouldnt be held accountable. You don’t deserve talking to. Killing unarmed, harmless people for crimes that dont carry the deatg penalty, is never “very good” and I dont see how a good person can call it such.”
I was under the impression that this website was for Orthodox Jews; I guess not. It’s “very good” because Hashem wants criminals like that, who don’t keep the 7 Mitzvos B’nai Noach to be killed. I don’t understand you & all the Liberals – Do you want to go back to the days of the Wild, Wild West? Or do you just want lawlessness, so you could be PC? The jury found the cop Not guilty & the libs are upset with that. If they found him guilty, that would be a miscarriage of justice!December 29, 2014 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm #1051542
you are making less and less sense, in the wild west theri was free reign to kill whomever you didnt like, we do not live in the wild west, that is why the police should be held to a standard and answer for their actions.
you must have a different list of 7 mitzvos, mine doesnt include selling loose cigarettes. What on Earth are you talking about,.
Please don’t insult the Torah by dragging it in to defend your krum bloodthirsty shitos. Everybody from Reform going full circle to Neturei karta also claims they have the Torah on their side. If you have a source indicating that selling loose cigarettes or resisting arrest is punishable by the death penalty fine otherwise stop claiming to speak for Hashem.December 29, 2014 7:27 pm at 7:27 pm #1051543
Police are not supposed to kill people.December 29, 2014 7:27 pm at 7:27 pm #1051544
Firstly, the opening question is hypothetical, and so I won’t deal with that. My issue with the protests are twofold. Firstly, they are mainly about racism and not purely police brutality. And I do not think there is any case for saying this was racist. Secondly, if what they were doing is what the law permits, then it cannot go to trial. When I said they were partly responsible, it is for not using common sense to determine that using a chokehold was necessary, but not that they had done any criminal action. The law instructs it’s officers to arrest those in violation of it’s dictum, and to restrain them if they resist, which he was certainly doing. They were stupid to use this particular tactic in this case, but not criminal. They are not murderers, and as such should not be prosecuted.
Of course, protests should always be allowed, and if they choose to make an issue out of it, even if I personally disagree, they should be free to protest without repercussion, so long as they are peaceful. And in the other cases, such as that of Darren Wilson, they are certainly being ridiculous to demand any further process, as the law has been seen to, and what they are asking for is more a lynching than anything else. But as long as they cause no trouble (which many of them have), their rights to free speech should not be curbed.
And of course it was unforeseeable at that moment. This officer had probably arrested many people, some in this manner, like many such arrests nationwide. I’m sure some were obese, out of breath, whatever. The fact that his life was at risk was not something they should have realised, even if he ‘looked unhealthy’. Being fat doesn’t give you asthma or any of the other illnesses he purportedly had.December 29, 2014 7:36 pm at 7:36 pm #1051545
Health: Hashem wants him killed? Excuse me? So why don’t you go around killing every Goy who’s ever stolen? Here’s a hint: Hashem doesn’t want them killed. He wants Misas Beis Din administered when it’s deserved. Not the free vigilante “justice” you’re advocating.
And no, he wasn’t acquitted. The Grand Jury refused to even send it to trial. That is the miscarriage of justice here.
- The topic ‘No police protection for a week’ is closed to new replies.