George Floyd death

Status
Not open for further replies.
Emjay post misleading things with no context? Well, now I've seen everything!

The tweet I posted does not change if you read the actual letter. *facepalm*

Reduction of workload
The heads of house signatories of this letter will alert college tutors, senior tutors, tutors for graduates and welfare staff to the potential need here, and will urge those colleagues to reach out to any Black students who may be experiencing difficulty at this time.

This is a matter for individual discussions between students and their tutors. We urge any undergraduate who is feeling the strain to contact their tutors/senior tutor/welfare supporter as soon as possible, and likewise any graduate student to contact their supervisor/college tutor for graduates/college welfare team

That letter to the students comes on the heels of this:

 
Are you aware that Mr. Floyd was black?
Why you gotta make things about race all the time ?(giving flags to criminals/suspects dishonors the dead who recieved it for service to their country)
If you gonna do that , i have some stats you may be interested in seeing , FBI stats in pristine condition.
 

Great monologue by a certain Nigel Farage (a politician so powerful he effectively ended the careers of two Tory PMs). Very little critical analysis of the aims of BLM UK in the mainstream media. He really needs to return to politics and offer a centre-right alternative to the Tories.

Farage, "centre-right" - lol.

And lol @ "politician so powerful" - couldn't even win a seat in the House of Commons despite trying 7 times.
 
@cerebus and @truman19

Marx and Darwin were extremely racist. Should their statues remain?

Edit:




Do you gentleman think he should be commemorated?

It's not that difficult to understand the difference between people who had mixed records and could be memorialised despite also doing bad things, because they also contributed something really good, and people who are known only in the national memory for doing something horrible, e.g. Robert E. Lee, Nathan Bedford Forrest etc.
 
Trevor Noah Nails ‘The Truth’ About Police Killing Of Rayshard Brooks
“The Daily Show” host revealed the common thread of “ifs” in high-profile police killings of Black people.



Trevor Noah tried to make sense of the fatal police shooting of Rayshard Brooks on “The Daily Show” Monday. He distilled what he said was one truth about the circumstances in the high-profile police killings of Brooks and numerous other Black people.

Brooks was questioned by white officers and failed a sobriety test after he was reported asleep at a Wendy’s drive-thru in Atlanta. He was shot twice in the back after grabbing an officer’s stun gun during the arrest, running and pointing the weapon at an officer, investigators told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

But Noah questioned how an interaction between two cops and a man who probably was drunk could devolve into Brooks losing his life.

“People always say the same thing ― if you didn’t do that, then you would still be alive. They say this **** all the time ― if you didn’t do that.

“The truth is, the ‘ifs’ keep on changing. If you didn’t resist, you would still be alive. Or if you didn’t run away from the cops, you would still be alive. Or if you didn’t have a toy gun and were 12 years old in the middle of the park, then you’d still be alive. Well, if you weren’t wearing a hoodie, you’d still be alive. If you didn’t talk back to the cops, you’d still be alive. If you weren’t sleeping in your bed as a Black woman, you would have still been alive. There’s one common thread beyond all the ifs:
“If you weren’t Black, maybe you’d still be alive.”


Why Did Rayshard Brooks Have to Lose His Life? | The Daily Social Distancing Show

Yeah, it's absurd how they've just accepted that people will just be killed. As if there's no other way a situation like this could be handled.

How does Germany have fewer than 10 police killings a year while the US has over 1000?
 

Read her letter and the letter she was responding to and you’ll see the context.


The measures in place are not just for black students.
 


Your confirmation bias is tripping you up a bit, Em.

Alhambra police began investigating the incident as a possible case of food tampering, but soon determined there did not appear to be any malicious intent involved, officials said.

“After conducting interviews with the employees and a walk through inspection of the restaurant, it was learned the cutting blade found in the food order came from an industrial food chopper,”

There would be no way for them to know it was for police either, since it was phoned in.

A South Carolina National Guard spokesperson confirmed the soldiers never filed a report with Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department and they believe the incident was not intentional.

No evidence presented, no police report filed, no pizza shop found to be involved in any way, with many being closed, and again, ordered via Uber Eats (supposedly), so no way of knowing they were police officers in the first place.

And there seems to be a bit of a pattern with these stories...


 
Is this a statue or not?

1280px-USMC_War_Memorial_Sunset_Parade_2008-07-08.jpg
War memorial, dedicated to the lives of all US Marines lost since 1775.

It is defined by the National Parks as such.
 
For those still confused about the Rayshard shooting. Here's a good write up over on Reddit. Enjoy.

Here is the issue with the general public: READ the law.

The general public needs to understand that use of force incidents are technical. They are judged based on the law and not opinion. If you don't understand Graham vs Connor, or Tennessee vs Garner, you aren't qualified to give an opinion in regards to if the force was justified or not.

So lets first look at Graham vs Connor:


"The Court held that the actions of a LEO must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable LEO and not a responsible person. This is significant as most criminal and civil standards incorporate and rely upon a reasonable person or “reasonable man” standard as the law once described it."

"Our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence has long recognized that the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.”

“The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.”

"The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”

“The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.”

Now lets look at Tennessee vs Garner

Synopsis of Rule of Law. : If an officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat of serious bodily harm either to fellow officers or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force.

Now lets look at the situation.

You have a man who is in his vehicle at the drive through at Wendy's passed out. Imagine you are at a drive through trying to get food, but the line is not moving, because the person in front of you is passed out drunk. So obviously, this generated 9-1-1 calls. Officers arrived on scene and had reasonable suspicion that he was DUI. Obviously. So they administered field sobriety tests. The man failed the sobriety test, so the man was now going to be placed under arrest for DUI. At some point a struggle ensued.

The man decides to take it upon himself and fight officers. Which is a crime:

Georgia Statute Georgia Code [Section 16-10-24] Obstruction of a law enforcement officer) - Misdemeanor section (If you knowingly and willfully obstruct or hinder any law enforcement officer from completing his or her duties, you are guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by 12 months in county jail.

The man then begins then resisting more, the officers attempt to overcome the mans resistance, they attempt to tase him, however the man takes grabs the officers taser.

So now you have another crime:

Georgia Code Section 16-10-24 Obstruction of a law enforcement officer) - Felony section ** you knowingly and willfully obstruct or hinder officers from completing their duties by threatening violence or actually committing violence, then this is a felony, punishable by a prison term ranging from 1-5 years.

So you have 2 crimes so far, DUI and Felony Obstruction.

The man then takes the taser from the officer. Which is another felony: Grand Theft: Georgia Statute ( § 17-10-5.) "Property valued at more than $500, the crime is punishable as a felony. Police Tasers (X-26's) cost in excess of $1,000.

And assaulting the officer which is another felony:

Georgia Statute (16-5-21) (I) A person who knowingly commits the offense of aggravated assault upon an officer of the court while such officer is engaged in, or on account of the performance of, his or her official duties shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than five nor more than 20 years

2 Counts of Felony assault also, because it was two officers there.


So far we have DUI, and 3 Felonies that have been committed.

The man then runs with the taser he stole from the officer by snatching it from the officers hand, which is another felony: Removal of weapon from public official

(a) For the purposes of this Code section, the term "firearm" shall include stun guns and tasers. A stun gun or taser is any device that is powered by electrical charging units such as batteries and emits an electrical charge in excess of 20,000 volts or is otherwise capable of incapacitating a person by an electrical charge.

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to remove or attempt to remove a firearm, chemical spray, or baton from the possession of another person if:

(1) The other person is lawfully acting within the course and scope of employment; and

(2) The person has knowledge or reason to know that the other person is employed as:

(A) A peace officer as defined in paragraph (8) of Code Section 35-8-2;

Any person who violates subsection (b) of this Code section shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years.

The man and then turns around and points it, which is another felony count of Aggravated Assault against a Peace officer because of his intent.

Now lets freeze here, in this instant in time, based on the fact that the man had no due regard for the publics safety by operating a motor vehicle while under the influence (tens of thousands die each year from drunk drivers), based on the fact that the man resisted officers when they tried to place him under arrest, based on the fact the man assaulted the officers, who were attempting to make a lawful arrest, based on the fact the man committed numerous felonies, including grand theft, removal of weapon from a public official, 2 counts of felony assault, felony aggravated assault, based on the mans intent to use the stolen taser to incapacitate the officers, based on the totality of the circumstances, the officer had probable cause to believe that the man posed a significant threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officers and others; and furthermore based on his actions, showed that he had the intent and was willing to do whatever was necessary to evade arrest. Courts have deemed, Police need not wait until a person is being subjected to a threat of serious bodily injury or death and can stop it at the point a reasonable and prudent person is likely to believe it is about to be carried out.

Thus to protect himself, as well as the public, deadly force was used.

Justified.

I'd still like to know on what grounds did they fire the policeman. I'm going to assume politics had its way.
 
It's a statue which is also a memorial. Are you gonna redefine statues now?
Statue is of a person.

That memorial commemorates and honours the deaths of all US Marines killed.

You making up your own definitions now.
 
Statue is of a person.

That memorial commemorates and honours the deaths of all US Marines killed.

You making up your own definitions now.


You're trying but failing hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue Scroll down it's there.


A persistent rumor has attributed the existence of a thirteenth hand from the six statues of the men depicted on the memorial, and speculation about the possible reasons for it. When informed of the rumor, de Weldon exclaimed, "Thirteen hands. Who needed 13 hands? Twelve were enough."
The $5.37 million donation, made through the National Park Foundation, supported cleaning and waxing the statue, polishing the black granite panels, regilding inscriptions, relandscaping, and making repairs to the pavement, lighting and flagpole.


While the statue depicts one of the most famous incidents of World War II, the memorial is dedicated to all Marines who have given their lives in defense of the United States since 1775.
The Picture behind the Statue
Once the statue was completed in plaster, it was carefully disassembled and trucked to Brooklyn, N.Y., for casting in bronze.
Here they were bolted and welded together, and the statue was treated with preservatives.
The figures in the statue occupy the same positions as they were identified at the time in Rosenthal's historic photograph.
These were the men believed to have been the actual flag raisers when de Weldon created the statue.
The entire cost of the statue ($850,000) was donated by US Marines, friends of the Marine Corps, and members of the Naval Service.


The U.S. Marine Corps War Memorial's world-famous statue, which is based on the iconic photograph taken by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal, depicts the six Marines who raised of the second American flag at Iwo Jima in the Japanese Volcano Islands on February 23, 1945, signifying the conclusion of the American campaign in the Pacific during World War II.
The memorial was dedicated on November 10, 1954 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and the American flag has flown from the statue 24 hours a day, 365 days a year by presidential proclamation ever since
The bronze statue was made by sculptor Felix W. de Weldon. He worked with the three surviving Marines from the battle, Rene A. Gagnon, Ira Hayes and John H. Bradley, to model their faces in clay.

There's more.

Everybody knows it's a statue except those that want to redefine what a statue is by the looks of things.

 
Is that the best you can do?

What else should I say? You're trying to put words in my mouth and impute things I never intended to mean. I'm not "fine" with tearing down or vandalizing the majority of statues or memorials. I just think Confederate "heroes" who were actually traitors who fought for slavery have no right to being honoured and memorialized in the streets, it's disgraceful and an open f you to black Americans.
 
For those still confused about the Rayshard shooting. Here's a good write up over on Reddit. Enjoy.



I'd still like to know on what grounds did they fire the policeman. I'm going to assume politics had its way.

Lol, what a load of sht, it is almost as if Xarog posted it. 20 paragraphs to say one thing.

Doesn't matter how many "felonies" someone commits in than span of 2 minutes, racking them up to make the person sound like Hitler doesn't justify gunning him down in the back
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X