Author Topic: Eric Garner  (Read 4633 times)

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Eric Garner
« on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 02:50:01 AM »
I believe it was Michael Brown who was killed in that shooting incident and I was willing to give the cop benefit of the doubt because if you don't trust the law who are you going to trust? Besides, it was a case of he said vs he said, so yeah, OK fine.

This Eric Garner video floating around where he is choked to death is so disturbing. I can see the officer's intent was not to kill but to subdue him to arrest him, but man.. it just seems so unfair that no one is being punished for this.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #1 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 02:56:04 AM »
I feel really sad watching this:

http://www.ytpak.com/?component=video&task=view&id=6o572qVlnWs

The moment he said I can't breathe they should have gotten off of him.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,464
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #2 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 08:00:00 AM »
I'm in the middle of these issues. Most of the time I don't believe the victim is as innocent as the public wants to believe. In most of the high-profile cases that have come up lately, there is clearly at least some guilt on the part of the victims. Not enough to make it okay, but enough to leave reasonable doubt about accidental death in a lot of cases. At the same time, I think cops need to be held accountable way more often in this country than they actually are, and trends in the police force these days are extremely alarming, most especially the rapidity of their militarizing. Not good. This particular guy needs to be punished simply because chokeholds are not a legal methodology where he serves. They've been banned. There can be no dispute about this, even if other stuff is subjective. But really ... you fucking killed a guy in a chokehold. If you can't adequately tell how much physical damage you're doing to another human being in trying to subdue them, you do not deserve to be a cop. You need to be fired at the very least. It should only ever be okay (and by "okay" I mean "justifiable", not really okay) to kill a civilian if that person is actively trying to kill you by shooting you, stabbing you, setting you on fire, whatever. Accidental death as a byproduct of simply arresting someone? Absolutely not fucking okay, not even a little bit. And the whole "let's pile 16 cops on one guy" thing is ridiculous. There was no need, as there usually isn't, for that degree of force from the one officer when that many cops are present. Yes, I understand that dealing with crime is dangerous and they need to protect themselves, but that video demonstrates the absolute definition of overkill. Literally.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #3 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 08:40:40 AM »
My brother, the lawyer/public defender, told us something very disturbing on Thanksgiving Day.  I'll start off with the conclusion:  It's easier for a cop to shoot someone on the street legally than for a soldier in a war zone.

Soldiers have rules of engagement, usually quite strict.  Apparently, all a cop has to say is that he feared for his life, and he is justified in using deadly force.  Here in Ohio, we had some jackass of a cop jump on top of the hood of a (white) girl's car, and shoot her 4 times through the windshield.  There were several passengers in the car when he did this.  The car went out of control and crashed.  What was this girl doing that cost her life, and endangered others?  She was leaving a party, and refused to stop for an alcohol check.  This could have happened to my niece.

The cop was just exonerated recently.

My brother's take is that the rules have to change.  Otherwise murders by cop will continue, as well as the civil-unrest consequences.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #4 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 09:30:52 AM »
I'm in the middle of these issues. Most of the time I don't believe the victim is as innocent as the public wants to believe. In most of the high-profile cases that have come up lately, there is clearly at least some guilt on the part of the victims. Not enough to make it okay, but enough to leave reasonable doubt about accidental death in a lot of cases. At the same time, I think cops need to be held accountable way more often in this country than they actually are, and trends in the police force these days are extremely alarming, most especially the rapidity of their militarizing. Not good. This particular guy needs to be punished simply because chokeholds are not a legal methodology where he serves. They've been banned. There can be no dispute about this, even if other stuff is subjective. But really ... you fucking killed a guy in a chokehold. If you can't adequately tell how much physical damage you're doing to another human being in trying to subdue them, you do not deserve to be a cop. You need to be fired at the very least. It should only ever be okay (and by "okay" I mean "justifiable", not really okay) to kill a civilian if that person is actively trying to kill you by shooting you, stabbing you, setting you on fire, whatever. Accidental death as a byproduct of simply arresting someone? Absolutely not fucking okay, not even a little bit. And the whole "let's pile 16 cops on one guy" thing is ridiculous. There was no need, as there usually isn't, for that degree of force from the one officer when that many cops are present. Yes, I understand that dealing with crime is dangerous and they need to protect themselves, but that video demonstrates the absolute definition of overkill. Literally.

That is so well said with such logic and intelligence. Thank you. I hadn't thought about it that way at all. Yes, now I am convinced the cop should have been punished.

Quote
Here in Ohio, we had some jackass of a cop jump on top of the hood of a (white) girl's car, and shoot her 4 times through the windshield.  There were several passengers in the car when he did this.  The car went out of control and crashed.  What was this girl doing that cost her life, and endangered others?  She was leaving a party, and refused to stop for an alcohol check.  This could have happened to my niece.

I am just speechless.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,880
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #5 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 03:24:46 PM »
The fact that there has been several of these events happening over the last couple months and so far none of them have gone to trial is sickening. No wonder you have people not trusting cops and losing faith in the justice system if they can kill someone and basically not have to answer for it.

Offline scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,598
    • Facebook Me
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #6 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 03:59:07 PM »
The militarizing of police - in terms of the equipment they are getting - isn't the issue.  The issue is the attitudes.  They need to more often find non-violent and non-confrontational means to de-escalate a situation rather than immediately whip out a gun.  I also wish they could be held more accountable for their own crimes.

A lot of people are conflating the police body camera issue with spying, and I think that's a huge mistake.  Our government spying on us is a problem, but this has nothing to do with body cameras.  The recordings for body cameras are useful for finding out what happened in a given situation.  Sometimes, they help exonerate police officers when they are accused of doing things they didn't do or showing that the things they did do were reasonable given the accusers actual actions in the situation.  Other times, they can be used to show that the police acted improperly.

I think they are a good thing, but only if the officers will be held accountable for when they are unable to produce a recording or have been found to be tampering with the camera so that it does not work properly.

I also think that judges need to stop holding police officers' word over the average citizen.  There are so many examples of police acting improperly but being caught on camera unbeknownst to them that I don't think the average officer is any more trustworthy than the average citizen.

Offline Quemaqua

  • 古い塩
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 16,464
  • パンダは触るな。
    • Bookruptcy
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #7 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 06:18:46 PM »
Well said. I'll disagree with you on the militarizing of the police, though. Granted, that's not what THIS problem is about, but think of how much more frightening that makes cops that aren't held accountable for their actions. The two to me are a terrifying combo.

天才的な閃きと平均以下のテクニックやな。 課長有野

Offline gpw11

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7,163
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #8 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 07:51:27 PM »
My brother, the lawyer/public defender, told us something very disturbing on Thanksgiving Day.  I'll start off with the conclusion:  It's easier for a cop to shoot someone on the street legally than for a soldier in a war zone.

Soldiers have rules of engagement, usually quite strict.  Apparently, all a cop has to say is that he feared for his life, and he is justified in using deadly force.  Here in Ohio, we had some jackass of a cop jump on top of the hood of a (white) girl's car, and shoot her 4 times through the windshield.  There were several passengers in the car when he did this.  The car went out of control and crashed.  What was this girl doing that cost her life, and endangered others?  She was leaving a party, and refused to stop for an alcohol check.  This could have happened to my niece.

The cop was just exonerated recently.

My brother's take is that the rules have to change.  Otherwise murders by cop will continue, as well as the civil-unrest consequences.

I had a friend/coworker who was a marine.  He met some girl, followed her back to Canada, and started working under the table for us because her brother was there.  He once was saying how a lot of guys he was in the service with tried to go into law enforcement but it didn't often work out.  Hiring boards, or whoever, are somewhat cautious because there's a very different skill set needed for a police officer when compared to a soldier in a combat zone.  A few guys went all the way through with it and were now police officers and when they'd get together they'd remark how mind blowing the differences were in mentality.  Like, it was the opposite of what the hiring boards were concerned with - the police officers had terrible discipline when dealing with suspects and the general public, while the guys just out of the military didn't for the most part.  He thought a lot of it was because the military is so quick to discipline and court marshal while the police administration almost seemed to do anything to avoid disciplining officers, which is pretty much exactly what your brother said.

As for the militarization of the police force, I think it is a huge factor - not just the equipment, but the mentality they're trained with.  I read somewhere (and have no idea how accurate it is) that over the last decade and a half or so the training has caused a mentality shift where every routine action is all of a sudden life or death.  Every stop, every interaction, every incident could lead to their deaths and they act accordingly - and with excessive force - in many cases. Previously, there was a lot more faith in the general public and a lot more lenience, which resulted in a lot more incidents like this. Whatever I read went on for a while about this and it seemed to make sense.

I don't think the reasons behind it really matter.  I mean, it could equally just be a case that we hear about it a lot more because almost every single person on the street has a device to record video on them at all times now. The thing is that it IS an issue and SOMETHING needs to be done.  Cameras on police officers is a good step, but will it do anything? The garner is a perfect case - if you have a man being choked out to death on camera and no one is even indicted (not even convicted, indicted).  The medical examiners office ruled it a homicide, it's on tape.  The cops didn't even get suspended, just moved to desk jobs. The EMTs were suspended without pay for not responding fast enough - the police who actually were involved in killing this guy received no punishment.  How fucked is that? 

And that's the whole thing - there is increasing unrest and an increasing public perception that the police are untouchable. I don't know enough about the situation to say whether or not this cop should have been convicted, but should he have been indicted?  Fuck yes.  I don't know what evidence there is out there, but does the fact that there is clear video from two angles showing an officer breaking department regulations with the direct result being the death of a restrained man mean that he should be fired immediately?  Fuck yes.

It makes a lot of people ask what it takes for someone to actually be punished. And sure, there are a lot of people out there who think that the police can do no wrong, but those people are idiots. It should be a no brainer that we hold the police to a higher standard of personal discipline and conduct than an average citizen, but for some weird fucking reason the powers that be seem to think it should go the other way.  Something definitely has to change.


Offline K-man

  • Post-aholic
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,947
  • HOW'S IT FEEEEEL IDOL
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #9 on: Saturday, December 06, 2014, 09:09:42 PM »
I'm still somewhat torn on the Ferguson deal.  But Eric Garner was literally killed over selling loose cigarettes.   


Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #10 on: Sunday, December 07, 2014, 03:38:41 AM »
Quote
A lot of people are conflating the police body camera issue with spying, and I think that's a huge mistake.  Our government spying on us is a problem, but this has nothing to do with body cameras.  The recordings for body cameras are useful for finding out what happened in a given situation.  Sometimes, they help exonerate police officers when they are accused of doing things they didn't do or showing that the things they did do were reasonable given the accusers actual actions in the situation.  Other times, they can be used to show that the police acted improperly.

I feel that sometimes people are so afraid of being spied upon that they misdirect their fears. As you said, a citizen being spied up is wrong, but a police officer on duty is at that moment not a private citizen. He is performing a service and it is about making sure he is doing it right.

On the other hand, how much would the cameras do? Eric Garner's case was documented better on video than you could expect from a cop cam on an officer, yet nothing was done.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #11 on: Sunday, December 07, 2014, 05:18:57 AM »
I feel that sometimes people are so afraid of being spied upon that they misdirect their fears. As you said, a citizen being spied up is wrong, but a police officer on duty is at that moment not a private citizen. He is performing a service and it is about making sure he is doing it right.

On the other hand, how much would the cameras do? Eric Garner's case was documented better on video than you could expect from a cop cam on an officer, yet nothing was done.

Because the rules practically give him carte blanche to kill at the slightest provocation.  That the clear video evidence made no difference is proof of his impunity.  Add in the civil forfeiture scandal, and we arrive at a frightening fascist police state, only yellow stars and mass executions away from the most familiar one.  (Then again, black people are plainly recognizable without yellow stars marking them.)

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #12 on: Sunday, December 07, 2014, 06:44:26 AM »
So that's the point. The rules need to change because clearly more cameras aren't the answer.


Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #13 on: Sunday, December 07, 2014, 07:28:10 AM »
Yeah.  Will they?  I won't bet my life on it.

Offline Pugnate

  • What? You no like?
  • Global Moderator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 12,186
    • OW
Re: Eric Garner
« Reply #14 on: Sunday, December 07, 2014, 02:03:40 PM »
I don't think so but there are lots of protests across America. Happy to see that.