Transcript of George Floyd's murder prove that he was cooperating

How is your absurd question that my comment that a person who is sitting at a park with with zero signs of crime or criminal behavior should be OK, but that means the police not arrest ANYONE?

What apparently your statement is that police should be allowed to arrest someone who shows no criminal behaviour or crime is that the the problem it is a BLACK person who is the legitimately can arrest be arrested with no basis, except for being black. Which is truly enough.

Which was the point of BLM and supporters getting sick and tired of that harassment and deaths.

 

You propose absurd strawmen and then expect rational answers.

 

Sure, ignore all the scientific evidence and make up a story to fit a narrow optic.

 

Yes, I believe we all agree that it was murder.

 

They were lwaful orders he resisted and then physically struggled with the police and brought about his own death.

 

He resisted arrest and his life was not imminent danger. Do you believe police can no longer arrest black persons and they now have a right to refuse to be arrested?

 

This is how it works: police stops killing black people.

A poster on your side, @Rush_is_Right , posted a video about this that makes sense to me.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/i-agree-the-police-need-much-more-training.573998/

 

That does not answer my questions?

"How do you arrest someone if they resist arrest? Or somehow, are the police going avoid arresting black people? Exactly how is this supposed to work?"

 

He most certainly DID deserve to die. That's what happens when you run and attempt to use a potentially deadly weapon on a cop. And the rest of us are better off for it. Good riddance.

 

That's another matter. It's not the same thing as getting shot in the back while running away...
or getting choked to death for not getting into a police vehicle.
How does a cop (or you) justify killing someone that has not even been convicted of a crime yet?

 

I believe that anybody who can't tell the difference between panic and resisting arrest requires enormously more training if they expect to be a professional police officer. And anybody who believes that if you resist arrest you forfeit your life is not only not qualified to be a cop... but needs serious treatment as a sociopath.

 

Of course THAT doesn't. But that part you quoted plus the rest of my post does.

If you want to know in detail how it should work, that requires professionals in the field to figure it out. And the video gives many hints. My post shows that, whatever that is, the way it should definitely not work is that cops kill the black guy.

 

No. They do not.

"How do you arrest someone if they resist arrest? Or somehow, are the police going avoid arresting black people? Exactly how is this supposed to work?"

 

Show in the U.S. code, where it says that anything this guy did "deserves" the death penalty. If you can't show that, you have lost all credibility.

 

Even his own companion in the car told him to stop resisting, he had refused to show his hands prior to that, people whobhad gathered while he was on the ground urged him to stop resisting. And the fact remains he was having a cardiac event before he collapsed on his own to the ground.

 

Seriously? When you use violence to create a credible fear of imminent death or grave bodily harm in another individual, you have opened the door to being killed, legally. With some likely exceptions (NY, NJ, CA, the usual suspects), it's considered a clean shoot in just about any jurisdiction. I'm surprised you need to be told that.

 

No. Not really. You had already lost credibility when you made the original statement.

Uhm... do you know who George Floyd is? Or anything whatsoever about the case?

No?

I didn't think so....

 

We were discussing the Atlanta Wendy's shooting, which you yourself brought up as noted here. A Wendy's that the thug mob later burned to the ground as if they were somehow at fault to begin with. Do try to keep up, especially when you effectively changed the topic.

 

Worse! You are implying that the unarmed guy running away from them with an empty taser in his hand created "a fear of imminent death or grave bodily harm"?

The nonsense keeps coming and coming.

 

I have been unable to find out what model taser was used. They vary from one shot, two shot and multiple shots.

 

If a cop doesn't know what type of taser he's carrying, he shouldn't be a cop.

In any case, a taser is not life-threatening.

 

Two misleading statements.

1) I am sure the cop knew what kind of taser. However, I don't know and apparently you do not know either.

2) The Atlanta prosecuting attorney said they were a lethal weapon a few years ago. Additionally, the taser would render the cop helpless and Brooks could have taken his gun.

 

It doesn't matter if you or I know. Neither of us killed the guy. It only matters that the cop knew.

So an empty taser from a guy running away could have rendered two cops helpless...

Amazing the extent to which Trump supporters can go to to defend the actions of a murderer.

 

You claimed it was only a one shot taser. You do not know whether it was a one shot taser.

Again, you do not know whether it is a one shot taser. Amazing the extent you would go to in order to make the cop a murderer.

Additionally, the cop said he was unsure whether he fired the taser at him.

 

By running and using a (presumably stolen, but they don't know if he already had another) weapon on the cops, he has established himself as a violent thug. That's good enough. It's already been explained to you why a taser is "less than lethal" instead of "nonlethal".