• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

F is for Fascism (Ferguson MO)

Even the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention has released a statement condemning the non-indictment.
http://erlc.com/article/erlcs-russell-moore-responds-to-eric-garner-case

ERLC President, Russell Moore, responds to this case.
“I’m stunned speechless by this news. We hear a lot about the rule of law—and rightly so. But a government that can choke a man to death on video for selling cigarettes is not a government living up to a biblical definition of justice or any recognizable definition of justice. We may not agree in this country on every particular case and situation, but it’s high time we start listening to our African American brothers and sisters in this country when they tell us they are experiencing a problem.
“For those of us in Christ, we need to recognize that when one part of the Body of Christ hurts, the whole Body of Christ hurts. It’s time for us in Christian churches to not just talk about the gospel but live out the gospel by tearing down these dividing walls not only by learning and listening to one another but also by standing up and speaking out for one another.”
 
The use of deadly force in many of these examples are clearly excessive.
 
Deacon923 said:
#justiceforwhitecollegestudents

Seriously though I'm glad this officer is being held accountable. Wonder if his union rep will be able to spin this into 2-week suspension with pay.
Click to expand...

The results are easily google able.
 
Deacon923 said:
#justiceforwhitecollegestudents

Seriously though I'm glad this officer is being held accountable. Wonder if his union rep will be able to spin this into 2-week suspension with pay.
Click to expand...

Actually he retired without facing charges.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/11/deputy-who-choked-student-gets-to-retire-wont-face-charges/

It's funny that the first link I got was The Daily Caller. They seem pretty pissed that a 21 year old white kid got choked by a cop. So I check the front page to see their lead story.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/03/o...uments-about-white-house-role-in-irs-scandal/

When Lois Lerner is a bigger problem to you than cops who choked a man to death, you have a problem.
 
Junebug said:
I don't think your conclusion is correct. The fact that a justification statute might be unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment as applied to a civil claim of unreasonable seizure does not necessarily mean that it is unconstitutional as applied in a criminal case brought against the officer. Again, the state is not required to criminalize unconstitutional behavior. If, in response to Gardner, the Missouri legislature had repealed the statute (or that portion of it ruled unconstitutional as applied) I'd agree with you. But it didn't, thus evidencing that the Missouri legislature had no desire to criminalize the behavior permitted by the statue.
Click to expand...

It is unconstitutional in a criminal case in the sense that it will be considered an unreasonable seizure and all subsequent evidence will be suppressed as a result. Whether the officer is guilty of a crime is quite another matter.
 
As far as the Garner case, I'm shocked there wasn't an indictment for manslaughter or some other type of culpable negligence type charge. I can think of no other reason other than the DA pushed for a no true bill.
 
Les Grossman said:
As far as the Garner case, I'm shocked there wasn't an indictment for manslaughter or some other type of culpable negligence type charge. I can think of no other reason other than the DA pushed for a no true bill.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's why I was wondering what charges were presented. You've gotta think it's at least criminally negligent homicide for using a banned maneuver to subdue him.
 
Officer Told Grand Jury He Meant No Harm to Eric Garner

On the video, the men toppled to the ground, but the arm around Mr. Garner’s neck did not appear to move. Officer Pantaleo told jurors he continued to hold on to Mr. Garner as he struggled to regain his balance, Mr. London said. He said he wanted to make sure that Mr. Garner was not injured by other officers rushing in, as well as to prevent Mr. Garner from possibly biting one of them.

On the video, Mr. Garner, 43, can be heard saying that he could not breathe. Officer Pantaleo told the grand jurors he heard those pleas.

“That’s why he attempted to get off as quick as he could,” Mr. London said. “He thought that once E.M.T. arrived, everything would be O.K.”
Click to expand...
 
Les Grossman said:
As far as the Garner case, I'm shocked there wasn't an indictment for manslaughter or some other type of culpable negligence type charge. I can think of no other reason other than the DA pushed for a no true bill.
Click to expand...

The only explanation I've seen so far claims the DA overwhelmed the grand jury with evidence and concerned the grand jury with the intent of the cop.
 
Junebug said:
I have to say this again (I said it about 200 pages ago)--I am fed up with this being painted as a racial issue. It's not. It's a police overreaching issue that disproportionately impacts black people who, for reasons we can argue about until we are blue in the face, have more encounters with cops than white people.

In my view, and based only on what I have seen in the papers, Eric Gardner was likely murdered, and the officer(s) involved should at least stand trial. But not because Gardner was black. Because he was likely murdered. When people try to turn this into a race war (and some of the posters on here are so guilty of this at every turn) consensus is lost and the real message--police brutality is a problem that needs desperately to be addressed--is lost in the shouting match that ensues.
Click to expand...

Why are consensus and the real message lost because the victims are generally black men? Why does it make it more difficult for focus on the issues? Is it because you don't want to be seen on the same side as Al Sharpton and Obama?
 
wfumike02 said:
Yeah, that's why I was wondering what charges were presented. You've gotta think it's at least criminally negligent homicide for using a banned maneuver to subdue him.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know either. If they just presented a first degree murder charge (and I have no idea why they'd do that), then they should really convene another grand jury.
 
Junebug said:
I have to say this again (I said it about 200 pages ago)--I am fed up with this being painted as a racial issue. It's not. It's a police overreaching issue that disproportionately impacts black people who, for reasons we can argue about until we are blue in the face, have more encounters with cops than white people.

In my view, and based only on what I have seen in the papers, Eric Gardner was likely murdered, and the officer(s) involved should at least stand trial. But not because Gardner was black. Because he was likely murdered. When people try to turn this into a race war (and some of the posters on here are so guilty of this at every turn) consensus is lost and the real message--police brutality is a problem that needs desperately to be addressed--is lost in the shouting match that ensues.
Click to expand...

To a certain extent, I agree with you - but it is not only black people or liberals who make this a "racial issue". It's also police-supporting conservatives. Every time any black community (which, as you admit, is disproportionately impacted by police brutality) rises up and complains about a Michael Brown or an Eric Garner or the latest black victim of police brutality, talking heads and message board posters and the rest of the right-wing spectrum immediately call the leaders of the community "race hustlers" and start whining about Al Sharpton this and Jesse Jackson that and "why don't they focus on black-on-black crime" (as if black community leaders don't fight that every day). It's the #1 tactic of the right to minimize and deflect attention from the issue and the actions of the cops.
 
avalon said:
Officer Told Grand Jury He Meant No Harm to Eric Garner

On the video, the men toppled to the ground, but the arm around Mr. Garner’s neck did not appear to move. Officer Pantaleo told jurors he continued to hold on to Mr. Garner as he struggled to regain his balance, Mr. London said. He said he wanted to make sure that Mr. Garner was not injured by other officers rushing in, as well as to prevent Mr. Garner from possibly biting one of them.

On the video, Mr. Garner, 43, can be heard saying that he could not breathe. Officer Pantaleo told the grand jurors he heard those pleas.

“That’s why he attempted to get off as quick as he could,” Mr. London said. “He thought that once E.M.T. arrived, everything would be O.K.”
Click to expand...

He is one slow cop then.
 
PhDeac said:
The only explanation I've seen so far claims the DA overwhelmed the grand jury with evidence and concerned the grand jury with the intent of the cop.
Click to expand...

And the intent of the cop is meaningless for those lesser charges. As a matter of fact, they're lesser charges because the person did not intend to kill anybody.
 
Junebug said:
The message isn't lost because police brutality disproportionately affects black people. It's lost because people like Al Sharpton argue that that fact means police are racist. It's divisive when the underlying issue is one that really shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

We've been having these conversations for weeks now. One thing I don't think you even try to understand is that it's not "police are racist." That's reductionist and frankly plain stupid. It's much bigger than that. The other thing is these police interactions aren't because black men are more likely to commit crime. Selling loose cigarettes is barely a crime. Walking in the street is barely a crime. Carrying a toy gun or toy sword isn't a crime at all. Neither is getting something from your car.

But the fact of the matter is people call 911 when they see black men doing these things and police are taught to respond to these black men as if they're killers. And when something goes down, people like you think a story like Wilson's is believable because it's loaded with slavery and Jim Crow stereotypes. Check the #crimingwhilewhite link. Plenty of stories of white people in situations like that who faced nothing like what these black male victims face.

And even going back to your point, if people can't see a problem simply because the people it affects are black, that's the true problem and reflects the lack of empathy for black people reflected in the research.
 
Junebug said:
The message isn't lost because police brutality disproportionately affects black people. It's lost because people like Al Sharpton argue that that fact means police are racist. It's divisive when the underlying issue is one that really shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

I mean, it just depends on who you listen to. For whatever reason (and probably because I don't watch cable news), I have made it through all of these tragedies without having to listen to "people like Al Sharpton." I have heard really amazing accounts from others on public radio and in print/online, though, that haven't played into those tropes and that do shed light onto these situations.

It kind of goes without saying, but the FOX News vs. MSNBC schtick we have on here really makes it hard to have any actual dialogue on these issues. That's a shame because the past 3-4 pages have been really enlightening.
 
Strickland33 said:
I mean, it just depends on who you listen to. For whatever reason (and probably because I don't watch cable news), I have made it through all of these tragedies without having to listen to "people like Al Sharpton." I have heard really amazing accounts from others on public radio and in print/online, though, that haven't played into those tropes and that do shed light onto these situations.

It kind of goes without saying, but the FOX News vs. MSNBC schtick we have on here really makes it hard to have any actual dialogue on these issues. That's a shame because the past 3-4 pages have been really enlightening.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Junebug would probably call Coates, Bouie, or any of the other quality black male writers who have been covering these issues "people like Al Sharpton." He believes anybody who talks about race is a race baiter or race hustler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top