So again you aren't thinking about both sides.

As to your post, I feel bad for the honest cop who lost his job and the life he had because the violent criminal thug, based on 2 incidents on that night, decided he wasn't going to obey the law of the rules of society.

Protestors blocking traffic and trying to get to Rockerfeller Center, where Tree lighting ceremony on TV is going on.

Glad cops are stopping them, refusing to allow protestors into area, and as they aren't listening, arrests are being made.

http://nypost.com/2014/12/04/eric-garne ... to-resist/

Blame only the man who tragically decided to resist
By Bob McManusDecember 4, 2014 | 12:03am

Here is a portion of the story

Eric Garner and Michael Brown had much in common, not the least of which was this: On the last day of their lives, they made bad decisions. Especially bad decisions.

Each broke the law — petty offenses, to be sure, but sufficient to attract the attention of the police.

And then — tragically, stupidly, fatally, inexplicably — each fought the law.

The law won, of course, as it almost always does.

For there are many New Yorkers — politicians, activists, trial lawyers, all the usual suspects — who will now seek to profit from a tragedy that wouldn't have happened had Eric Garner made a different decision.

He was a victim of himself. It’s just that simple.

It's appalling how ignorant you are.

To wit, I do see both sides. I likely come off as arguing one side more simply because someone needs to counterbalance all the people like you who try to win arguments by yelling the loudest, repeating points ad nauseam, and being frustratingly ignorant. I though lovemerox was guilty of this, at least he was capable of a conversation. You're a robot with the IQ of a toddler programmed like a parrot to spout the same incessant crap over and over.

Cops have a hard job. My contention is the entire way they do that job has spiraled into methods that were never intended. We need to radically change the approach to policing this nation. Let's take Eric Garner's situation. It was escalated by the police into a physical confrontation. Their goal was to arrest a man, and they decided to swarm him to accomplish that goal. Why didn't they simply say, sir you're under arrest, face the wall and put your hands behind your back? From there, they should be practicing deescalation techniques that they should have been trained on, methods to calming people like Eric Garner down, not instinctively resorting to violence that leads to horrifying street fight maneuvers and death.

Take Tamir Rice, the 12 year old waving a gun in public. You have a boy sitting at a pavilion with no one around him, no one in any immediate danger. Police come blazing in, and 5 seconds later a child is dead. Again, they should be practicing deescalation, not escalating situations to a violent conclusion. Park the car further away, get on the loud speaker and give out commands, do everything you can and be sure there's a real violent threat before resorting to shooting a child.

It's no different with Brown. He was very wrong in how he acted, he should be in jail. He didn't have to die, yet he did because the situation was handled poorly. The officer acted on aggressive instincts and was trained to escalate (pursue, detain) rather than deescalate. He encountered a violent threat, if he felt his only solution was to shoot the person or let them get away, he should have removed himself from the situation, and called for backup.

Three people are dead because of aggressive police tactics. I do see both sides. It's the police's job to protect and serve, not escalate situations into violent encounters.

All of what Eagle said.

Calling me ignorant, when for one your facts in the Garner case is fantasy, as watch the video, he is bickering with the cops while they try to talk to him, then when they try to put him under arrests, he fights with them, by resisting arrest, raising his hands telling him to leave him alone, and fighting so they had to take him down.

Ok, Mr Al Sharpton!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1ka4oKu1jo

You are clueless my friend.

Two responses:

1. Eric Garner's death is troubling in certain ways, particularly use of a wrestling-style physical maneuver the police department reportedly forbids. But your scenario of Policeman Dandy coming up to say, "Please, sir, I am here to arrest you" and Garner presumably saying, "I respect your candor, sir, and you may have me" is a bit farfetched. Garner had the chance to submit to arrest without incident, regardless of the number of officers in his presence, but he was clearly interested in throwing his considerable weight around and causing turmoil, and the response to subdue him cost him dearly (exacerbated by his asthma and obesity).

2. It is interesting to see a police officer's instinct to pursue and detain a dangerous criminal characterized as irresponsible and/or unjustified escalation.

#CrimingWhileWhite is a pretty revealing hashtag on Twitter. I suggest y'all give it a read.

Glad there are others with common sense and social responsibility!

Here it is again, as this didn't show above.

David,

The police should always start as non-confrontational as possible. What's the rush? Use non-confrontational techniques first, be calm, tell him that if he doesn't put his hands behind his back he'll be charged with resisting arrest and explain to him what the next steps are. I want the police to be better and be held to a higher standard then those they're engaged with. I expect more from them, and while I fully understand that not every situation will end quietly, many more can than do currently.

I think your typical police officer should be trained to avoid violent encounters unless the public is in danger. I think specialized and highly trained SWAT units should be called in to handle these situations. It's no different than police backing off high pursuit chases, continuing the chase does more harm than good.

I like #IDIDNTDONOTHING!

Have you ever watched the incident, because the officers seemed to give him alot of time, listening to his BS!

And just like Brown, resisting arrest is a NONO!

Resisting arrest is punishable by death.

When I watch the Eric Garner video, I see two officers calmly approach him (he is screaming, not them) and try to place him under arrest. He begins to push and throw his body around, clearly overwhelming them as a physical presence, so other officers rush in to help subdue him. It is unfortunate one put him in a choke hold in the heat of the moment, and it is tragic his asthma and morbid obesity coupled with the physical pressure ended his life, but I see no other potential scenario in regard to their approaching him. He demonstrated a total disinterest in compliance when they were directly and calmly conversing with him, and they needed the man power to place such an enormous (and non-compliant) man in custody.

And they did not murder him as a punishment for resisting arrest. They did not, as many self-righteous protestors might say, elect themselves judge, jury, and executioner in the moment. Rather, he died in the process of resisting arrest. His inherent poor health multiplied by his decision to not comply and instead fight equals this sad event. I do not care what anyone else says. This is crystal clear to me.

The officer should be reprimanded for his use of the choke hold, though I for one can understand him not having every rule and regulation in mind whilst fighting to subdue such a large man. He held him improperly. A poor decision.

Fucking anti-cigarette Nazis. I wish more people would realize that when they ask for Government to do more and more that this is the type of risk you run.

I didn't say they murdered him.

I said he died because he resisted arrest. So obviously now we have two cases of resisting arrest = death.

Pretty crystal clear to me.

The way you phrase it indicates, to me at least, punishment for resisting arrest.

No matter how he resisted arrest, they used an ILLEGAL procedure to arrest him. That's not grounds for punishment?

Because asking the Government to run healthcare means we also want a military state.

I never said it wasn't. He should be reprimanded for using an improper physical movement. He should not be tried as a murderer.

Why not? It was him using the illegal technique that DIRECTLY led to his death. That's homicide. Accidental, maybe. But there should be a trial.

You and JACKO keep victim blaming.

And you are an ass trying to spin isolated incidents into an indictment of a singular Burgeoning Police State, but no doubt mainly because you are turned on when you feign a holier-than-thou, wafer-thin social conscience online rather than embracing the cynical shades of grey with which the world is painted.

Victim started the problem and then contributed greatly.