- Joined
- Nov 20, 2013
- Messages
- 76,257
- Reaction score
- 58,509
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Using an approved, at least at the time, restraint hold.Perhaps. But the issue in this case wasn’t that. Even if Floyd was perfectly healthy or not high, a cop shouldn’t kneel on a handcuffed person’s neck for 8-9 minutes while he says over and over again that he can’t breathe.
If that restraint hold is still approved for use, yes.Can you imagine a class in the police academy demonstrating this as proper procedure?: “Cadets, be aware that saying ‘I can’t breathe’ is a common ploy used by handcuffed perps when you kneel on their necks.
Buuutttt Trump!Don’t be fooled, even if there are 2-3 other officers there to assist you.”
But relax. The Felon-in-Chief, the guy who says
As opposed to what? Progressive DAs unleashing heinous and violent criminals back onto minority communities?cops shouldn’t be gentle with suspects,
. . and here it is showing yet again.our would-be torturer, may just figure out a way to pardon his fellow felons, much as he did with the patriots that trashed the Capitol.
It is the law, in every state it is the law. Police cannot handle everyone as though they were a perfectly healthy 18 year old. They deal with all kinds of people. They can't deal with someone in such a way that they would only be injured if they had no serious medical conditions - that is the whole point of the term "appropriate force". Are you even thinking about what you are arguing here? For example, I am a very fit, athletic guy.
Would your daughter the 90 year old man be as out of control, such as what Floyd was at the time?Should the police handle my daughter with cerebral palsy with the same amount of force they might use on me? Should they deal with an 90 year old man with the same amount of force?
No, of course not.
That is why if someone is telling them they can't breath, they must act appropriately.
It seems both the cultural left and the cultural right thinks that everyone in law enforcement is Derek Chauvin. They aren't, most of them care about other people, that is why they do what they do for a living.
It would depend on Floyd's probable overdose outcome.With most police officers, George Floyd would have been safely taken into custody and not died in the process.
I don't think you know how drugs work. Fentanyl is not a slow release drug. People that overdose, overdose within minutes of using. Moreover, in the case of fentanyl, they have to use multiple times a day, often every 2 hours, even in the middle of the night. Addicts are a literal slave to the drug. For them it is smoke or inject > risk the possibility of overdosing within moments of doing so > experience the high > come down very fast > smoke or inject > risk the possibility of overdosing...Would your daughter the 90 year old man be as out of control, such as what Floyd was at the time?
It would depend on Floyd's probable overdose outcome.
Who knows what the hell street drugs have been cut with.I don't think you know how drugs work. Fentanyl is not a slow release drug. People that overdose, overdose within minutes of using. Moreover, in the case of fentanyl, they have to use multiple times a day, often every 2 hours, even in the middle of the night. Addicts are a literal slave to the drug. For them it is smoke or inject > risk the possibility of overdosing within moments of doing so > experience the high > come down very fast > smoke or inject > risk the possibility of overdosing...
My point being that you appear to be ignoring the long lasting damages to the body of those drugs and unknown substances.Point being, George Floyd had fentanyl in his system, but he wasn't injecting while he was on the ground. He had already passed the risk period for overdosing that particular time he had used. This is one of the reasons why the medical examiners did not rule his death a drug overdose.
Random onlookers as an authoritative source? Seriously?As to being out of control, Floyd had been subdued and brought under control, then his air was continued to be cut off for several minutes while he told them he couldn't breathe and onlookers asked Chauvin to let him breathe.
I didn’t know that kneeling on the neck of a handcuffed man was an approved restraint hold, even if he said he can’t breathe. Do you have a source for that that the cop’s lawyer could have used to convince the jury not to convict?Using an approved, at least at the time, restraint hold.
If that restraint hold is still approved for use, yes.
Buuutttt Trump!
Your TDS fixation is showing itself again.
I was arrested twice by cops on charges that amounted to nothing. In both cases they were gentle. Why would you have a problem with that, given that under the law I was innocent (til proven guilty) when in their custody. Face it, Trump supports brutality by police, jailers, and his supporters.As opposed to what? Progressive DAs unleashing heinous and violent criminals back onto minority communities?
Naa.
. . and here it is showing yet again.
I didn’t know that kneeling on the neck of a handcuffed man was an approved restraint hold, even if he said he can’t breathe. Do you have a source for that that the cop’s lawyer could have used to convince the jury not to convict?
I'll wager that you weren't threatening nor confrontational nor incoherent nor behaving erratic to the officers.I was arrested twice by cops on charges that amounted to nothing. In both cases they were gentle. Why would you have a problem with that, given that under the law I was innocent (til proven guilty) when in their custody.
Now this is just you pushing your left overly broad brush propaganda.Face it, Trump supports brutality by police, jailers, and his supporters.
Was he found guilty in a court of law? If so, why are you saying 'my narrative'? My narrative didn't find him guilty, the jurors did.
do still people believe the knee on the neck was the technique that killed George? He asphyxiated, sure, but it was positional. Chauvin had to much weight on the chest. You try breathing with 180+ pounds on your diaphragm.SO, the leaning on the neck till the perp dies has NOTHING to do with either scenario?
You can’t break your arm patting yourself on the back.Don't break you arm patting yourself on the back.
So he died from someone kneeling on him, thanks for agreeing with me.do still people believe the knee on the neck was the technique that killed George? He asphyxiated, sure, but it was positional. Chauvin had to much weight on the chest. You try breathing with 180+ pounds on your diaphragm.
Why would they have to?
They could just call it a sanctuary problem and forget to share any information about his release with state agencies.
Isn't that what certain blue states and cities are doing with regard to ICE?
They don't have to impede, but they just don't cooperate.
Two way street sort of sucks doesn't it.
It is not how you appear to want to make it.You guys are really ignorant about the whole thing aren’t you? I mean, willfull ignorance on display.
ICI likes to send out Detainer Requests. That is a letter signed by an agent which states that they would really appreciate it if you could hold onto this guy. That “request” has no force of law. It is like your neighbor asking you for a favor. You are free to say no.
The Sanctuary Cities all have the same responsibility for Judicial Warrants. They are required to obey and execute those by law. But ICE hates Judicial Warrants as they mean the guy is now in the Court System. They prefer to handle things administratively.
Now RW Trump Fanboys claim that a Judge demanding to know what kind of Warrant ICE agents have is obstruction. However in Chauvin’s packet is the Judges Order to allow him to serve his State Time concurrently with the Federal Time. That is a lawful order. If they just turn Chauvin loose and do not comply with the state order that is literally the legal definition of Obstruction as well as Aiding and Abetting.
As usual the Fanboys have nothing but false equivalence to wave around.
It is not how you appear to want to make it.
There are a number of applicable federal laws not being complied with.
8 U.S.C. § 1373 (Information Sharing on Immigration Status)
- Description: Enacted as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), this statute prohibits state or local governments from restricting their officials from sharing information regarding an individual’s immigration or citizenship status with federal immigration authorities (e.g., ICE or DHS).
8 U.S.C. § 1324 (Harboring or Shielding Undocumented Immigrants)
- Description: This federal criminal statute prohibits knowingly concealing, harboring, or shielding undocumented immigrants from detection or encouraging their illegal entry or presence in the U.S. Penalties include fines or imprisonment.
8 U.S.C. § 1357(d) (Detainers for Controlled Substances Violations)
- Description: This section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) authorizes ICE to issue detainers specifically for individuals arrested for violations of laws relating to controlled substances. It allows local agencies to hold such individuals temporarily for ICE custody.
State Anti-Sanctuary Laws
- Description: Some states have enacted laws prohibiting sanctuary policies, requiring local law enforcement to honor ICE detainer requests. For example:
- Iowa Code Chapter 27A (2018): Mandates compliance with ICE detainer requests, with penalties like loss of state funding for non-compliance. Iowa AG Brenna Bird accused Winneshiek County Sheriff Dan Marx of violating this law by stating his office would not honor certain detainers (Newsweek, 2025).
- Florida SB 168 (2019): Requires local governments to use “best efforts” to support ICE, including honoring detainers, with penalties for non-compliance (Oxford Law Blogs, 2019).
- Tennessee Legislation (2025): Establishes a centralized immigration enforcement division and allows charges against local officials maintaining sanctuary policies (Fox News, 2025).
You guys are really ignorant about the whole thing aren’t you? I mean, willfull ignorance on display.
ICI likes to send out Detainer Requests. That is a letter signed by an agent which states that they would really appreciate it if you could hold onto this guy. That “request” has no force of law. It is like your neighbor asking you for a favor. You are free to say no.
The Sanctuary Cities all have the same responsibility for Judicial Warrants. They are required to obey and execute those by law. But ICE hates Judicial Warrants as they mean the guy is now in the Court System. They prefer to handle things administratively.
Now RW Trump Fanboys claim that a Judge demanding to know what kind of Warrant ICE agents have is obstruction. However in Chauvin’s packet is the Judges Order to allow him to serve his State Time concurrently with the Federal Time. That is a lawful order. If they just turn Chauvin loose and do not comply with the state order that is literally the legal definition of Obstruction as well as Aiding and Abetting.
As usual the Fanboys have nothing but false equivalence to wave around.
It's not ignorance. There are just those of us out here who are willing to entertain and speculate about what life would be like if Republicans just started acting like Democrats.
You showing up and saying that can't happen.... Republicans are doing to follow the laws and Democrats apply the laws selectively, doesn't really amount to much.
It's like you tisking when saying "Why would anyone go to jail over lying on a loan about about their primary residence for a mortgage appllication... well normally people wouldn't but when you're the sate AG who is getting those turned into felonies, well your medicine might just be applied against you as well.
How many people are serving time for Tax Evasion this year? State and Federal? Several hundred are sentenced every year. Somehow that is outrageous if the defendant is Trump.
So perhaps you can help me out. Why hasn’t Trump pardoned all of those people? I mean it’s wrong to send them to prison for tax crimes isn’t it?
That is the real problem with the Fanboys. Every argument is heaped with enough Hypocrisy to choke a Camel. Oh it was unfair to target Trump. Why isn’t it unfair for anyone to go to jail for tax evasion?
Oh it isn’t fair to hold Trump accountable for lying on forms. Sure we want people arrested and prosecuted for lying on forms, but not Trump. Hunter Biden lied on a form and he needs to go to prison for life plus.
You guys have one core belief. You hate the Left thanks to decades of propaganda. You have nothing else you believe in or about. You willingly, happily sell all of it for a chance to get the left.
Avoidance? Great technique. Especially when you can’t answer a question.So clearly you are triggered and that has put an end to your pretend lawyering.
I'm calling that a two-fer.
Avoidance? Great technique. Especially when you can’t answer a question.
I love how MAGAts ignore the medical testimony.Floyd was under the influence and was medically compromised due to his prior drug use, both of which were factors in his death.
To ignore these factors would simply not be credible.
Floyd's criminal history established him as a 'thug', not the racism based remark you just made.
Yes, silly jury.Floyd was under the influence and was medically compromised due to his prior drug use, both of which were factors in his death.
To ignore these factors would simply not be credible.
Floyd's criminal history established him as a 'thug', not the racism based remark you just made.
Pretend lawyering and whataboutism are the ultimate avoidance.
The fact you can't see that has now made the two-fer a three-fer.
Dude. I addressed your points.
Why should Trump go to jail for lying on forms. That one was against the Trump Company and no individual faced a prison sentence from it. I assumed you had gotten the tax evasion case mixed up instead of embarrassing you by pointing out your error. I asked you how many people were serving time for tax evasion. You utterly ignored the somewhat graceful out I had given you and totally skipped the entire point of your own post. I tried to treat you as intelligent. My mistake. I admit it.
I’ve never pretended to be a lawyer. I do read and quote them from time to time. I recognize that they know a hell of a lot more about the law than the fanboys who scream executive power.
I have said many times that if ICE has a warrant the local police are required to enforce it. That is a warrant. Those are mandatory. A Detainer request is not a warrant. Those are requests. Like you being asked to be taken seriously and then flubbing it up when someone does.
ICE agents hate warrants. They don’t like to get them. Sometimes they will get what are called Administrative Warrants. Those are from immigration court judges. A difference. If the Agent has a Judicial Warrant and has reason to believe that the person named is in a private home they can enter the home through forced entry to get the guy. They can not do so with an administrative warrant.
Judicial Warrants are issued by the Judicial Branch. Administrative Warrants are issued by the Executive Branch. Now you don’t need to be a lawyer to understand this. If you are still unclear Harvard is giving a free online course on Constitution and Government. Since you didn’t pay attention in Civics Class perhaps you would like to take this course and learn.
I keep pointing out how you guys claim to be smart when you aren’t. And here you go proving my point. I don’t have a lot of time but let me tackle the first one.
No one claimed that this was part of the criminal code.The law you quote is a Civil Code. In other words it isn’t a Criminal Violation.
Are you implying that federal civil code can simply be chosen to be ignored by states, counties, and municipalities at will?And it has not been enforced because the people who wrote it and quote it are pretty dumb too.
The loophole is so large you can drive a truck through it. Let me paint it for you since you don’t understand.
Claiming that statutes simply don't apply if ignorance is claimed is a foolish position to take in an argument. Especially If that 'ignorance' is willful.If I don’t know, I can’t be blamed for not telling you. So Sanctuary States and Cities prohibit the authorities from asking about the Immigration Status. If you try to require the various Governments to investigate that is called an Unfunded Mandate.
Oh do please cite the court precedent here.The Courts have pretty regularly said that you can’t do that.
The case appears to be different than what you are claiming it is.As for the States that prohibit such things like say, Florida? They are getting sued for doing it. You might not have heard about the American Citizen who was detained by the Florida Cops on suspicion of being an illegal.
U.S.-born American citizen under ICE hold in Florida after driving from Georgia
Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez is being held even though a county judge found his birth certificate “authentic” and said there wasn’t reason to consider him an “illegal alien.”www.nbcnews.com
The Judge claimed he couldn’t order the release for the man as ICE was investigating.
This is nothing more than your guess or / or your wish.The settlement on that lawsuit will be seven digits.
The only court judgements in your cited article are:The Florida Cops were ordered by a Federal Judge not to enforce the State Law that violated the Constitution. They did anyway. The Judge had a Constitutional Duty to insure the Civil Rights of the “defendant” were upheld. He didn’t. If it goes to trial, and we can hope, the finding for the plaintiff will be huge. Or Yuge if you prefer.
Total fail. Nothing which I have cited in the post you responded to came from Fox News.By now a reasonably intelligent man would have learned that Fox News is going to tell you what you want to hear, and it isn’t going to be truthful.
The left keep throwing this in everyone's face, but completely all the rest of the lawsuits involving media, pretending that these law suits don't exist:Especially when Fox claimed that they were not a news station but opinions for entertainment during the lawsuit where they coughed up three quarters of a billion dollars to avoid trial.
Or maybe its that these law suits don't exist in the liberal / progressive media echo chamber which dictates the left's reality to them?Trial in defamation lawsuit against CNN set for early 2025
The judge in a high-stakes defamation lawsuit against CNN ruled on Tuesday that U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young "did not act illegally or criminally" despite what the network reported on air.
Young alleges that CNN smeared him and his security consulting company, Nemex Enterprises Inc., by implying it illegally profited when helping people flee Afghanistan during the Biden administration's military withdrawal from the country in 2021. Young believes CNN "destroyed his reputation and business by branding him an illegal profiteer who exploited desperate Afghans" dur
What I posted has nothing to do with that jury and has nothing to do with why you would think that jury was silly.Yes, silly jury.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?