George Floyd

[BoSoxGal]

Jeff Toobin has more brains in his little finger, Darren.

[RayThom]

The New Yorker? Cough! Cough! I don't read the fiction in the New Yorker.

Says Darren, whose major news sources are Breitbart and the Daily Wire.

[Econoline]

Darren, whether or not you read the article (or anything else in The New Yorker) really has no bearing on which of the two of you—you, on the one hand, or Jeffrey Toobin (Harvard Law, 1986, J.D. magna cum laude), on the other—has a better understanding of the Insurrection Act of 1807, the Civil Rights Act of 1871, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, and the legal issues raised by these laws since their passage. Others may differ but, personally, I think I'm gonna side with the senior legal analyst for CNN.

[liberty]

First I am going to say the same thing I have said before no one should die in police custody. But, I am not surprised the world is full ass holes and some of them are police, but what are going do about it. If you care to remember some years ago I suggested that that each state should have an organization whose only job would be to search for and remove people that should not be police. Hopefully they would be fired or arrested before they did serious harm. I don’t know what you guys want but evidently it is not a solution. When you guys are going to learn that government is dangerous and it is not just police.

[Joe Guy]

....each state should have an organization whose only job would be to search for and remove people that should not be police....

That's the management of the police departments' job. They need strict hiring policies and officer training along with regularly scheduled performance evaluations after a person is hired.

[dales]

Hasn't Oakland gone thru 4 or 5 police chiefs in as many years?

[Gob]

Thousands of people have joined a protest in London over the death of African-American George Floyd in US police custody nine days ago.



It comes as UK chief constables said they stand alongside all those "appalled and horrified" by his death.

In a joint statement, they said the right to lawful protest was a "key part of any democracy".

But they stressed coronavirus restrictions, including not gathering in groups of more than six, remained.

Ironic, watching all the young black men protesting in London about a black guy being murdered by a white cop in the USA, when the leading cause of death for young black men in London is......



.... Murder by young black men.

[BoSoxGal]

That you can’t grasp the difference between individual and state-sanctioned action is perhaps a sign of a very deficient education.

[Scooter]

Indeed, "but what about black-on-black crime" is never a good response to a campaign of extrajudicial murder by the state. It was Margaret Thatcher's stock response to Britons who protested against the South African regime. Didn't go over well then, won't go over well now.

[Darren]

First I am going to say the same thing I have said before no one should die in police custody. But, I am not surprised the world is full ass holes and some of them are police, but what are going do about it. If you care to remember some years ago I suggested that that each state should have an organization whose only job would be to search for and remove people that should not be police. Hopefully they would be fired or arrested before they did serious harm. I don’t know what you guys want but evidently it is not a solution. When you guys are going to learn that government is dangerous and it is not just police.

The evidence of that is common if you care to look for it.

As far as who is responsible for police criminality, that should be the city/county/state that hired them. Voters gravitate toward law and order candidates when they think their fat's in the fire.

The issue is the pass a law, declare the job well done, please reelect me nature of politicians.

Once a politician ascends to office there's an addictive nature not only to the job but a sense of being high above the hoi polloi that goes to their head. Once they're secure in their fiefdom the little people often only get attention when an election comes up.

The campaign donations necessary to get reelected and favors received in return ensures that the little people never get close to even sucking on the hind tit.

Add in the scraps that get thrown to the little people and the human nature of prejudice and you end up with a legion of voters that regularly gets harvested.

Police officers are selected for aggressiveness. That's a necessary survival trait. Multiple entities had a chance to remove Chauvin from police work. Bullying is a fact of life. I can only imagine what it's like at a police station. I pity the officer that was standing there while three officer pressed the life out of Floyd's body. Was there no place for him on top of Floyd? Or did he recognize the criminality of the three on Floyd?

The autopsy report was released to the public. It shows that someone beat Floyd multiple times. The contusions didn't happen when Floyd hit the sidewalk before being placed in the car.

Floyd was medically in distress. I suspect that's why he didn't drive away immediately after leaving the store. He was sick and trying to recover enough to drive.

The cops arrived after being dispatched and told the man was not in control of himself, failed to recognize the obvious signs of someone needing immediate medical attention and murdered him.

There's no question about that in my mind.

[RayThom]

First I am going to say the same thing I have said before no one should die in police custody. But, I am not surprised the world is full ass holes and some of them are police, but what are going do about it. If you care to remember some years ago I suggested that that each state should have an organization whose only job would be to search for and remove people that should not be police. Hopefully they would be fired or arrested before they did serious harm. I don’t know what you guys want but evidently it is not a solution. When you guys are going to learn that government is dangerous and it is not just police.

The evidence of that is common if you care to look for it. As far as who is responsible for police criminality, that should be the city/county/state that hired them. Voters gravitate toward law and order candidates when they think their fat's in the fire. The issue is the pass a law, declare the job well done, please reelect me nature of politicians. Once a politician ascends to office there's an addictive nature not only to the job but a sense of being high above the hoi polloi that goes to their head. Once they're secure in their fiefdom the little people often only get attention when an election comes up.The campaign donations necessary to get reelected and favors received in return ensures that the little people never get close to even sucking on the hind tit. Add in the scraps that get thrown to the little people and the human nature of prejudice and you end up with a legion of voters that regularly gets harvested. Police officers are selected for aggressiveness. That's a necessary survival trait. Multiple entities had a chance to remove Chauvin from police work. Bullying is a fact of life. I can only imagine what it's like at a police station. I pity the officer that was standing there while three officer pressed the life out of Floyd's body. Was there no place for him on top of Floyd? Or did he recognize the criminality of the three on Floyd?The autopsy report was released to the public. It shows that someone beat Floyd multiple times. The contusions didn't happen when Floyd hit the sidewalk before being placed in the car.Floyd was medically in distress.I suspect that's why he didn't drive away immediately after leaving the store. He was sick and trying to recover enough to drive. The cops arrived after being dispatched and told the man was not in control of himself, failed to recognize the obvious signs of someone needing immediate medical attention and murdered him. There's no question about that in my mind.

Darren, is that what "Doc" also suspects?

[MajGenl.Meade]

Excellent demonstration of the Quote function RayT. Kudos! Perhaps Darren will larn him a thing or two.

[Gob]

That you can’t grasp the difference between individual and state-sanctioned action is perhaps a sign of a very deficient education.

Perhaps the fact that you believe this incident to be "state sanctioned" shows either how biased you are, or ill-informed you are.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Jury's out Gob (or will be). The state does not authorize such horrors in advance; I doubt that's what BSG means. The state is complicit in ex post facto condoning of such things by finding the guilty cop not guilty or by not bringing charges in the first place or by bringing the wrong charges. Too many examples to cite.

The effect on bad cops is the careless confidence that whatever they do is not going to be punished in any meaningful way. In that manner, the state "sanctions" their mindset and permits by inaction the continuation of misuse of power.

In the movies, the cops all run around scared of Internal Affairs. Guess IA isn't interested in continuous assaults on the public and the accumulation of sidelined complaints or slaps on the wrist (as in the case of Chauvin and his Hwongus partner). That, my friend, is the state condoning the crimes.

[BoSoxGal]

That you can’t grasp the difference between individual and state-sanctioned action is perhaps a sign of a very deficient education.

Perhaps the fact that you believe this incident to be "state sanctioned" shows either how biased you are, or ill-informed you are.

When a person with a badge or other color of authority engages in an extrajudicial killing, it is de facto state sanctioned. Whether the state attempts to rectify the injustice afterward by charging and trying the killer is not the issue at hand.

This is a simple concept and I don’t believe you are too stupid to grasp it. I’ve seen enough of your postings over enough years to know exactly why you resist acknowledging the existence of systemic racism in our society or in your own. It’s the same reason you engage in the dog whistling of yapping endlessly about young black men killing other young black men as though that somehow cancels out police violence. And as though young white men aren’t also killing young white men, etc. The stats on who kills who, which age groups are most violent, how the majority of violence is within races, etc. are all readily available. But always with you Gob is the constant berating of brown people as violent. Why is that, I [don't really] wonder?

[Gob]

]

When a person with a badge or other color of authority engages in an extrajudicial killing, it is de facto state sanctioned. Whether the state attempts to rectify the injustice afterward by charging and trying the killer is not the issue at hand.

What utter horseshit!

sanction
noun
authoritative permission or approval, as for an action.
something that serves to support an action, condition, etc.
something that gives binding force, as to an oath, rule of conduct, etc.
Law.
a provision of a law enacting a penalty for disobedience or a reward for obedience.
the penalty or reward.

So according to our legal expert, the state;

The institutions of government. The state is a form of human association distinguished from other social groups by its purpose, the establishment of order and security; its methods, the laws and their enforcement; its territory, the area of jurisdiction or geographic boundaries; and finally by its sovereignty. The state consists, most broadly, of the agreement of the individuals on the means whereby disputes are settled in the form of laws. In such countries as the United States, Australia, Nigeria, Mexico, and Brazil, the term state (or a cognate) also refers to political units, not sovereign themselves, but subject to the authority of the larger state, or federal union.

Gave these cops carte blanche to kill this man....

Jesus, no wonder Trump is your president if this is the kind of opposition he faces...

[MajGenl.Meade]

When a person with a badge or other color of authority engages in an extrajudicial killing, it is de facto state sanctioned.

OK that's just not correct, either factually or linguistically. By 'extrajudicial' you can only mean 'illegally' or 'outside the law'. "The state" is a legal construct of such wide application and specifically constituted that in itself it cannot be part of illegality. Individual members of the state authority can certainly act in an illegal manner, as can individual citizens.

The "state" including all elective and non-elective offices (mayors, governor, senators, reps, judges, lawyers, ordinary citizens, police, National Guard, Federal operatives within the state, and all the cows in the field) can never be said to all-together-and-all-at-once sanction (agree to, authorize, approve of) any illegal action.

To use the word "state" as you have done is exactly the same as Trump using "antifa", assuming a unity of common purpose that does not exist in either word in order to pursue a particular political vendetta.

You'd be better off reigning in the hyperbole and speaking of the responsibility of the authorities in failing to take sufficient necessary steps to prevent such actions as those that led to the death of Mr Floyd. Culpability if you wish - not explicit approval and authorization. We are, in a sense, all Spartacus.

[ex-khobar Andy]

When a person with a badge or other color of authority engages in an extrajudicial killing, it is de facto state sanctioned. Whether the state attempts to rectify the injustice afterward by charging and trying the killer is not the issue at hand.

It's exactly the issue at hand. Chauvin is not Louis XIV ("L'état, c'est moi!") and almost the hallmark of a liberal democracy is that when its agents do dumb or criminal things they are, for the most part, punished. Sometimes we give them medals (e.g., the Captain of the USS Vincennes who shot down the Iranian airliner) and sometimes we try to push it under the rug. I could make a plausible case that the Vincennes incident was state-sanctioned - no action was taken against Capt Rogers and the relatives of those murdered were given a few hundred grand each to give the appearance of at least some regret. But in the case of Mr Floyd the state - Minnesota - is at least so far giving the appearance of not sanctioning the act.

We need to keep up the pressure on MN so that effective action is taken. There have been cases (I don't have a reference to hand) where the prosecution has been less than enthusiastic or even deliberately sabotaged so that the appearance is maintained but the result is that the agent gets off.

[MajGenl.Meade]

There have been cases (I don't have a reference to hand) where the prosecution has been less than enthusiastic or even deliberately sabotaged so that the appearance is maintained but the result is that the agent gets off.

Ignoring that disturbing visual, you only have to look back a few precious days. What did "the state" do in the case of Ahmaud Arbery? His murder was swept under the rug by local authorities in Georgia, making them complicit in the act itself. But it wasn't the entire state - it wasn't every government organ, court, police person and so on who connived to prevent justice. And it is plainly false to say that the "state sanctioned" what the guilty parties did (not referring solely to the two vigilantes).

We can get into the "general atmosphere" or whatever we want to call it that allows people such as Gregory McMichael, his son, Officer Chauvin et al to believe that their actions are either reasonable or acceptable to society.

[Big RR]

The "state" including all elective and non-elective offices (mayors, governor, senators, reps, judges, lawyers, ordinary citizens, police, National Guard, Federal operatives within the state, and all the cows in the field) can never be said to all-together-and-all-at-once sanction (agree to, authorize, approve of) any illegal action.

I disagree; the people of the state empower certain individuals (elected representatives and appointed officers, like the police and the district attorney (OK some DAs are elected)) to act on their behalf; when those persons do not act to stop or punish an illegal action, I think it is appropriate to say the illegal action was state sanctioned. For example, during reconstruction, when the Klan roved through areas and burned out and even lynched "uppity" blacks with impunity, I think it is appropriate to call those actions state sanctioned. Ditto for when the authorities refused to follow the law and court orders to integrate schools.

As for these killings, the facts will (or should) ultimately speak for themselves. The state (through its elected representatives) does empower law enforcement officers to use deadly force under appropriate circumstances; if action is not taken to punish those who use the force when not appropiate, then I do think it is proper to accuse the state of sanctioning the killings.