Liberal claptrap from the New York Times. Ping to Today show list.
Bottom line, the officer did not use a ‘choke hold’. The method he used was taught in the academy.
“During his testimony before the grand jury, Pantaleo denied using a chokehold on Garner, saying he applied “a takedown move as he was taught in the [Police] Academy,” London said.”
“He testified in the grand jury that he utilized the techniques that he was trained with in the police academy,” Pantaleo’s attorney, Stuart London, told CBS2’s Kramer. “He was attempting to do a take-down move, which he was taught in the academy. He never intended to apply any force to the individual’s neck, and any contact with the neck was incidental.”
I don’t know how accurate this is, but we watch those cop shows, and we see the law enforcement officers draw their weapons, and the perp takes off running, chased by the officers, who have to catch him and wrestle him down because he knows they can’t shoot him.
What’s the point of arming officers if they can’t use their weapons when someone is resisting arrest? “Stop, or I’ll yell stop again.”
Eggs-zactly!
Michael Brown WAS NOT UNARMED!
Legally, whenver two individuals are fighting for possession of a weapon, both are deemed to be in possession until that fight is concluded.
So an 5’5” armed woman has no right to shoot the 6’5” brute attempting to rape her?
So women should just submit to being raped?
Some folks just need to spend a few minutes in a locked room with a mean fellow with nothing to lose that outweighs them by, say, 100 pounds.
An arrest was made of a very large man that chose to resist. His body, unfortunately was not actually capable of fulfilling his mind's desire. The effort of resisting was more than his heart and lungs could stand
He was pitifully ignorant. All over the country his "people of color" have been delivering the message of salvation by the tens of thousands
So when do you find out if they are unarmed? Before or after you are dead.......
I’m a grown man. I am under no obligation to BOX anyone. You approach me or my loved ones in a threatening manner and I will use whatever technology I see fit to put your underdeveloped brain on the sidewalk.
COUNT ON IT!
Then tell that to the black flash mobs playing the Knockout Game.
If you ever needed an example of why NYT thinking is incompatible with reality, this is it. Ignoring simple, obvious facts of life and the whole of the history of living things, this NYT writer suggests that we return to a state where the physically strong dominate the weak. Physical strength was the deciding factor in all interpersonal conflicts before the introduction of firearms, especially handguns.
Without handguns, gangs win and the elderly, weak, and children lose. Women become subordinate to physically stronger males in all matters.
The NYT writer and all fellow travelers are dragging people toward a societal vision that looks a lot like the brutal oppression of the dark ages.
Or you could try to run to home base or tag somebody else.
Reading the NY Times makes you stupider.
So if this guy’s wife is getting strong arm raped....
(Oh, I’m sorry, thats presumptuous to think he is married to a woman.)
So if this guy’s mother is getting strong arm raped, and he was standing there with a gun, he would say “sorry mom, I can’t shoot him, try peeing yourself”
Idiots.
As a people we could agree to do things this guys way, or we could simply demand that animals behave themselves and have a civilization. It’s up to us.
Who approves this incindiary crap for publication