National Guard called into Minneapolis

[Houseman]

Please show me the case law that states the penalty for "resisting arrest" even "violently" is "police brutality up to and including death (at the discretion of the officers involved)."

Please also show me case law that states "resisting arrest" causes a person to forfeit their constitutional rights to the following:

1. not be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (5th amendment)
2. a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. (6th amendment)
3. trial by jury (7th amendment)
4. not have cruel and unusual punishments inflicted upon them (8th amendment)

Why would I show you any of that? Is that somehow related to anything I've ever said?

If you volunteer to work on an oil rig, do you sign away your right to life? To not be brutally mauled by an unforgiving machine?
No, it's just a thing that you recognize might happen. It's a risk you're willing to take.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Please show me the case law that states the penalty for "resisting arrest" even "violently" is police brutality up to and including death (at the discretion of the officers involved).

If you resist arrest and try to take an officers weapon then yes, they are allowed to kill you.

 

[Revnak]

If you resist arrest and try to take an officers weapon then yes, they are allowed to kill you.

Neither of those charges carry the death penalty, particularly in states where there is no death penalty. This also ignores all of the other rights enumerated there, such as trial by jury.

 

[Houseman]

Neither of those charges carry the death penalty, particularly in states where there is no death penalty. This also ignores all of the other rights enumerated there, such as trial by jury.

There's also the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", so that means that the cops shouldn't react with lethal force if someone were to aim a gun at them, because the person with the gun is supposed to be innocent, right? Of course not, because what happens on the streets and what happens in a court room are two different things.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Neither of those charges carry the death penalty, particularly in states where there is no death penalty. This also ignores all of the other rights enumerated there, such as trial by jury.

I'm sorry, could you rephrase that? I don't understand what you're saying.

 

[Seanchaidh]

If you resist arrest and try to take an officers weapon then yes, they are allowed to kill you.

There is a significant chance that an encounter with a police officer will result in the officer executing someone without any such provocation, life-threatening or otherwise, which makes trying to disarm a cop a not unreasonable thing to do if there is a good chance of success. Indeed, with expectations about police conduct as they are, it's increasingly hard to argue against the proposition that civilians, especially civilians in certain at risk groups, may be best served by an organized campaign to use whatever means are available to force the blue menace out of their communities.

 

[Revnak]

There's also the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", so that means that the cops shouldn't react with lethal force if someone were to aim a gun at them, because the person with the gun is supposed to be innocent, right? Of course not, because what happens on the streets and what happens in a court room are two different things.

Well, I’d hope in that case the officer would be ruled to be acting in self-defense, as would anyone else. But if the other person is retreating and I cannot reasonably argue they are a lethal threat, that’s not the case. In any case, their death isn’t justice, it is a tragedy.

 

[Revnak]

I'm sorry, could you rephrase that? I don't understand what you're saying.

The punishment does not fit the crime, and it’s still an injustice that their other rights were ignored.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

There is a significant chance that an encounter with a police officer will result in the officer executing someone without any such provocation, life-threatening or otherwise, which makes trying to disarm a cop a not unreasonable thing to do-

No. It is unreasonable. That's the kind of mentality that gets people shot in the first place. They are legally within their right to defend themselves. Trying to take their weapon is explicitly saying, "I am going to shoot you". This is ridiculous nonsense. Just think about this, either the police are not inherently the most vile evil humans on the planet and are not just looking for an excuse to shoot anyone that's not white they see and are reacting how they are taught to react to someone trying to take a deadly weapon from them OR they ARE all those things and trying to take their weapon just means their partner is going to shoot you dead anyway.

Did you not see what happened over the weekend where a drunk guy was going to just be handcuffed and taken away only for him to resist, take the officers taser, run, shoot the taser at him, and then get shot? You think they were just going to execute him no matter what he did?

What you are advocating here is the idea that officers should just allow themselves to get shot by their own weapons? If officers have no ability to defend themselves then you will have NO ONE becoming a police officer. And guess what? It's not the right wing people that advocate for people to not have guns so it's not the alt right rednecks that you hate so much that are going to be in trouble when you have no law enforcement around.

Seriously, what the hell kind of logic is this?!

The punishment does not fit the crime, and it’s still an injustice that their other rights were ignored.

So the right of the police officer to life should instead be ignored?! Don't try to take a cop's weapon and you won't get shot for trying to take his weapon. There are legitimate cases of police brutality or injustices caused by the police, this is not one of them.

 

[Revnak]

So the right of the police officer to life should instead be ignored?! Don't try to take a cop's weapon and you won't get shot for trying to take his weapon. There are legitimate cases of police brutality or injustices caused by the police, this is not one of them.

Hopefully they’ll get processed through a legal investigation to see if the action was taken in self-defense. If the man who took the taser represented a lethal threat. Just like would be the case for anyone who isn’t a cop.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Trying to take their weapon is explicitly saying, "I am going to shoot you".

No more than a police officer taking someone's weapon.

If officers have no ability to defend themselves then you will have NO ONE becoming a police officer.

If only it were that simple.

 

[Eacaraxe]

No. It is unreasonable...

Yeah, it is. By the same calculi as, say, high speed chases. You brought up Rayshaud Brooks, let's talk about Rayshaud Brooks. Guy was publicly intoxicated (a bullshit charge) and OWI (not a bullshit charge). Guy resisted arrest, fought with cops, and tried to flee on foot.

Just let the dude go, impound his car, get the arrest warrant and put an APB out, pick him up later. The cops had his car, he had no visual indication he was armed. He was drunk enough to pass out in his car in the first place, he wasn't going anywhere. Nope, cops decided right then and there to just whoop his ass, which is what put the taser in reach in the first place. That's one needless escalation of force right there.

So, Brooks got his hands on a taser. I'm familiar with that kind of taser, the cartridges are single-use and Brooks used his one shot trying to Max Payne the cop from behind. Whoopty-goddamn-do. Again, just let his drunk ass go and put the APB out, he's not going far drunk and on foot. Needless escalation of force #2.

At that point did the cops decide to turn a Wendy's parking lot into the OK Corral. You can't tell me based on released footage the cops took their time to check their target and field of fire. Funny thing about putting your booger hook on the bang switch, you don't just have to worry about what you're aiming at but what's behind it and around it, and if you don't you're putting anything and anyone a bullet might go into at risk of harm, destruction, or death.

Know what I said at the start of my post about police chases? Bystanders get injured and killed in them, property gets damaged and destroyed, and ultimately taxpayers bear the cost of them through insurance claims and civil suits. And in this day and age when every police cruiser has not just radio communications but also onboard computers, audiovisual recording equipment, and mobile internet, what is the purpose they serve? To apprehend supposedly dangerous criminals? or is that a self-fulfilling prophecy wrought by irresponsible and outdated policing?

 

[ObsidianJones]

No. It is unreasonable. That's the kind of mentality that gets people shot in the first place. They are legally within their right to defend themselves. Trying to take their weapon is explicitly saying, "I am going to shoot you". This is ridiculous nonsense. Just think about this, either the police are not inherently the most vile evil humans on the planet and are not just looking for an excuse to shoot anyone that's not white they see and are reacting how they are taught to react to someone trying to take a deadly weapon from them OR they ARE all those things and trying to take their weapon just means their partner is going to shoot you dead anyway.

Did you not see what happened over the weekend where a drunk guy was going to just be handcuffed and taken away only for him to resist, take the officers taser, run, shoot the taser at him, and then get shot? You think they were just going to execute him no matter what he did?

What you are advocating here is the idea that officers should just allow themselves to get shot by their own weapons? If officers have no ability to defend themselves then you will have NO ONE becoming a police officer. And guess what? It's not the right wing people that advocate for people to not have guns so it's not the alt right rednecks that you hate so much that are going to be in trouble when you have no law enforcement around.

Seriously, what the hell kind of logic is this?!

So the right of the police officer to life should instead be ignored?! Don't try to take a cop's weapon and you won't get shot for trying to take his weapon. There are legitimate cases of police brutality or injustices caused by the police, this is not one of them.

Think of it like this.

Say all the times a police officer said a person tried to take their baton or stun gun was true. Hell, the wendy's in Atlanta. It's right there.

What has the response always been? "He grabbed my baton/He grabbed my stun gun. My life was in danger. I had to do it to get home".

So if the cops felt like someone coming to them with a baton or a stun gun was such a plausible threat to their lives that the use of deadly force was not only allowed but required... imagine what the flipside of that must feel like. Those average citizens felt like their lives were in danger. Who had that moment of "If I don't fight, I might die like all those countless others".

If it's irrational to ask for Cops to stop and assess a situation where a display of Force is levied against them, it's also irrational to ask that for any sentient and sane thinking human.

There's no such thing as a benign show of Force. It will always be imbalanced. It will always be threatening. We're just deciding now who gets to be threatening and who gets to be justified.

 

[Eacaraxe]

What has the response always been? "He grabbed my baton/He grabbed my stun gun. My life was in danger. I had to do it to get home".

Funny how nerf bats, glorified hot sauces, mild incapacitating shocks, and harmless crowd suppression agents magick themselves into the Five-Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique when in the hands of anyone but cops, private security, and rednecks, isn't it.

 

[Houseman]

So if the cops felt like someone coming to them with a baton or a stun gun was such a plausible threat to their lives that the use of deadly force was not only allowed but required... imagine what the flipside of that must feel like. Those average citizens felt like their lives were in danger.

What do you usually have to do in order for the situation to escalate to the point of a baton or a stun gun?
Why not just comply BEFORE it gets to that point?

Cops don't usually just baton people out of nowhere and for no reason.
Even if they do, it's better to fight it in court rather than on the street.

Please nobody get themselves killed by trying to engage police officers in any type of hand-to-hand combat

 

[ObsidianJones]

What do you usually have to do in order for the situation to escalate to the point of a baton or a stun gun?
Why not just comply BEFORE it gets to that point?

Cops don't usually just baton people out of nowhere and for no reason.
Even if they do, it's better to fight it in court rather than on the street.

Please nobody get themselves killed by trying to engage police officers in any type of hand-to-hand combat

What I had to do? Personally?

I drove my dad's car. He had a busted tail light. He asked for the registration. I reached for it. That earned a gun being pulled out.

I slowly went back into place and asked the passenger to get it for me.

Or there was the time I ran to the last train of the night when I was 16 years old. Black teen? Running at night? Must have done something. Searched while pinned by two grown adults.

Or that time my friend threw some trash and batons "needed" to be drawn to express how littering is not a good thing to do.

 

[Houseman]

I drove my dad's car. He had a busted tail light. He asked for the registration. I reached for it. That earned a gun being pulled out.

I slowly went back into place and asked the passenger to get it for me.

Or there was the time I ran to the last train of the night when I was 16 years old.

Or that time my friend threw some trash and batons "needed" to be drawn to express how littering is not a good thing to do.

And you didn't get harmed because you didn't start fighting with the police. Everybody goes home alive and happy.

 

[Revnak]

More fun regarding Seattle PD, they knew the Proud Boys were there, breaking the law by not having a license plate on their van. If they had been pulled over, should’ve been real easy to hit Tiny with a probation violation with all the guns they’re carrying. But nah, because cops do not protect you.
Remember, THIS IS NOT OCCURRING IN CHAZ. Also, militia guys and fash brutes like Tiny HAVE KILLED MORE COPS THAN RIOTERS since this has started.

 

[Buyetyen]

If it's irrational to ask for Cops to stop and assess a situation where a display of Force is levied against them, it's also irrational to ask that for any sentient and sane thinking human.

Funny how cops are expected to be obeyed even though by their own admission they're so twitchy and wimpy that they fear for their lives and resort to mag-dumping if a black 12-year-old is looking at a Nerf gun.

Black teen? Running at night? Must have done something.

You said that ironically. I have a suspicion the guy you're arguing with did not catch the irony. If so, hat he's cool with such a scenario would suggest a few possibilities as to why this conversation has been going in circles for so long.

 

[ObsidianJones]

And you didn't get harmed because you didn't start fighting with the police. Everybody goes home alive and happy.

And that fact that they dramatically overstepped their bounds makes you think I went home happy... why exactly?