- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: White people feeling the pangs of change
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:56 am to baybeefeetz
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:56 am to baybeefeetz
You continue to pretend that there is no known risk for death from chest and neck compression. I'm not sure why. It can't be simple ignorance. It must be simply propaganda.
LINK
This is a really old study, too. I'm sure there's a lot more dead guys from police restraint in the meantime. You can continue to be surprised by each and every one of them.
quote:
The NYPD has introduced a series of guidelines over the years designed to reduce deaths in police custody from procedures known to carry a risk of asphyxia. The practice of “hogtying” (tying a suspect’s rear-cuffed hands to cuffed or shackled ankles) - which has led to a number of deaths in the USA - was banned by the NYPD in 1987. In 1985 the NYPD banned the use of choke holds except in circumstances where deadly force was necessary to protect the life of the officer or others and this was the least dangerous option available. In 1993, the use of choke holds was banned in all cases, following concern about the deaths of several suspects from apparent asphyxia in the 1990s. [26] In 1994 the NYPD established the task force referred to above to review policy and training for handling prisoners who resist arrest. This resulted in the issuing of Positional Asphyxia Prevention Guidelines in September 1994. The guidelines reiterate what was mostly already NYPD policy, such as the ban on hogtying. They state that the risk of positional asphyxia increases where the restrained subject is obese and in a face-down position and if intoxicated with drugs or alcohol. The guidelines instruct officers not to transport or maintain a suspect face-down and wherever possible to avoid sitting or standing on
LINK
This is a really old study, too. I'm sure there's a lot more dead guys from police restraint in the meantime. You can continue to be surprised by each and every one of them.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 12:59 am
2
Posted on 12/22/14 at 12:58 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
There are chokeholds that clearly pose a greater risk. Here, the very low percentage chance of death panned out. That's all.
And with this sort of attitude, it's no wonder America tires of the police.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:08 am to the808bass
You are deluded. I'm not saying there's no known risk from chest or neck compression. For frick's sake man. I'm saying that you can look at a degree of chest and neck compression and reasonably conclude that there is no way (colloquially meaning very low chance) it would kill a person. And then be wrong. It's called a low risk based not on a label of "compression"'or "chokehold," but based on observation, normal human experience, and reason. And applying the law to that, you get this grand jury result, among other possible outcomes.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:09 am
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:09 am to the808bass
Don't be so emotional about it. Think. You Are almost there. I can tell.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:17 am to baybeefeetz
You're fine with police killing people in custody. As long as it's kinda unlikely. I get it. It's easier for you to arrive at that conclusion than deal with the attendant issues. Understandable.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:18 am to the808bass
Dude, this whole thing is about whether the law was followed. Not whether I think people should die in police custody.
It would be easy for me to say it was just bullshite that the store owner complained about him undercutting his cig price or that thh cops should have written him a ticket, but that's not what I'm arguing because that is not what people are protesting in the streets about. They are protestif because the cop didn't get charged. I can clearly see how he didn't get charged, and I wouldn't protest it because it was a reasonable result given the facts and law as I undersand it. If not, I'd be pissed.
It would be easy for me to say it was just bullshite that the store owner complained about him undercutting his cig price or that thh cops should have written him a ticket, but that's not what I'm arguing because that is not what people are protesting in the streets about. They are protestif because the cop didn't get charged. I can clearly see how he didn't get charged, and I wouldn't protest it because it was a reasonable result given the facts and law as I undersand it. If not, I'd be pissed.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:22 am
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:21 am to baybeefeetz
I'm pretty sure people dying in police custody is in some way connected to the law.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:24 am to the808bass
You are all over the place now. As you know, even a homicide is not necessarily illegal. That is why you are careful in voting for a prosecutor and why it can be good when a prosecutor employs a grand jury. Some killings are justified, some are excusable, and some are crimes.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:31 am to baybeefeetz
I'm not all over the place. Thanks.
I didn't say all deaths in police custody were illegal or murder. I said they were connected to the law. There's a legal decision to be made about them. You think every person who dies in police restraint is a crazy unforeseeable accident. I don't.
I didn't say all deaths in police custody were illegal or murder. I said they were connected to the law. There's a legal decision to be made about them. You think every person who dies in police restraint is a crazy unforeseeable accident. I don't.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 1:35 am to the808bass
Now you're just being an a-hole and making this about me and how I view the world, when all I've ever done on here is argue the facts of a single case and the law. You can't believe it, but somebody is above the little scrum you have created in your mind. Eta: re-read my OP.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 1:41 am
Posted on 12/22/14 at 4:05 am to the808bass
quote:
You continue to pretend that there is no known risk for death from chest and neck compression. I'm not sure why. It can't be simple ignorance. It must be simply propaganda.
except garner was in a headlock not a "chokehold"
Try to keep up dumbass.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 5:45 am to gthog61
quote:
except garner was in a headlock not a "chokehold"
Medical examiner says neck compression cause of death
Presumably a "headlock" would not result in neck compression, thus it is argued that's what was used - but the picture in the link makes it pretty clear that there was tracheal trauma by the headlock/chokehold - so parsing that definition here, particularly when the officer wasn't supposed to be choking the suspect (by policy) and he was clearly choking the suspect is not particularly persuasive for me.
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 5:48 am
Posted on 12/22/14 at 6:22 am to antibarner
quote:
ALL lives should matter. But life is what you make of it. No matter who you are. If you try to better yourself, you probably will. If you run with thugs and scum and blame others for your plight instead of working hard and trying to move up, your life will probably suck.
I'm glad the black community is starting to believe that black lives mater. This could be the start of a real change.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 6:32 am to Zach
quote:
I couldn't eat where I wanted in 1960.
You're wasting your breath on this crowd. You had to live through it to understand it. Black people had it hard in the 1960s. Believe it or not, my white privilege didn't kick in until the mid 70s. I had an enchanting dialogue with a young affirmative action squid on this board who couldn't believe there were whites that weren't living the life of Riley in 1965.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 8:34 am to son of arlo
quote:
You're wasting your breath on this crowd. You had to live through it to understand it. Black people had it hard in the 1960s. Believe it or not, my white privilege didn't kick in until the mid 70s. I had an enchanting dialogue with a young affirmative action squid on this board who couldn't believe there were whites that weren't living the life of Riley in 1965.
So what restaurants and stores discriminated against whites based on the color of their skin?
Posted on 12/22/14 at 8:37 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
But maybe there is something to this whole "white people losing their grip" thing. Maybe I am, we whites are, just coming to terms with the fact that being white isn't going to be as awesome as it used to be. What do you think?
I think you care too much about color.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 9:26 am to mahdragonz
quote:
So what restaurants and stores discriminated against whites based on the color of their skin?
Those a-hole restaurants and stores discriminated against whites based on money. Once in a while I have a dream about the time when my mother didn't have the $ at the grocery checkout line. Sometimes reality is harsh.
Meanwhile, I'm cooking a pot of pinto beans. Very tasty when you're hungry.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 9:28 am to imjustafatkid
Yeah, you're right. I'm driving the race discussion in this country. I should just ignore all this talk since it doesn't concern me.
Posted on 12/22/14 at 9:38 am to son of arlo
quote:
Those a-hole restaurants and stores discriminated against whites based on money. Once in a while I have a dream about the time when my mother didn't have the $ at the grocery checkout line. Sometimes reality is harsh.
So your mom could go into any restaurant and be served, but she was too lazy to work to have money.
While at the same time, a hard working black person wouldn't even be let into a place to eat.
And these were the glory days when blacks had it good, amirite!
Afar kind of dim arse woman goes to a store with no money to pay? Is she special?
This post was edited on 12/22/14 at 9:47 am
Posted on 12/22/14 at 9:48 am to mahdragonz
I have done some checking and it seems like my white privilege is fully intact.
New Z71 paid for, nice house in 98% white gated community, presents under the Christmas, membership to the country club still intact, what am I missing?
New Z71 paid for, nice house in 98% white gated community, presents under the Christmas, membership to the country club still intact, what am I missing?
Page 13 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News