Pages:
Author

Topic: Riots after Death of Man in Minneapolis Police Custody - page 9. (Read 4415 times)

legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

Still not sure how Floyd being a longtime criminal justifies the clearly excessive use of force that led to his death. You're saying that not only was Floyd's previous crimes (or current one of passing a fake $20) grounds for the death penalty but the cop had the right to act as executioner? If not, what are you saying exactly? Think about it.

And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

Okay and seeing as how you are not a medical examiner you aren't a credible source when it comes to speculating upon his cause of death.

1. Nope.  Never said that. I guess English wasn't a good subject for you.  Try reading the WORDS again.  I said a criminal with 10 arrests is 10x more likely to encounter a bad cop than a criminal who was arrested once.
  I've never justified the unlawful death of Floyd.  But you seem blind to basic facts, so wrongfully opine away fella.  

2. I have 2 decades of training, education, and experience with excited delirium and positional asphyxiation. No one here has ever heard those words before this Floyd case. I knew it the first time I saw the video. Been there, done that. And, I'll go so far as to say, Chauvin wasn't the primary cause for positional asphyxiation, he's secondary. The primary cause will be the cop that was on Floyd's back, preventing the rise and fall of Floyd's chest cavity.    You can offer dissenting opinion now, or put this in your back pocket and get back to me after trial.


And, I'll be so bold as to add..... go ahead and protest Minneapolis Police policy all you want. Those idiots still had the choke hold as an approved Use of Force technique.  Most every other department in the US removed that policy decades ago for the exact reason of this entire subject.
How exactly can the cop be charged with murder if the technique used was an approved use of force?

(Note that may sound like a dumb question, but we've got here a dumb cop, dump police department...)

full member
Activity: 414
Merit: 182
Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

Still not sure how Floyd being a longtime criminal justifies the clearly excessive use of force that led to his death. You're saying that not only was Floyd's previous crimes (or current one of passing a fake $20) grounds for the death penalty but the cop had the right to act as executioner? If not, what are you saying exactly? Think about it.

And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

Okay and seeing as how you are not a medical examiner you aren't a credible source when it comes to speculating upon his cause of death.

1. Nope.  Never said that. I guess English wasn't a good subject for you.  Try reading the WORDS again.  I said a criminal with 10 arrests is 10x more likely to encounter a bad cop than a criminal who was arrested once.
  I've never justified the unlawful death of Floyd.  But you seem blind to basic facts, so wrongfully opine away fella.  

2. I have 2 decades of training, education, and experience with excited delirium and positional asphyxiation. No one here has ever heard those words before this Floyd case. I knew it the first time I saw the video. Been there, done that. And, I'll go so far as to say, Chauvin wasn't the primary cause for positional asphyxiation, he's secondary. The primary cause will be the cop that was on Floyd's back, preventing the rise and fall of Floyd's chest cavity.    You can offer dissenting opinion now, or put this in your back pocket and get back to me after trial.


And, I'll be so bold as to add..... go ahead and protest Minneapolis Police policy all you want. Those idiots still had the choke hold as an approved Use of Force technique.  Most every other department in the US removed that policy decades ago for the exact reason of this entire subject.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1368
This study offers a different perspective.

https://ndews.umd.edu/sites/ndews.umd.edu/files/ndews-hotspot-unintentional-fentanyl-overdoses-in-new-hampshire-final-09-11-17.pdf

Quote
Despite the ubiquitous presence of multiple drugs in these decedents, the effects of fentanyl
were evidently so strong that there were no statistical differences in the fentanyl level (mean
and standard deviation) with or without the presence of these co-intoxicants. The range of
fentanyl levels was wide, from 0.75 to 113.00 ng/mL, with an average of 9.96 ng/mL.

Nevertheless, the mean and range of fentanyl levels when fentanyl was the only drug found in
toxicology were statistically the same as the mean and range for the cases where fentanyl was
only one of several synergistic co-intoxicants. This suggests that fentanyl presence alone seems
to be sufficient to cause death.

It's not a "different perspective" -- its just a broader range of data. It also includes a large number of people who tested positive for alcohol (32%) which could very well be weighing down the average concentration of fentanyl in those who died, as that is often a lethal combination of drugs. The study I quoted is more relevant as it doesn't include those with alcohol in their systems.

You do not necessarily need a concoction of other drugs for fentanyl to be dangerous. Regardless, I'm not saying that George Floyd died of a drug overdose because both autopsy reports ruled the death a homicide. However, it did play a factor in his death. This is what the first autopsy report plainly stated. It isn't my medical take.

Actually the first autopsy report doesn't state that at all. The title is "CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION." You can argue that fentanyl played a role in his death, but you're on your own here. So actually it is your "medical take."

Was an autopsy done? You can get two or more coroners or doctors to disagree on cause of death, sometimes even with an autopsy.

The point is, all these Covid deaths aren't really known to be Covid deaths.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1512
Fentanyl 11 ng/mL - clearly in a safe range
Where does it say 11 ng/mL is safe? Article states "Blood concentrations of approximately 7 ng/ml or greater have been associated with fatalities where poly-substance use was involved." unless you're talking about something else.

It also says 10-20 ng/mL is the suggested range for anaesthesia.

"Poly-substance use" in this case most likely means adding fentanyl to other nervous system depressants, of which meth is not one. Here's a more specific study that determined the mean concentration of fentanyl in multi-drug overdose deaths was 26.4 ng/ml.

Quote
Among the 36 natural deaths the following co-administered drugs were identified: antidepressants (11), oxycodone (9), benzodiazepines (7), morphine/codeine (5), and hydrocodone (4).

This study offers a different perspective.

https://ndews.umd.edu/sites/ndews.umd.edu/files/ndews-hotspot-unintentional-fentanyl-overdoses-in-new-hampshire-final-09-11-17.pdf

Quote
Despite the ubiquitous presence of multiple drugs in these decedents, the effects of fentanyl
were evidently so strong that there were no statistical differences in the fentanyl level (mean
and standard deviation) with or without the presence of these co-intoxicants. The range of
fentanyl levels was wide, from 0.75 to 113.00 ng/mL, with an average of 9.96 ng/mL.

Nevertheless, the mean and range of fentanyl levels when fentanyl was the only drug found in
toxicology were statistically the same as the mean and range for the cases where fentanyl was
only one of several synergistic co-intoxicants. This suggests that fentanyl presence alone seems
to be sufficient to cause death.

You do not necessarily need a concoction of other drugs for fentanyl to be dangerous. Regardless, I'm not saying that George Floyd died of a drug overdose because both autopsy reports ruled the death a homicide. However, it did play a factor in his death. This is what the first autopsy report plainly stated. It isn't my medical take.
legendary
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1512
Fentanyl 11 ng/mL - clearly in a safe range
Where does it say 11 ng/mL is safe? Article states "Blood concentrations of approximately 7 ng/ml or greater have been associated with fatalities where poly-substance use was involved." unless you're talking about something else.

full member
Activity: 414
Merit: 182
Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

I still stand by my statement, that a decades long criminal arrested 10x has a 10x greater chance of finding a bad cop than a criminal who has only been arrested once.


And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)
legendary
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1512
...

Look at the dates of the complaints. These were written by the DA's office after all the civil unrest. They very well could have merit, but keep in mind the charges that were levied against the 3 other officers who didn't place Floyd under neck restraint were completely baseless and were solely done to satisfy the mob/protesters. The charges were done for political reasons and I don't think anyone should be inclined to believe the latter reports have more merit than the previous reports. The fact is, we don't have the body cam footage which would provide a lot more context to the entire situation.

With the case in Atlanta with Rayshard Brooks, full bodycam videos were released immediately after the shooting. I have a feeling the bodycam video isn't being released because it will help out the defense because it will show George Floyd resisting.


I would be willing to bet the officers will be found not guilty because of who is prosecuting the case, Keith Ellison. This is someone who allegedly beat his girlfriend, and there is evidence to support this. I also believe him to be corrupt, and would not be surprised if he threw the case for political benefit.

If Floyd has > the OD dose of multiple drugs when he died, I would have serious doubt as to how much Chauvin's actions contributed to Floyd's death. I also have concerns about overcharging the officers, for political purposes.

Here's the autopsy report - https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/Autopsy_2020-3700_Floyd.pdf

Notable traces of drugs from the toxicology report are Fentanyl 11 ng/mL and Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL. This is more than enough drugs to be in a delirious state.

If Chauvin gets off, I don't think it'll be because of the prosecutor's record. I don't think the defense will invoke Ellison's domestic abuse past with all the other evidence that's available. Regardless if he gets off or not, I thought this was a clear cut case of murder when I watched the video. Now it seems more like poor department policy and potential negligence than anything else.
copper member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1899
Amazon Prime Member #7
My point is I think you should read the criminal complaint I linked.  It doesn't make the picture perfectly clear, but he was described as calm and polite after being handcuffed.  Then when they went to put him in the car he explicitly said he wasn't resisting, he was claustrophobic, and he couldn't breath - then he stiffened up and just went down.  The rest is clear from the video.

Interesting article that I read examining the incident a bit more closely - https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911

TL;DR - Floyd was resisting and refusing to get in the police car probably because he was in an excited delirious state (ExDS), not because he was claustrophobic. There were a range of drugs in his system, including a deadly dose of fentanyl (11 ng/mL with average concentration being 10 ng/mL in an overdose). This explains why Floyd was acting so erratic and also why Derek Chauvin, a 19 year vet of the police department with military training and 4 years of military experience would seemingly do something stupid enough to have Floyd in a neck restraint for so long. Apparently it tends to be department policy to have anyone in a delirious state under full restraint until paramedics arrive on scene until they can inject the patient with loads of ketamine to calm them down.

The article also explores a few instances where people experiencing ExDS tend to die regardless of the restraint they're put in due to drugs and underlying conditions playing a role. The prosecution might try to argue that ExDS isn't a recognized condition by the American Medical Association but being in a delirious tends to have the same sorts of physical signs (agitation, aggression, reduced pain sensitivity, ect.)
The medium article you cited is short on citations, however, this is one very good example as to why rash decisions or actions are wrong before all the facts are available. It is also why the mayors and governors allowing the lawlessness to continue should be condemned in the strongest way possible.

I would be willing to bet the officers will be found not guilty because of who is prosecuting the case, Keith Ellison. This is someone who allegedly beat his girlfriend, and there is evidence to support this. I also believe him to be corrupt, and would not be surprised if he threw the case for political benefit.

If Floyd has > the OD dose of multiple drugs when he died, I would have serious doubt as to how much Chauvin's actions contributed to Floyd's death. I also have concerns about overcharging the officers, for political purposes.
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 2015
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
My point is I think you should read the criminal complaint I linked.  It doesn't make the picture perfectly clear, but he was described as calm and polite after being handcuffed.  Then when they went to put him in the car he explicitly said he wasn't resisting, he was claustrophobic, and he couldn't breath - then he stiffened up and just went down.  The rest is clear from the video.

Interesting article that I read examining the incident a bit more closely - https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911

TL;DR - Floyd was resisting and refusing to get in the police car probably because he was in an excited delirious state (ExDS), not because he was claustrophobic. There were a range of drugs in his system, including a deadly dose of fentanyl (11 ng/mL with average concentration being 10 ng/mL in an overdose). This explains why Floyd was acting so erratic and also why Derek Chauvin, a 19 year vet of the police department with military training and 4 years of military experience would seemingly do something stupid enough to have Floyd in a neck restraint for so long. Apparently it tends to be department policy to have anyone in a delirious state under full restraint until paramedics arrive on scene until they can inject the patient with loads of ketamine to calm them down.

The article also explores a few instances where people experiencing ExDS tend to die regardless of the restraint they're put in due to drugs and underlying conditions playing a role. The prosecution might try to argue that ExDS isn't a recognized condition by the American Medical Association but being in a delirious tends to have the same sorts of physical signs (agitation, aggression, reduced pain sensitivity, ect.)

Is there any footage out there from when he is removed from the car to when he ends up face down on the ground?  I have only seen the cop struggling to get him out and then the 8 or 9 minutes of him on the ground.

The blog you posted makes no mention of the complaint on cop #2, written on 6/3, it only sites the original complaint against cop #1, written on 5/29.  In the 5/29 complaint, Flloyd is made out as more aggressive and less calm than the 6/3 complaint.

5/29:
Quote
Once handcuffed, Mr. Floyd became compliant and walked with Officer Lane to the sidewalk and sat on the
ground at Officer Lane’s direction. In a conversation that lasted just under two minutes, Officer Lang asked
Mr. Floyd for his name and identification. Officer Lane asked Mr. Lloyd if he was “on anything” and
explained that he was arresting Mr. Lloyd for passing counterfeit currency.

6/3
Quote
Once hand cuffed, Mr. Floyd walked with Lane to the sidewalk and sat on the ground at Lane’s direction.
When Mr. Floyd sat down he said “thank you man” and was calm.  In a conversation that lasted just under
two minutes, Lane asked Mr. Floyd for his name and identification. Lane asked Mr. Lloyd if he was "on
anything" and noted there was foam at the edges of his mouth.  Lane explained that he was arresting Mr.
Floyd for passing counterfeit currency.


5/29:
Quote
While Officer Kueng was speaking with the front seat passenger, Officer Lane ordered Mr. Floyd out of the
car, put his hands on Mr. Floyd, and pulled him out of the car. Officer Lane handcuffed Mr. Floyd. Mr. Floyd
actively resisted being handcuffed.

6/3
Quote
While Officer Kueng was speaking with the front seat passenger, Lane ordered Mr. Floyd out of the car, put
his hands on Mr. Floyd, and pulled him out of the car. Lane handcuffed Mr. Floyd.


5/29
Quote
Officers Kueng and Lane stood Mr. Floyd up and attempted to walk Mr. Floyd to their squad car (MPD 320)
at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Floyd stiffened up, fell to the ground, and told the officers he was claustrophobic.

6/3
Quote
As the officers tried to put Mr. Floyd in their squad car, Mr. Floyd stiffened up and fell to the ground.  Mr.
Floyd told the officers that he was not resisting but did not want to get in the back seat
and was
claustrophobic.


There are a few more, but I'm done reading about this for the night. 


legendary
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1512
My point is I think you should read the criminal complaint I linked.  It doesn't make the picture perfectly clear, but he was described as calm and polite after being handcuffed.  Then when they went to put him in the car he explicitly said he wasn't resisting, he was claustrophobic, and he couldn't breath - then he stiffened up and just went down.  The rest is clear from the video.

Interesting article that I read examining the incident a bit more closely - https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911

TL;DR - Floyd was resisting and refusing to get in the police car probably because he was in an excited delirious state (ExDS), not because he was claustrophobic. There were a range of drugs in his system, including a deadly dose of fentanyl (11 ng/mL with average concentration being 10 ng/mL in an overdose). This explains why Floyd was acting so erratic and also why Derek Chauvin, a 19 year vet of the police department with military training and 4 years of military experience would seemingly do something stupid enough to have Floyd in a neck restraint for so long. Apparently it tends to be department policy to have anyone in a delirious state under full restraint until paramedics arrive on scene until they can inject the patient with loads of ketamine to calm them down.

The article also explores a few instances where people experiencing ExDS tend to die regardless of the restraint they're put in due to drugs and underlying conditions playing a role. The prosecution might try to argue that ExDS isn't a recognized condition by the American Medical Association but being in a delirious tends to have the same sorts of physical signs (agitation, aggression, reduced pain sensitivity, ect.)
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 2015
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf

What does that Affidavit have to do with my comment?  

It describes the police interaction...

Go on....

Waiting for the point.

My point is I think you should read the criminal complaint I linked.  It doesn't make the picture perfectly clear, but he was described as calm and polite after being handcuffed.  Then when they went to put him in the car he explicitly said he wasn't resisting, he was claustrophobic, and he couldn't breath - then he stiffened up and just went down.  The rest is clear from the video.

But I think your missing mine or are trying to deflect.

Floyd was unlawfully killed while being arrested. I've never contested that.
But if you look at my comment which you quoted, I said Floyd was a criminal.
What are the odds of a criminal being killed by police vs a non-criminal...... and how do you think those odds exponentially increase with the longer you engage in criminal activity?  I think Floyd demonstrated two decades of criminal behavior, maybe 10 arrests.  Wouldn't he be 10x more likely to have a bad police interaction as someone who only got arrested once?

Pretty sure the last crime he was arrested for happened in 2007.  He'd been out of prison for almost 10 years at the time of his death and steadily employed until he was laid off due to the pandemic a couple weeks earlier.  All signs point to him being a recovering drug addict that relapsed after he lost his job.  


From aged 22-33 he had 9 arrests. (1996-2007)

4 of them for possession or intent to deliver less than 1 gram of cocaine - Sentenced to 36 months in total for them

2 for theft of less than $500
1 for trespassing
1 for failure to identify himself to the police - He got 10 days to a few weeks for each of those.

1 for Robbery with a deadly weapon.  He dressed up like a plumber or something and robbed a woman in her home with some other guys in 2007.  Sentenced to 5 years, paroled out in 2011.
full member
Activity: 414
Merit: 182
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf

What does that Affidavit have to do with my comment?  

It describes the police interaction...

Go on....

Waiting for the point.

But I think your missing mine or are trying to deflect.

Floyd was unlawfully killed while being arrested. I've never contested that.
But if you look at my comment which you quoted, I said Floyd was a criminal.
What are the odds of a criminal being killed by police vs a non-criminal...... and how do you think those odds exponentially increase with the longer you engage in criminal activity?  I think Floyd demonstrated two decades of criminal behavior, maybe 10 arrests.  Wouldn't he be 10x more likely to have a bad police interaction as someone who only got arrested once?
legendary
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf

What does that Affidavit have to do with my comment? 

It describes the police interaction...
Why don't you quote that part you believe is relevant?
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 2015
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf

What does that Affidavit have to do with my comment? 

It describes the police interaction...
full member
Activity: 414
Merit: 182
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf

What does that Affidavit have to do with my comment? 
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 2015
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.

Seems like he had a drug problem from 1996-2007.  Got like 3 years for a 4 separate possession of <1g of cocaine charges, a few petty thefts that got him a few weeks, and then in 2007 armed robbery got him 5 years.

He got out in 2011 and had been holding down a steady job for a while until he was laid off in early spring.  My guess is he relapsed.

Did you read the charging documents?  Because it doesn't seem like you did. http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/ThaoComplaint06032020.pdf
full member
Activity: 414
Merit: 182
  ....whatever type of racism they attribute it to is always disproved, so they'll create a new type of racism next election cycle.  
Where was racism disproved? Are you saying that slavery and jim crow were not based on race?  I honestly do not understand what you mean.

Reading comprehension junior.    You missed about 98% of logical reasoning in my post, and got confused on the other 2%.
   I understand you probably haven't been alive long enough to observe the changes, so I'll spell it out for you again.
   The liberals keep changing the definition of racism, defining it, and theorizing different types of racism. They are manufacturing new types of racism to appeal to your feeling, and it's based on weak "facts" and shaky theories.
   There's a new Democrat talking point every 4 years and the naive do nothing but parrot the buzz words.
The new one for this election cycle to make the rounds is "systemic" racism. And when you watch the propaganda films and facts they use to substantiate their systemic racism, they leave out conflicting facts that easily question the theory as being solid.


   Want to see how bad you are being manipulated?

Go to google, and type in "Is ______ racist"

Fill in the blank with whatever comes to mind. Anything. And look at the results.
A few things that google told me were racist:  masturbation, air, water, dogs, knitting, hair, anal sex, cars....



But to keep this thread on topic... I'd suggest we talk about how big of a criminal Floyd was, and what that did do increase his odds of having a police interaction not go his way.
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies
  It's really getting funny how hypocritical the left is... point the finger... point the finger, and everyone looks over there. They pay no attention to what you are doing, just what you point at.
   Implicit racism, institutional racism, systemic racism, this racism, that racism..... they come out with a new type of racism whenever they run out of the last one.

  They keep talking in a circle, but always hit on one point....... poverty.   Now, in the Democrats eyes (yes, this is all political now), the poverty is caused by racism. (Look over there). Whatever type of racism they attribute it to is always disproved, so they'll create a new type of racism next election cycle.  But the poverty is actually caused by Liberal Democrat policies, in Democrat controlled cities, in Democrat controlled states.
    They'll show you propaganda films of black kids being unable to succeed because they couldn't go to a good rich school 2 blocks away because of imaginary lines. But when they'll leave out the part of school funding, and increased funding to poorer schools had ZERO effect. It's proven that throwing money at poverty doesnt work, it just creates dependency, and that's what the Democrats want.
    We see higher crime rates among the poor in every race. The black community fears racism, and when you can control someone's fear, you control them.  Just like their Democratic President LBJ said, they'll keep them voting Democrat for 200 years. The poor communities are being kept poor intentionally. The Democrats give the poor free money, free housing, free food. The poor have literally zero incentive to work, better their lives, or leave their free accommodations. And thats how the Democrats want it.
   And what' the next best voter base they can manipulate?  The young and naive. Shove propaganda down the throats of the young naive kids with feelings via Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, and you can make someone born less than two decades ago think they are guilty for something that happened two centuries ago.

  Some of us have been on this earth long enough to see this happen EVERY election cycle. Theres a routine. Theres a pattern.

   But do not fret.... there is a cure for racism. And the Democrats have already found it. It's OPEN BORDERS.  They've already done studies on the Latino vs Black birth rates in the US. The black birth relate is dropping, and the Latino birth rate is rising. Open borders can expedite their plan, and once they feel they can manipulate the larger Latino vote, you will see the switch happen. All of a sudden, you'll see the political battle cry switch from black racism to Latino something. Racism will have been cured.

   Have you not noticed already, the change in the narrative from the last election cycle?   4 years ago, it was just RACISM, RACISM.   That didnt work, so now they want to scream it louder, come up with systemic racism, oh, and this time lets throw in some white supremacy to top it off.   Yes, one talking head in this thread actually called Candice Owes a white supremacist.  

On topic..... George Floyd was a career criminal with a much higher probability of dying while committing crime, than a non-criminal.  
Where was racism disproved? Are you saying that slavery and jim crow were not based on race?  I honestly do not understand what you mean.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958
First Exclusion Ever
These monuments were there to remember history, not to idolize it. Those that do not learn history are doomed to repeat it, and that is the point. Before history can be repeated, you must first erase it so that people can forget, so the old playbooks can be dug up and used again.

You're confusing statues with books.

I am not confusing anything. They already have the books covered, along with the modern equivalent the internet. In addition to erasing history, this is also about creating fear and intimidation among the general population. It is a message, "See what we can do? Resist us and we are coming for you next." This is terrorist activity.
legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 2015
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
These monuments were there to remember history, not to idolize it. Those that do not learn history are doomed to repeat it, and that is the point. Before history can be repeated, you must first erase it so that people can forget, so the old playbooks can be dug up and used again.

You're confusing statues with books.
Pages:
Jump to: