Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Response to the killing of George Floyd
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #1
Response to the killing of George Floyd
Figured it makes sense to start a new thread separate from "Trump Administration".

Obama put out a statement today:

As millions of people across the country take to the streets and raise their voices in response to the killing of George Floyd and the ongoing problem of unequal justice, many people have reached out asking how we can sustain momentum to bring about real change.

Ultimately, it’s going to be up to a new generation of activists to shape strategies that best fit the times. But I believe there are some basic lessons to draw from past efforts that are worth remembering.

First, the waves of protests across the country represent a genuine and legitimate frustration over a decades-long failure to reform police practices and the broader criminal justice system in the United States. The overwhelming majority of participants have been peaceful, courageous, responsible, and inspiring. They deserve our respect and support, not condemnation – something that police in cities like Camden and Flint have commendably understood.

On the other hand, the small minority of folks who’ve resorted to violence in various forms, whether out of genuine anger or mere opportunism, are putting innocent people at risk, compounding the destruction of neighborhoods that are often already short on services and investment and detracting from the larger cause. I saw an elderly black woman being interviewed today in tears because the only grocery store in her neighborhood had been trashed. If history is any guide, that store may take years to come back. So let’s not excuse violence, or rationalize it, or participate in it. If we want our criminal justice system, and American society at large, to operate on a higher ethical code, then we have to model that code ourselves.

Second, I’ve heard some suggest that the recurrent problem of racial bias in our criminal justice system proves that only protests and direct action can bring about change, and that voting and participation in electoral politics is a waste of time. I couldn’t disagree more. The point of protest is to raise public awareness, to put a spotlight on injustice, and to make the powers that be uncomfortable; in fact, throughout American history, it’s often only been in response to protests and civil disobedience that the political system has even paid attention to marginalized communities. But eventually, aspirations have to be translated into specific laws and institutional practices – and in a democracy, that only happens when we elect government officials who are responsive to our demands.

Moreover, it’s important for us to understand which levels of government have the biggest impact on our criminal justice system and police practices. When we think about politics, a lot of us focus only on the presidency and the federal government. And yes, we should be fighting to make sure that we have a president, a Congress, a U.S. Justice Department, and a federal judiciary that actually recognize the ongoing, corrosive role that racism plays in our society and want to do something about it. But the elected officials who matter most in reforming police departments and the criminal justice system work at the state and local levels.

It’s mayors and county executives that appoint most police chiefs and negotiate collective bargaining agreements with police unions. It’s district attorneys and state’s attorneys that decide whether or not to investigate and ultimately charge those involved in police misconduct. Those are all elected positions. In some places, police review boards with the power to monitor police conduct are elected as well. Unfortunately, voter turnout in these local races is usually pitifully low, especially among young people – which makes no sense given the direct impact these offices have on social justice issues, not to mention the fact that who wins and who loses those seats is often determined by just a few thousand, or even a few hundred, votes.

So the bottom line is this: if we want to bring about real change, then the choice isn’t between protest and politics. We have to do both. We have to mobilize to raise awareness, and we have to organize and cast our ballots to make sure that we elect candidates who will act on reform.

Finally, the more specific we can make demands for criminal justice and police reform, the harder it will be for elected officials to just offer lip service to the cause and then fall back into business as usual once protests have gone away. The content of that reform agenda will be different for various communities. A big city may need one set of reforms; a rural community may need another. Some agencies will require wholesale rehabilitation; others should make minor improvements. Every law enforcement agency should have clear policies, including an independent body that conducts investigations of alleged misconduct. Tailoring reforms for each community will require local activists and organizations to do their research and educate fellow citizens in their community on what strategies work best.

But as a starting point, I’ve included two links below. One leads to a report and toolkit developed by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and based on the work of the Task Force on 21st Century Policing that I formed when I was in the White House. And if you’re interested in taking concrete action, we’ve also created a dedicated site at the Obama Foundation to aggregate and direct you to useful resources and organizations who’ve been fighting the good fight at the local and national levels for years.

I recognize that these past few months have been hard and dispiriting – that the fear, sorrow, uncertainty, and hardship of a pandemic have been compounded by tragic reminders that prejudice and inequality still shape so much of American life. But watching the heightened activism of young people in recent weeks, of every race and every station, makes me hopeful. If, going forward, we can channel our justifiable anger into peaceful, sustained, and effective action, then this moment can be a real turning point in our nation’s long journey to live up to our highest ideals.

Let’s get to work.

- obama.org/policing-civil-rights-org-toolkit
- obama.org/anguish-and-action
06-01-2020 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,830
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #2
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
Blah, blah, blah. Just over thought out political speech. I prefer the leader of the free world to speak more directly.

Quote: “I don’t see any indication that there were any white supremest groups mixing in. This is an ANTIFA Organization. It seems that the first time we saw it in a major way was Occupy Wall Street. It’s the same mindset.” @kilmeade @foxandfriends TRUE!
06-01-2020 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ExcitedOwl18 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,904
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 59
I Root For: Rice
Location: New York
Post: #3
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
I never post in this forum but a bunch of Rice students are on Leebron's ass for not donating enough money to their BLM/Activist slush fund ( https://www.gofundme.com/f/rice-for-blac...ntactathon ).

This is why I never donate to GoFundMe's... It's never enough for some people. I'm charitable in silence.

https://twitter.com/niapopia/status/1267...02498?s=20
06-01-2020 01:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

If the facts are shown that show the actions caused his death, then yes, let us lead with the term 'killing' as you did.

But, at the same time numerous others are 'mishandled' at the fate of the police. Without the same consternation of this.

I guess when the wrongful death of a blond haired Australian woman *in Minneapolis* isnt enough to raise a comment from the social organizer in chief, but leave it to him (and to all the shitbirds looting and burning) to gin it up ton the level when an African American suffers at the very least a horrendous assault at the hands of a police officer, and, if the evidence that comes forth that shows that that assault led to his death I will join you in your pre-judging of the term 'killing'.

But again, I kind of ascribe that merging of topics when available, and ignoring the same sort of action when the skin color isnt correct to be fairly grotesque.

My comment is that police misconduct should be accorded the rigors of.... well.... police misconduct. Sorry, I dont waltz down the 'it is especially bad based on the skin color of the victim'. The numbers that came out of a Michigan State study two years ago simply dont bear the thesis that african americans are accorded police misconduct *any more* than the rates of detentions and arrests generally.
06-01-2020 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #5
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 02:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck). Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him. Do you really think this is in doubt?

Quote:If the facts are shown that show the actions caused his death, then yes, let us lead with the term 'killing' as you did.

What do you think the final pathology could possibly show that would make you think that he wasn't "killed"?
06-01-2020 03:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,386
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 306
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #6
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
I miss having a true leader in the White House. Sigh.
06-01-2020 03:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,224
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1783
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #7
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 03:52 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I miss having a true leader in the White House. Sigh.

Who would you say is the last true leader in the white house?

Seems we've had more dividers than leaders there lately.
06-01-2020 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,959
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #8
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
A lot of good things in this statement.

This is a nice observation (he was a law school faculty member, after all):

(06-01-2020 01:06 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Moreover, it’s important for us to understand which levels of government have the biggest impact on our criminal justice system and police practices. ... But the elected officials who matter most in reforming police departments and the criminal justice system work at the state and local levels.
06-01-2020 04:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,297
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #9
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
Simple solution.

Make it illegal for a white person to serve as a cop.

We would never again hear this white cop/black victim stuff.

We would never again have a black man die in custody.

We would never again hear this "systemic racism" stuff.
06-01-2020 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 03:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 02:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck).

I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.

Quote:Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him.

I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.

Quote: Do you really think this is in doubt?

I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

Quote:
Quote:If the facts are shown that show the actions caused his death, then yes, let us lead with the term 'killing' as you did.

What do you think the final pathology could possibly show that would make you think that he wasn't "killed"?

The medical evidence that is present in asphyxiation should be present, for one. If it isnt present, then that cuts against that causation. Just a wild thought, I know.

But, unlike you, I will form my opinion on the facts that come out of it. If the medical evidence shows that causation, you leap of faith is correct. But funny, you get allworked up and spastic about someone wishing to wait for that evidence, as opposed to joining you in your leap to a conclusion. Must be fun to ride that 'get worked up and jump on that leap of faith based on a subjective opinion' go cart you have latched on to. How many carnival tickets does that cost? Hopefully only one or two....

Wow, your follow up here is one for the ages. I suggest you limit your expert opinion to modeling if this is what we should expect.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 04:59 PM by tanqtonic.)
06-01-2020 04:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mrbig Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,045
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 112
I Root For: Rice
Location: New Orleans
Post: #11
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
So the Hannepin County Medical Examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide. Hopefully that is good enough for tanq, as the argument about whether this was a "killing" seems to be a bit of a weird knit-pick and/or nit-pick given everything else in the world.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:04 PM by mrbig.)
06-01-2020 05:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 04:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Simple solution.

Make it illegal for a white person to serve as a cop.

We would never again hear this white cop/black victim stuff.

Even that wouldnt work. Trayvon Martin was killed by a Hispanic --- yet we had the same black/white **** then.
06-01-2020 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #13
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 03:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 02:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck).

I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.

Quote:Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him.

I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.

Quote: Do you really think this is in doubt?

I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

I will respond to the rest later when I have time, but I thought you take great offense to ad homs? I’m confused.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:12 PM by Rice93.)
06-01-2020 05:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  So the Hannepin County Medical Examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide. Hopefully that is good enough for tanq,

It absolutely is for me. My apologies for not immediately jumping immediately into the 'judgement without facts' pool at the outset like some. That apparently is no-no to those 'some'.

I will assume 93 has hot embers in his britches to have the other officers charged. The ones who ---- did crowd control, for example.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:19 PM by tanqtonic.)
06-01-2020 05:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 03:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 02:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck).

I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.

Quote:Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him.

I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.

Quote: Do you really think this is in doubt?

I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

I will respond to the rest later when I have time, but I thought you take great offense to ad homs? I’m confused.

Yes, your inability to state correct basic factual bases does seem to indicate at least some amount of confusion. On that we agree.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 05:17 PM by tanqtonic.)
06-01-2020 05:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  So the Hannepin County Medical Examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide. Hopefully that is good enough for tanq, as the argument about whether this was a "killing" seems to be a bit of a weird knit-pick and/or nit-pick given everything else in the world.

Just noting a rush to judgement by some.
06-01-2020 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,959
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 85
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #17
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  So the Hannepin County Medical Examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide. Hopefully that is good enough for tanq, as the argument about whether this was a "killing" seems to be a bit of a weird knit-pick and/or nit-pick given everything else in the world.

Since you brought it up 03-wink
nitpick is correct, referring to the picking of lice eggs (nits) out of hair.

By the way, the usage example in the Wiktionary entry is startlingly apropos:
"Someone will invariably nitpick about any spelling error posted to the forums."
See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nitpick
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 06:02 PM by georgewebb.)
06-01-2020 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #18
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 03:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 02:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The problem is that Obama statement conflates the activity of police misconduct in general to emphasize the favorite 'talking point' of 'racial injustice' and various forms of pablum.

The death of George Floyd (being precise here, since, I hate to tell you, the verdict of the medical examiner at this point does not note a 'killing', nor the verdict of a court of law hasnt been rendered, but you knew that and *still* use the term 'killing' as the lede) is horrible, the treatment of him as he was being restrained seemingly *is* very facially an act of police misconduct even if at the very least it was an assault that *didnt* cause his death (i.e. your killing term).

LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck).

I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.

Quote:Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him.

I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.

Quote: Do you really think this is in doubt?

I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

I will respond to the rest later when I have time, but I thought you take great offense to ad homs? I’m confused.

Yes, your inability to state correct basic factual bases does seem to indicate at least some amount of confusion. On that we agree.

It's weird that you took that initial statement re: the pathology report to mean that they didn't think that Floyd was "killed".

Hopefully this will provide you some background:

https://twitter.com/drjudymelinek/status...65634?s=20
06-01-2020 05:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:41 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 03:22 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  LOLOLOLOL. That cop didn't kill him. He just happened to have a heart attack which would TOTALLY have happened anyway whether or not there were four cops sitting on him for ten minutes (and one with his knee in his neck).

I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.

Quote:Whether or not the pathologist said asphyxiation, whatever pathologic process ended his life was directly related to what those cops did to him.

I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.

Quote: Do you really think this is in doubt?

I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

I will respond to the rest later when I have time, but I thought you take great offense to ad homs? I’m confused.

Yes, your inability to state correct basic factual bases does seem to indicate at least some amount of confusion. On that we agree.

It's weird that you took that initial statement re: the pathology report to mean that they didn't think that Floyd was "killed".

Hopefully this will provide you some background:

https://twitter.com/drjudymelinek/status...65634?s=20

Ooh, boy --- proof by twitter feed. *That* is dispositive. Lolz.

By the way I just read the just released medical report.

Floyd died of a heart attack.

But, you got that Twitter feed that proves otherwise. So you must be happy. You are on a roll.

Quote:t's weird that you took that initial statement re: the pathology report to mean that they didn't think that Floyd was "killed".

By the way the preliminary report was vague about the cause of death. That is why. Again, facts, 93. They help.

Of course, you dont bother to note that that, after being removed from his car, Floyd collapsed twice before getting to the patrol car. As he was being led to the patrol car he complained of a shortness of breath. And collapsed again.

Kind of sounds like something was happening *before* the knee on the throat. But, 93, that is the power of facts. Not the power of 'making **** up' (like you did), nor the power of supposition, nor the power of a Twitter expert schooling us what happened.

Funny thing, the Twitter roll you put up is incorrect -- there was no asphyxia present. 'Cardiopulmonary attack'.

Sometimes, just perhaps once or twice, use facts. Not made up ****, not Twitter school, not supposition. It is helpful.

The legal standard for the murder is a 'but for standard'. I guess but for the '4 police sitting on him for two thousand minutes', Floyd wouldnt have had a heart attack. Funny, he was exhibiting signs of that attack before being on the ground.

The medical report jives with reporting on the stop and the issues that occurred prior to Floyd's final fall. A heart attack. Not to mention the fentanyl and meth.
(This post was last modified: 06-01-2020 06:02 PM by tanqtonic.)
06-01-2020 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #20
RE: Response to the killing of George Floyd
(06-01-2020 05:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:41 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:17 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 05:11 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(06-01-2020 04:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I prefer facts, 93. Not suppositions. Should be simple. Apparently not.

By the way 93, you have some facts wrong. Actually numerous.

One cop sat on him. One cop did crowd control. One cop held his leg, and prior to the apparent distress moved away. Another cop restrained Floyd with a single hand on the small of the back.

Chauvin sat in that position for 8 minutes, 30 seconds, not ten minutes.

I suggest you re-edit your historonics about 'four cops sitting on on him for ten minutes.'

Good fing grief. One statement, 3 errors about the cops and one error on the time. Awesome job there.


I am glad you are substituting your expert medical and pathologic knowledge for that of a........ medical professional. And a....... pathologist. Do you play an attorney on TV as well to enamor us with your expert legal opinions as well? Perhaps you should with the angle you are taking above.

In short you say 'I dont give a fk what an expert pathologist says is the cause of death, I will substitute my own opinion.' That really takes the cake there '93. Just awesome.


I will form my opinion based on the medical evidence. Not neceessarily on some douchebag board poster's opinion and his inherent belief without the medical evidence. Sound like plan?

I will respond to the rest later when I have time, but I thought you take great offense to ad homs? I’m confused.

Yes, your inability to state correct basic factual bases does seem to indicate at least some amount of confusion. On that we agree.

It's weird that you took that initial statement re: the pathology report to mean that they didn't think that Floyd was "killed".

Hopefully this will provide you some background:

https://twitter.com/drjudymelinek/status...65634?s=20

Ooh, boy --- proof by twitter feed. *That* is dispositive. Lolz.

By the way I just read the just released medical report.

Floyd died of a heart attack.

But, you got that Twitter feed that proves otherwise. So you must be happy. You are on a roll.

Got it... so the pathologist putting forth her informed opinion doesn't count because she posted it on twitter. Strong take.

So you don't think the heart attack (I haven't read the medical report but I'll take your word for it) was related to the stress placed on the cardiovascular system due the actions of the police officers? So George Floyd wasn't killed... he just died of natural causes? Do you feel this autopsy report exonerates the officers in some way?
06-01-2020 05:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.