No but feelings and opinions don’t belong in a debate about facts. Something you earlier pointed out.A: One does not need to prove an opinion.
B: The counterfeit money was shown on a news broadcast.
No but feelings and opinions don’t belong in a debate about facts. Something you earlier pointed out.A: One does not need to prove an opinion.
B: The counterfeit money was shown on a news broadcast.
So prove your point that he didn’t surrender. That’s how a debate works.Exactly ! That's why he should be expected (we) are expected to surrender to the arrest ... and fight it out in court.
It very much applies, rgp, but you don't want to admit it.
Let's go one step further: let's say the guy had just passed counterfeit bills, the evidence was overwhelming. I have two questions for you.
1. Do you think anyone who passes counterfeit bills, knowingly or not, should be arrested? Are you sure you have never unwittingly had a phony bill in your wallet, which you innocently used? If spotted, should you have been dragged out of your car, assaulted, and murdered?
2. If you feel that arresting Floyd was justified for whatever reason, do you also feel that the actions taken by the police were justified? Being held down for 9 minutes by an armed cop and gruesomely asphyxiated, while he was begging to be allowed to breathe? And a group of other armed policemen stood around watching, making no attempt to stop the murder? Was there no other way to humanely calm this prisoner down and bring him in for questioning?
In other words, are the police justified in acting like murderous brutes?
Before you tell me that this scenario doesn't apply, which seems to be your go-to strategy when you've backed yourself into a corner, see if you can answer these two questions. I'd be very curious to hear your answer.
It very much applies, rgp, but you don't want to admit it.
Let's go one step further: let's say the guy had just passed counterfeit bills, the evidence was overwhelming. I have two questions for you.
1. Do you think anyone who passes counterfeit bills, knowingly or not, should be arrested? Are you sure you have never unwittingly had a phony bill in your wallet, which you innocently used? If spotted, should you have been dragged out of your car, assaulted, and murdered?
2. If you feel that arresting Floyd was justified for whatever reason, do you also feel that the actions taken by the police were justified? Being held down for 9 minutes by an armed cop and gruesomely asphyxiated, while he was begging to be allowed to breathe? And a group of other armed policemen stood around watching, making no attempt to stop the murder? Was there no other way to humanely calm this prisoner down and bring him in for questioning?
In other words, are the police justified in acting like murderous brutes?
Before you tell me that this scenario doesn't apply, which seems to be your go-to strategy when you've backed yourself into a corner, see if you can answer these two questions. I'd be very curious to hear your answer.
Well that's definitely one closed-minded way of looking at it.I'm not going to wast my time debating you non-applicable scenarios.
I am not backed into any corner, I stand by all I have said.
He fought the law & the law won.
So prove your point that he didn’t surrender. That’s how a debate works.
Well that's definitely one closed-minded way of looking at it.
Because it doesn't play into your ideals?And that's one asinine reply.
I'm not going to wast my time debating you non-applicable scenarios.
I am not backed into any corner, I stand by all I have said.
He fought the law & the law won.
The police report from the charged murderers?I trust the police report that says he didn't.
Because it doesn't play into your ideals?
Handcuffed the proper way with his hands cuffed behind him. How much more surrendering is there? Kind of hard to fight it out in court when your dead because a police office kept you face down with a knee on your neck & back until you took your last breath.Exactly ! That's why he should be expected (we) are expected to surrender to the arrest ... and fight it out in court.
It would be nice if RGP could see. He must be blind because two videos show what took placeIt very much applies, rgp, but you don't want to admit it.
Let's go one step further: let's say the guy had just passed counterfeit bills, the evidence was overwhelming. I have two questions for you.
1. Do you think anyone who passes counterfeit bills, knowingly or not, should be arrested? Are you sure you have never unwittingly had a phony bill in your wallet, which you innocently used? If spotted, should you have been dragged out of your car, assaulted, and murdered?
Yes. It's usually the reason why people will defend any cop's actions, regardless of how it makes them look.Your big on the cops in family aspect aren't ya ?..........
When did you retire from police work? You certainly spell like a cop.I'm not going to wast my time debating you non-applicable scenarios.
I am not backed into any corner, I stand by all I have said.
He fought the law & the law won.
The last I heard passing a counterfeit bill is not a capital offenseWell .... I disagree completely. He involved himself in a criminal activity, he encountered the police ..... he died as a result . Had he not involved himself in that criminal activity ......... he would likely still be alive.
Yes. It's usually the reason why people will defend any cop's actions, regardless of how it makes them look.
And, by the way, it's "You're big on the cops-in-family aspect."
Would you happen to be a retired cop?
What is "non-applicable?" If you think my first question in note # 304 was too hypothetical, how about answering the second question? I described exactly what happened, which we all saw on that excruciating video that was broadcast again and again. Are you going to duck that question also, because it requires you to look at the hard truth?
Finish off the "hard truth" for us... he finally lost because?The hard truth is simply ........he engaged with police several times over his criminal career , and finally he lost.
Are you posting contrary to what others have seen on two videos to agitate & to provoke a response? By that I mean are you entertaining yourself in this thread by posting the ridiculous position that George Floyd had a prior history of criminal activity so he deserved to die by asphyxiation?
Finish off the "hard truth" for us... he finally lost because?