George Floyd dies after police knelt on his neck (MOD NOTE IN POST #1)

Peregrinus

weldoninhio wrote: »

Did the colour of his skin make him pass off dud $20’s??

It hasn't been proven that he did pass dud $20s. Did the colour of his skin make you assume that, as he was accused of it, he must have done it?

weldoninhio

Peregrinus wrote: »

It hasn't been proven that he did pass dud $20s. Did the colour of his skin make you assume that, as he was accused of it, he must have done it?

I reckon a shopkeeper would know a dud 20 from a real one. It also hasn't been proven that Chauvert is guilty. Haven't seen you pull up many posters for stating he was. :rolleyes:

Dyr

weldoninhio wrote: »

I reckon a shopkeeper would know a dud 20 from a real one. It also hasn't been proven that Chauvert is guilty. Haven't seen you pull up many posters for stating he was. :rolleyes:

Hanst been proven he was murdered either, but you won't seeing that being mentioned

Silentcorner

Tell me how wrote: »

No evidence once again that any of this is the case.

You're going to have to stop thinking you know what the majority thinks based on your selection of accounts to pay attention to on Twitter.

Your statement above reminds me of the threads here proclaiming with confidence that most people were going to vote for Peter Casey in the run up to the Presidential Election.

I suppose 23.3% was a majority in your eyes that time also.

What is it with you people....abolosh the police means abolish the police, defund the police means defund the police.

What majority are you on about, the majority of rioters and looters?

The above statements are typical of those drunk on hysteria....pure morons!!!

Peregrinus

weldoninhio wrote: »

I reckon a shopkeeper would know a dud 20 from a real one.

But Floyd might not. And if Floyd didn't know it was forged, then he wouldn't be guilty of anything.

Or, the shopkeeper could be mistaken about who passed him the suspect $20.

Or, your confidence about the shopkeeper's powers of forgery detection might be misplaced; lots of traders accept forged bills and fail to spot the forgery; that's why forged bills circulate. Clearly, shopkeepers do not universally posses the the superpower that you so confidently ascribe to a man you have never met and whose name you do not appear to know.

weldoninhio wrote: »

It also hasn't been proven that Chauvert is guilty. Haven't seen you pull up many posters for stating he was. :rolleyes:

We have rather more direct evidence of Chauvin'g guilt than of Floyd's, I think you'll have to agree. Like the film of him kneeling on Floyd's neck while Floyd dies. And we know that Floyd is actually dead; we don't know that the $20 was actually forged.

But if it gives you any comfort I'll happily agree that Chauvin can't be assumed to be, or treated as, guilty unless convicted in a trial. If only you would adopt the same attitude towards Floyd, the world would be a happier place.

weldoninhio

Peregrinus wrote: »

But Floyd might not. And if Floyd didn't know it was forged, then he wouldn't be guilty of anything.

Or, the shopkeeper could be mistaken about who passed him the suspect $20.

Or, your confidence about the shopkeeper's powers of forgery detection might be misplaced; lots of traders accept forged bills and fail to spot the forgery; that's why forged bills circulate. Clearly, shopkeepers do not universally posses the the superpower that you so confidently ascribe to a man you have never met and whose name you do not appear to know.


We have rather more direct evidence of Chauvin'g guilt than of Floyd's, I think you'll have to agree. Like the film of him kneeling on Floyd's neck while Floyd dies. And we know that Floyd is actually dead; we don't know that the $20 was actually forged.

But if it gives you any comfort I'll happily agree that Chauvin can't be assumed to be, or treated as, guilty unless convicted in a trial. If only you would adopt the same attitude towards Floyd, the world would be a happier place.

The same attitude towards the convicted violent criminal?? :rolleyes: Let me guess he was reformed and a great guy now?

joe40

Bambi wrote: »

Less police and more Democrats will soon fix that. Proven formula for success

Those deaths prove the current formula isn't working.

KiKi III

Silentcorner wrote: »

What is it with you people....abolosh the police means abolish the police, defund the police means defund the police.

What majority are you on about, the majority of rioters and looters?

The above statements are typical of those drunk on hysteria....pure morons!!!

Now, now silentcorner, don’t be letting your emotions get the better of you. Just yesterday you were talking about how important you think it is to be civil.

Listened to some podcasts on “defund/dismantle the police”

It basically means
- redirect some of the police funding into social services, community facilities and mental health services
- restructuring police forces so they are better fit for purpose
- making it mandatory to use deadly force only as a last resort
- banning chokeholds etc

It all sounds logical and sensible and it’s great that so many major US cities are reforming.

KiKi III

weldoninhio wrote: »

The same attitude towards the convicted violent criminal?? :rolleyes: Let me guess he was reformed and a great guy now?

Are you saying that you feel police brutality up to and including extrajudicial killings is justified toward anyone with a criminal record?

But breaking windows at Target is deeply wrong.

So when the police are violent it’s grand, but when protesters do it it’s because they’re thugs?

weldoninhio

KiKi III wrote: »

Are you saying that you feel police brutality up to and including extrajudicial killings is justified toward anyone with a criminal record?

But breaking windows at Target is deeply wrong.

So when the police are violent it’s grand, but when protesters do it it’s because they’re thugs?

Here's an idea, read my posts, then you'll actually be able to see what i'm saying. You won't have to ask and won't look silly.

KiKi III

weldoninhio wrote: »

Here's an idea, read my posts, then you'll actually be able to see what i'm saying. You won't have to ask and won't look silly.

Answer my question.

ChelseaRentBoy

Looking at Floyd's criminal past he was a bit of a scumbag it seems. Funny but i'd hazard a guess that the majority of people virtue signalling about this matter would turn a blind eye if this happened in Dublin and his name was Anto from Finglas with that amount of criminal history. Furthermore they'd say he had it coming or some such similar vile sh1t.

weldoninhio

KiKi III wrote: »

Answer my question.

:rolleyes:

ELM327

ChelseaRentBoy wrote: »

Looking at Floyd's criminal past he was a bit of a scumbag it seems. Funny but i'd hazard a guess that the majority of people virtue signalling about this matter would turn a blind eye if this happened in Dublin and his name was Anto from Finglas with that amount of criminal history. Furthermore they'd say he had it coming or some such similar vile sh1t.

And I'd agree with that.

KiKi III

KiKi III wrote: »

Are you saying that you feel police brutality up to and including extrajudicial killings is justified toward anyone with a criminal record?

But breaking windows at Target is deeply wrong.

So when the police are violent it’s grand, but when protesters do it it’s because they’re thugs?

Can you point out where he said that? It's a deeply uncharitable reading of his post if you took that from it.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

Now, now silentcorner, don’t be letting your emotions get the better of you. Just yesterday you were talking about how important you think it is to be civil.

Listened to some podcasts on “defund/dismantle the police”

It basically means
- redirect some of the police funding into social services, community facilities and mental health services
- restructuring police forces so they are better fit for purpose
- making it mandatory to use deadly force only as a last resort
- banning chokeholds etc

It all sounds logical and sensible and it’s great that so many major US cities are reforming.

No yesterday I asked you to be civil because you have cursed at me on numerous occasions and you have implied that I have psychological issues in previous encounters...I am merely hoping you don't descend to those depths again.

You have no idea what it basically means, because you have no idea what you are on about....you are talking about high crime areas of large American cities and you have linked a number of articles outlining the premise of what you are trying to say those articles have been rubbished.

High Crime areas of cities do not need social workers, the innocent people living there need protection from extremely violent people, now, I have no doubt people will try and water down the implications of Defunding the Police (like you have done above) and leave out a heap of specifics because let's be honest...who needs specifics when you can lash around words like Privilege, or Systematic Racism etc etc...

Now, if you want to start chanting Reform the Police then that is a different matter and much more in line what what ordinary people can agree with...drop the hysterics and people will listen...ramp up the hysterics and people will laugh at you.

Silentcorner

KiKi III wrote: »

Are you saying that you feel police brutality up to and including extrajudicial killings is justified toward anyone with a criminal record?

But breaking windows at Target is deeply wrong.

So when the police are violent it’s grand, but when protesters do it it’s because they’re thugs?

What???

Can you explain what you are on about?

Yurt2

ChelseaRentBoy wrote: »

Looking at Floyd's criminal past he was a bit of a scumbag it seems. Funny but i'd hazard a guess that the majority of people virtue signalling about this matter would turn a blind eye if this happened in Dublin and his name was Anto from Finglas with that amount of criminal history. Furthermore they'd say he had it coming or some such similar vile sh1t.

Almost certainly. There was a thread recently where Gardai were filmed (apparently in Clonmel) reigning down punches on a subdued belly-down individual, including many to the head It could have ended very badly.

A lot of posters were positively giddy at the Gardai's behaviour and were calling for more of it.

CrankyHaus

ChelseaRentBoy wrote: »

Looking at Floyd's criminal past he was a bit of a scumbag it seems. Funny but i'd hazard a guess that the majority of people virtue signalling about this matter would turn a blind eye if this happened in Dublin and his name was Anto from Finglas with that amount of criminal history. Furthermore they'd say he had it coming or some such similar vile sh1t.

I don't know about a blind eye but the conversation would probably be more nuanced. It's much easier to see things in black and white when they're thousands of miles away.



The nearest case we had was Terence Wheelock's death in a cell in Store Street Garda Station in 2005, which was ruled a suicide.
Despite a protest movement involving his family no evidence was ever found to contradict this finding, even in a subsequent GSOC investigation.
The protests certainly never became a cause celebre of the middle class here as BLM has.


The rarity of such cases here shows that we don't have the same problem with excessively forceful policing in this country as the US clearly does.


Of course decades ago the Gardaí bashing people in custody was much more common; the infamous tunnel between the Bridewell and the Four Courts which suspects only had to pass through before magically pleading guilty, their fresh bruises ignored by the Court, being the best known example.



A relative was an FCA MP decades ago, with many of his comrades using it as a track into the Gardaí, and one of them was literally in tears at the physical abuse he was forced to dish out to people in custody to be accepted by his fellow Gardaí when he was posted to a station in a rough area.

Edgware

Peregrinus wrote: »

It hasn't been proven that he did pass dud $20s. Did the colour of his skin make you assume that, as he was accused of it, he must have done it?

How much has the go fund me raised for Floyds family so they won't have to go down the road he took?

ELM327

CrankyHaus wrote: »

I don't know about a blind eye but the conversation would probably be more nuanced. It's much easier to see things in black and white when they're thousands of miles away.



The nearest case we had was Terence Wheelock's death in a cell in Store Street Garda Station in 2005, which was ruled a suicide.
Despite a protest movement involving his family no evidence was ever found to contradict this finding, even in a subsequent GSOC investigation.
The protests certainly never became a cause celebre of the middle class here as BLM has.


The rarity of such cases here shows that we don't have the same problem with excessively forceful policing in this country as the US clearly does.


Of course decades ago the Gardaí bashing people in custody was much more common; the infamous tunnel between the Bridewell and the Four Courts which suspects only had to pass through before magically pleading guilty, their fresh bruises ignored by the Court, being the best known example.



A relative was an FCA MP decades ago, with many of his comrades using it as a track into the Gardaí, and one of them was literally in tears at the physical abuse he was forced to dish out to people in custody to be accepted by his fellow Gardaí when he was posted to a station in a rough area.

I think it's generally accepted that most people turn a blind eye to violence against known thugs/scum.


I don't understand why this is different in this case, he was a known junkie and did some adult films.


If he was irish, white and called anto from finglas, no one would bat an eyelid

osarusan

If an Irish police officer was filmed kneeling on the neck of Anto from Finglas and he died, nobody would bat an eyelid?

Utter garbage.

Edgware

osarusan wrote: »

If an Irish police office was filmed kneeling on the neck of Anto from Finglas and he died, nobody would bat an eyelid?

Utter garbage.

Agreed.

ELM327

osarusan wrote: »

If an Irish police office was filmed kneeling on the neck of Anto from Finglas and he died, nobody would bat an eyelid?

Utter garbage.

Relative to this case, yes.
Would there be worldwide "protests" (read "thugs looting")

osarusan

ELM327 wrote: »

Relative to this case, yes.
Would there be worldwide "protests" (read "thugs looting")

Is that what you said?

No, you said 'nobody would bat an eyelid.'

That's what I replied to.

Stateofyou

Silentcorner wrote: »

What???

Can you explain what you are on about?

It's perfectly clear what this poster is 'on about.' Is this the new deflection tactic when you don't want to see a logical point made? It's only obvious.

Yurt2

osarusan wrote: »

If an Irish police office was filmed kneeling on the neck of Anto from Finglas and he died, nobody would bat an eyelid?

Utter garbage.

I'm confident more people than you'd be comfortable with would be doing mental somersaults to defend the Garda in such a hypothesis.

joe40

ELM327 wrote: »

I think it's generally accepted that most people turn a blind eye to violence against known thugs/scum.


I don't understand why this is different in this case, he was a known junkie and did some adult films.


If he was irish, white and called anto from finglas, no one would bat an eyelid

Not in civilised countries like ours. (Not the vast majority anyway)

You're only trolling with the junkie and adult films stuff.
No one within touching distance of reality would think either of those things justify a beating from the police let alone what happened here.

Policing in Ireland and the UK has changed a lot since the 70s but they never did sh*t like kneeling on a neck until death.

CrankyHaus

ELM327 wrote: »

I think it's generally accepted that most people turn a blind eye to violence against known thugs/scum.


I don't understand why this is different in this case, he was a known junkie and did some adult films.


If he was irish, white and called anto from finglas, no one would bat an eyelid

I disagree. Whatever his criminal history he did not deserve to be killed.
Who cares if he was in adult films, are we back in the 1950s?


If the Gardaí killed anyone in that manner they would be severely criticised.
If they killed people regularly without justification the country would not allow it.


Define scum? Or thugs?

Seriously, make a split-second decision on that like a policeman would have to and see the margin for error. Do you base it on colour, accent, area, gender?

Are you confident that you, or your children, might never be confused for scum by the police and treated like dirt as a result?
It's a bad way to police, with the potential for error and abuse baked-in, and it guarantees undermining the community consent which is the basis of the Peelian Principles of Policing.



Snobbery certainly exists in Ireland but most people would find Gardaí unjustifiably killing Anto in Finglas to be abhorrent, and I'm glad of that.
We're not a society of Brahmins and untermensch, but a Republic of equal citizens.

Silentcorner

Stateofyou wrote: »

It's perfectly clear what this poster is 'on about.' Is this the new deflection tactic when you don't want to see a logical point made? It's only obvious.

If it is obvious to you , then maybe you can explain what she was on about?