[ SECRET POST #2906 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2906 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 021 secrets from Secret Submission Post #415.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: unpopular opinions

[ill_omened]

It will never change, because it's the basis of the social contract. The lawful enactment of their duty is arresting people. If they can't use force to do that, well you've just defacto allowed anyone to commit a non-violent offence and not face any censure for it. The suggestions of "arrest them later" stops the investigation and simply kicks the question further down the line.

A taser may have been an option (if they had one? Can't see any in the video), but if he'd had a heart attack which he may will, we'd be having this exact conversation except talking about how clearly excessive using a taser was.

You can see from the video the limited about of time the choke is held. The medical report says it's a contributary factor, not the sole factor. And there may have been alternate options, but if any of them had gone wrong we'd just be discussing that instead. The question is how reasonable would it have been to forsee death as a result.

Re: unpopular opinions

[diet_poison]

He was in that chokehold for a long ass time. Did we watch the same video?? Also: was a chokehold actually necessary to take him down?

Tasers are used all the time and I honestly *don't* think we'd be having the exact same conversation, though we would be having a conversation. Someone dropping dead from a taser is unusual.

As for all of that about arresting and the social contract, you have a point, but do you think it's worth peoples' lives? Also, interestingly, police are able to force arrests all the time without killing people.

Re: unpopular opinions

[ill_omened]

At the absolutle outside it was fifteen seconds (it won't have been fifteen seconds, having your arms around someones neck is very different to choking them).

You're right someone from dead from a taser is unusal, but again so is someone from a chokehold. It's an incredibly rare outcome in situations where it's not intended.

And yes, I believe in the social contract. I've been in roll arounds with plenty of people, it's the nature of the beast. The foundation of our entire society relies upon that. The state needs a monopoly on force and the ability to enforce it's will, we can't function without it. Are you willing to dispense of that, and threaten peoples lives through inaction?

That's not really an interesting point at all. You're looking at what is an incredibly unlikely outcome, and treating it as a certainty. Any use of force has a chance of ending in death, it's just a continum. That they do it all the time without a fatal outcome just speaks to the chances of outcomes involved.

Re: unpopular opinions

[diet_poison]

Are you willing to dispense of that, and threaten peoples lives through inaction?

Are you talking about the big picture or specific instances? Because in this particular instance, nobody's life was being threatened by inaction.

Re: unpopular opinions

[ill_omened]

Big picture.

Re: unpopular opinions

[diet_poison]

Okay.

So do you think that forcing an arrest in a situation that may cause death is necessary to save other lives in other situations?

Basically, where do you draw the line? I think I just don't agree with where you are drawing it.

Re: unpopular opinions

[ill_omened]

Literally ever single situation where force has to be used may lead to death.

Do you think that an officer should never arrest for a non-violent offence, and if someone is unwilling to comply with officers or the justice system we should be unable to enforce our will as a society?

Y/N?

Because that is the line where you're drawing it.

Re: unpopular opinions

[diet_poison]

Hmmm.

Well, that's a good question.

I do think part of the problem is with the law - we arrest for offenses that shouldn't even be illegal (that is not the cops' fault, they are just doing their jobs). I have a hard time justifying using potentially lethal force on someone for selling loosies. But there are other non-violent crimes for which I'd give a different answer (though always, care should be taken to minimize the chance of death or injury as much as possible).

And that's the other part of it - there isn't as much emphasis as there should be on the value of human lives and attempting to make all force non-lethal. Yes, there will be the risk of death, but that isn't an excuse to do everything you can to minimize that risk. It sounds like a very casual approach to the value of anyone's life if they happen to break a minor law.

And at any rate, I believe the officer who tackled and choked Eric Garner used lethal force by a big margin. We seem to have watched two different videos, so I guess we're at an impasse with that one.