Gun violence statistics are distorted by large cities and large urban areas. More people = more crimes.

Like commerce, a great deal of crime migrates into urban areas so it can exploit the wealth in the urban area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

On a per capita basis in 2015 the you are most likely to be murdered by a gun in the following and I will note the largest urban area:

1. DC (DC)
2. Louisiana (New Orleans)
3. MIzzou (St. Louis)
4. SC (Columbia)
5. Alaska (Fairbanks)
6. MD (Baltimore)
7. TN (Memphis)
8. Ga (Atlanta)
9. Mississippi (Jackson)
10. Nevada/Pa/Michigan (Las Vegas/Philly/Detroit)

You are least likely to be killed by a gun in:

1. Hawaii (Honolulu)
2. New Hampshire (Manchester)
3. Oregon (Portland)
4. Rhode Island (Providence)
5. Utah (SLC)
6. Mass/ND/Maine (Boston/Fargo/Portland)
9. Vermont (Burlington)
10. South Dakota and Minnesota (Rapid City/Minneapolis)

In every city there is a bad part of town. In every rural county there is a bad part of the county. In this country, illegal guns flow from South to North and West. Why? The Scots-irish/Ulster Scots who were abused by the English in Scotland, then Ireland, then in the over mountain portion of NC in the Revolutionary War learn to live and die with a weapon in hand. However, firepower to prevent another Highland Clearance or to show your strange neighbor that you will shoot him if he kills your dog becomes gasoline in areas where the underlying culture is not heavy weapon oriented.

Because of the flood of weapons, the police then took advantage of Gulf War surplus to obtain all sorts of goodies that are not really needed. If the popo have a personnel carrier, then the thug wants an automatic weapon to feel safer. Since he has that auto he now can pop his competition in the ass with high powered round instead of a 22 or 38. Now his competition dies. Whereas the police could periodically make a rousting round where they could rough up nuisances and criminals, they have to go armed and be careful.

More firepower just makes it harder to do anything except killing which is made easier.

I'm not a weapons expert but if it can hold more than 13 rounds and puncture my man's vest, I want it out of the hands of the average person. I think overproduction of these weapons is a key problem. To sell them you need an escalating cycle of violence and the manufacturer doesn't really care who buys the weapon. In this sense they are not much different from any other defense manufacturer product. You need them to be used for the government to order more.

Legitimate and reasonable gun owners have to be at the forefront to do this effectively and logically. Ideologues only make it worse.


Pacfan, I agree with you that the tangible problem is smaller weapons, but the mental image of automatic weaponry drives a lot of departments. It's that you are likely to face such a weapon, it's that you might face it.

IseWolf22 said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

^ True, the cop is not without blame at all. However there was nothing in the autopsy to indicate his airflow was ever restricted. He was saying he couldn't breathe while he was still standing. He said it the whole time until he had a heart attack and died. So he obviously could breathe... You can't talk if you can't breathe or if you're being choked.
Autopsy also found no damage or bruising or anything done to his neck. So there was no abnormal compression or anything done there, either

So no, the cop shouldn't have been on him like that and he probably did stay on him too long, and there will be some sort of appropriate charges for that... But second degree murder is not appropriate. Murder implies that it was intentional and there's nothing to indicate that was the case.
And the bottom line is, the race of either party had nothing to do with what happened.

---

The bold statement is not true. You can talk while your carotid artery is being compressed. Air is still able to enter your lungs but it cannot get to your brain. People can and do talk while in sleeper holds.

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

Pacfanweb said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

^ True, the cop is not without blame at all. However there was nothing in the autopsy to indicate his airflow was ever restricted. He was saying he couldn't breathe while he was still standing. He said it the whole time until he had a heart attack and died. So he obviously could breathe... You can't talk if you can't breathe or if you're being choked.
Autopsy also found no damage or bruising or anything done to his neck. So there was no abnormal compression or anything done there, either

So no, the cop shouldn't have been on him like that and he probably did stay on him too long, and there will be some sort of appropriate charges for that... But second degree murder is not appropriate. Murder implies that it was intentional and there's nothing to indicate that was the case.
And the bottom line is, the race of either party had nothing to do with what happened.

---

The bold statement is not true. You can talk while your carotid artery is being compressed. Air is still able to enter your lungs but it cannot get to your brain. People can and do talk while in sleeper holds.

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

---

Legitimately asking, where in the autopsy does it say he died of a heart attack? I've read both the original release which said homicide and the independent report which said he died of asphyxiation.

Responding to your previous post as well, you can't preface police reform on "both sides" making compromises. Police are agents of the government and accountable to people and lawa
makers. We can demand reform and make it happen. The "other side" is literally the entire rest of the US population that will ever have an officer encounter. There is no organization or leadership that can be held accountable. The only thing you can really proven that you can do on a policy level to reduce crime is to reduce poverty and increases overall prosperity in the country.

Ripper said:

---

Civilized said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

As for race, I've talked very little about it. I believe Police in the US need major reform regardless. Real de-escalation attempts should be made before force is considered. Less force should be used. Less people should die. Police should be held accountable when they abuse their position and Qualified Immunity should be abolished. And to cap it all off, less offenses should be criminalized.

---

Agree completely.

These reforms are absolute no-brainers and should theoretically have broad support on both sides of the aisle, although I'm sure we'll find a way to infuse them with partisanship.

---

How about criminals stop committing crimes? That is the best way to reduce interactions with police. There are a few reform measures that can help, especially for low level crime and non crime situations. But let's be serious, as long as crime is prevalent, there will be confrontational situations with law enforcement. I hope you are never the victim in a major crime.

---

Violent Crime has been falling for years. The biggest thing we can do to further reduce interactions is to decriminalize victimless actions.

lumberpack5 said:

---

Qualified immunity and union police contract protection at the same time is a problem.

I am not against Qualified Immunity in non-union situations. That serves the taxpayers.

However the City Manager or the Mayor in a strong mayor system needs to have the ability to **** can a bad police officer without facing a strike or unwinnable litigation.

When you have both protections there is no incentive for the police to police themselves.

---

Qualified Immunity needs to be abolished regardless of union contracts. It applies to more than police anyways. Any government official can claim it when caught commiting a crime or abusing power

The bold is absolutely true. Can't talk if you can't breathe, can't breathe if your airway is completely compressed. The pictures clearly show the knee isn't compressing the carotid, and if it had the dude would have had a stroke and he didn't die of a stroke, right? But whatever, doesn't matter. Still tragic.

Totally agree about policy to reduce poverty and improve the situations of those committing the crimes. But had policy been effective in changing that culture/ plight? Seems a huge uphill battle, and seems to me just a talking point to get elected. Baltimore (listed above) has been run by the Dems for decades and look at it. What has policy done? So it's easy to say policy can change their fate, but legitimately asking what are your suggestions to actually effect an actual tangible/measurable change for those in need?

IseWolf22 said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

^ True, the cop is not without blame at all. However there was nothing in the autopsy to indicate his airflow was ever restricted. He was saying he couldn't breathe while he was still standing. He said it the whole time until he had a heart attack and died. So he obviously could breathe... You can't talk if you can't breathe or if you're being choked.
Autopsy also found no damage or bruising or anything done to his neck. So there was no abnormal compression or anything done there, either

So no, the cop shouldn't have been on him like that and he probably did stay on him too long, and there will be some sort of appropriate charges for that... But second degree murder is not appropriate. Murder implies that it was intentional and there's nothing to indicate that was the case.
And the bottom line is, the race of either party had nothing to do with what happened.

---

The bold statement is not true. You can talk while your carotid artery is being compressed. Air is still able to enter your lungs but it cannot get to your brain. People can and do talk while in sleeper holds.

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

---

Legitimately asking, where in the autopsy does it say he died of a heart attack? I've read both the original release which said homicide and the independent report which said he died of asphyxiation.

Responding to your previous post as well, you can't preface police reform on "both sides" making compromises. Police are agents of the government and accountable to people and lawa
makers. We can demand reform and make it happen. The "other side" is literally the entire rest of the US population that will ever have an officer encounter. There is no organization or leadership that can be held accountable. The only thing you can really proven that you can do on a policy level to reduce crime is to reduce poverty and increases overall prosperity in the country.

---

Right at the top.
" Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating police subdual"

Pacfanweb said:

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

---

Police officers are put in challenging situations everyday, where split-second calls can mean life or death. That's very hard, but it is their responsibility to manage that risk professionally, and it is the job they signed up for.

In this case, the arresting officer didn't do 'the best he could'. His top priorities as a police officer aren't to see through BS, they're to protect the public and to not get killed himself.

I guaran-damn-tee you he violated multiple force protocols with his manner of arrest and those violations directly contributed to a man's death.

He likely didn't murder George Floyd since I still don't think the intent piece is there, but he very likely did commit homicide.

And this outcome isn't 'all you can ask of the system'. The system can train officers better to use force less frequently and less severely and to pay closer attention to key signs that a suspect that they are physically detaining is dying in their arms (or under their knee).

IseWolf22 said:

---

Ripper said:

---

Civilized said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

As for race, I've talked very little about it. I believe Police in the US need major reform regardless. Real de-escalation attempts should be made before force is considered. Less force should be used. Less people should die. Police should be held accountable when they abuse their position and Qualified Immunity should be abolished. And to cap it all off, less offenses should be criminalized.

---

Agree completely.

These reforms are absolute no-brainers and should theoretically have broad support on both sides of the aisle, although I'm sure we'll find a way to infuse them with partisanship.

---

How about criminals stop committing crimes? That is the best way to reduce interactions with police. There are a few reform measures that can help, especially for low level crime and non crime situations. But let's be serious, as long as crime is prevalent, there will be confrontational situations with law enforcement. I hope you are never the victim in a major crime.

---

Violent Crime has been falling for years. The biggest thing we can do to further reduce interactions is to decriminalize victimless actions.

---

That's not the biggest thing we can do. More people living moral, upright responsible lives is much closer to it.

And please note that passing counterfeit bills is not a "victimless crime". Neither is a father strung out on drugs.

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

---

Police officers are put in challenging situations everyday, where split-second calls can mean life or death. That's very hard, but it is their responsibility to manage that risk professionally, and it is the job they signed up for.

In this case, the arresting officer didn't do 'the best he could'. His top priorities as a police officer aren't to see through BS, they're to protect the public and to not get killed himself.

I guaran-damn-tee you he violated multiple force protocols with his manner of arrest and those violations directly contributed to a man's death.

He likely didn't murder George Floyd since I still don't think the intent piece is there, but he very likely did commit homicide.

And this outcome isn't 'all you can ask of the system'. The system can train officers better to use force less frequently and less severely and to pay closer attention to key signs that a suspect that they are physically detaining is dying in their arms (or under their knee).

---

Nothing he did made Floyd have a heart attack. FAR more violent encounters occur between police and criminal on a regular basis and nobody has a heart attack and dies.

I'm not saying, and never have said, the cop did everything right and doesn't deserve the appropriate punishment.

But it's not 2nd degree murder, or anything that has "murder" in the title.

Honestly, this one is all about the optics of the knee on the neck. That's not what caused the death. If he had been in cuffs on the sidewalk, or two cops were holding him against the car standing up and he died, there wouldn't be such outrage.

And again, I agree that it looked bad, and initially I figured he was strangled, too. But I also wanted to wait and see what the actual evidence showed.

Pacfanweb said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

But they can breathe. They don't say they can't breathe when they're in a sleeper hold.

And that's irrelevant anyway, because that's now what happened, or what's been insinuated.

It was first said the office choked Floyd by kneeling on his neck. We now know that's not true...the man died of a heart attack and had a lot of fentanyl onboard when he died. He was complaining about breathing and simultaneously resisting arrest.

There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on, now that we know how it ended.

But in the heat of the situation, sometimes things that might not be mistakes or deadly most times turn out to be.
You're dealing with someone who is resisting arrest, intoxicated but you don't know with what, accused of a crime, clearly doesn't want to go to jail, and police are trained to think everything a suspect says is BS and they're just trying to get out of whatever trouble they're in.

It was a deadly cocktail in this situation. You can second-guess them all day long now, but at the time they did the best they could and it turned out badly. And they'll pay for it. All you can ask of the system when something tragic like this happens.

---

Police officers are put in challenging situations everyday, where split-second calls can mean life or death. That's very hard, but it is their responsibility to manage that risk professionally, and it is the job they signed up for.

In this case, the arresting officer didn't do 'the best he could'. His top priorities as a police officer aren't to see through BS, they're to protect the public and to not get killed himself.

I guaran-damn-tee you he violated multiple force protocols with his manner of arrest and those violations directly contributed to a man's death.

He likely didn't murder George Floyd since I still don't think the intent piece is there, but he very likely did commit homicide.

And this outcome isn't 'all you can ask of the system'. The system can train officers better to use force less frequently and less severely and to pay closer attention to key signs that a suspect that they are physically detaining is dying in their arms (or under their knee).

---

Nothing he did made Floyd have a heart attack. FAR more violent encounters occur between police and criminal on a regular basis and nobody has a heart attack and dies.

I'm not saying, and never have said, the cop did everything right and doesn't deserve the appropriate punishment.

But it's not 2nd degree murder, or anything that has "murder" in the title.

Honestly, this one is all about the optics of the knee on the neck. That's not what caused the death. If he had been in cuffs on the sidewalk, or two cops were holding him against the car standing up and he died, there wouldn't be such outrage.

And again, I agree that it looked bad, and initially I figured he was strangled, too. But I also wanted to wait and see what the actual evidence showed.

---

A good rule of thumb is to never make a final judgement on an anti-cop story based on the initial video clip that gets released.

Without fail they always give an out-of-context clip and sensationalize the Hades out of it. You will not be allowed to see the 10 or 15 minutes of prior violent behavior by the perp. Usually that leaks out much later, well after the damage has already been done by the lying DNC media.

Pacfanweb said:

---

Nothing he did made Floyd have a heart attack. FAR more violent encounters occur between police and criminal on a regular basis and nobody has a heart attack and dies.

I'm not saying, and never have said, the cop did everything right and doesn't deserve the appropriate punishment.

But it's not 2nd degree murder, or anything that has "murder" in the title.

Honestly, this one is all about the optics of the knee on the neck. That's not what caused the death. If he had been in cuffs on the sidewalk, or two cops were holding him against the car standing up and he died, there wouldn't be such outrage.

And again, I agree that it looked bad, and initially I figured he was strangled, too. But I also wanted to wait and see what the actual evidence showed.

---

Agree it's not murder; it's manslaughter or negligent homicide. I've never heard anyone bring compelling evidence that the officer intended to kill George Floyd so right away the murder rap is in trouble.

Obviously you can't say that nothing the arresting officer did made Floyd die, though. There's no way for you, or anyone else, to decipher in what proportions the various contributing factors (drugs, pre-existing health conditions, officer kneeling on him for several minutes after he stopped moving, officer not checking his pulse and administering appropriate first aid when he'd stopped moving and was obviously in distress) led to Floyd's death.

What the prosecution will assert, I'm quite sure, is that if the officer had not restrained Floyd in the manner that he did that Floyd will still be alive. Floyd's death was the consequential damage of the officer's actions. There's compelling evidence the officer's negligence (as much after the initial takedown/restraint as before) caused the death of George Floyd. It's up to the prosecution to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

IseWolf22 said:

---

lumberpack5 said:

---

Qualified immunity and union police contract protection at the same time is a problem.

I am not against Qualified Immunity in non-union situations. That serves the taxpayers.

However the City Manager or the Mayor in a strong mayor system needs to have the ability to **** can a bad police officer without facing a strike or unwinnable litigation.

When you have both protections there is no incentive for the police to police themselves.

---

Qualified Immunity needs to be abolished regardless of union contracts. It applies to more than police anyways. Any government official can claim it when caught commiting a crime or abusing power

---

Qualified immunity in NC is cut when the unit of government buys insurance for certain things. The employee of the unit is covered under the umbrella of the coverage in most cases. Sometimes the insurance company will balk if the source of the litigation is an idiot that should have been fired long ago, it is document, and the actions are clearly illegal. Those hurdles together make one high hurdle.

The citizen is not in privity of contract with his or her government. The government does not "owe" you anything. Also the pockets of the government are much deeper than the person who wronged you. For instance, say the lazy building inspector does not come to your job on time and causes you to lose a load of concrete. He does not have a contract with you. Much case law will eventual say you should not have trusted him to come on time in the first place. Now if his negligence which can be documented results in a life safety thing and that thing kills people he and the unit of government have negligence insurance only to the level of criminal behavior.

I would not even bring abuse of power into the argument.

Three of the four men on Mount Rushmore abused their power. Washington was a power unto himself. Qualified immunity and government officials mix when stupidity is involved, not when conspiracy to defraud is involved. Take for example the crooks who voted themselves million dollar pensions in some little California town. Eventually they were indicted and convicted of fraud and conspiracy, but for a while they were in the wind so to speak claiming they took legal votes, etc., etc.

This is the definitive "Bible" on the subject in NC

https://www.sog.unc.edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/course_materials/Crowell_Local%20gov%27t%20immunity%20Nov%2011.pdf

The Institute of Government in Chapel Hill synthesizes the written law and more importantly the case law. The case law is what is most important. NC is one of the most conservative legal and fiscal states in the Nation and keeps it's smaller units under very strict controls. We are a Dillon's rule state and that also applies the University System.

Many States allow "Home Rule". Home rule means that unit gets to make it's own laws that are not in direct conflict with their State and Federal law. It is in some of these places that really crazy **** happens. Examples are San Diego, Detroit, Montgomery County Alabama (Birmingham), NYC, It happens in some rural places but since so few live their it gets little attention. Almost all of these cases of crazy are tied to economic foolishness and hubris, followed up by vultures and con men. Straight up frauds and thefts actually seem to cause less long term damage.

Evidence continues to strengthen that Floyd did himself in with the fentanyl.

Watch:

WPNfamily said:

---

I wish every person in America was required to ride with a police officer for one week so they can understand how impossible policing really is. It would be shocking to 99% of Americans.

---

One bazillion percent.

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Evidence continues to strengthen that Floyd did himself in with the fentanyl.

---

The post-mortem tox report said he had 11 ng of fentanyl in his system.

11 ng is not thought to be a fatal blood serum level, especially if he'd used fentanyl before and had some tolerance. Also, serum fentanyl spikes immediately post-mortem so behavioral cues are just as, or more, telling than levels of fentanyl in the blood post-mortem.

George Floyd didn't exhibit the drowsy, lethargic behaviors that users high on opioids exhibit. Also, based on his toxicology blood fentanyl levels, there is not compelling evidence that Floyd 'did himself in with the fentanyl'.

Evidence does continue to strengthen, though, that David Harris is a massive attention *****.

WPNfamily said:

---

I wish every person in America was required to ride with a police officer for one week so they can understand how impossible policing really is. It would be shocking to 99% of Americans.

---

Would probably be good for most situations on those under appreciated jobs. Teachers, Nurses, EMTs, many minimum wage workers.

WPNfamily said:

---

I wish every person in America was required to ride with a police officer for one week so they can understand how impossible policing really is. It would be shocking to 99% of Americans.

---

Yep. There's no way they can do their job, yet somehow they mostly do it anyway.

If everyone saw what they had to deal with on a daily basis, it'd be a real eye-opener.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Evidence continues to strengthen that Floyd did himself in with the fentanyl.

---

The post-mortem tox report said he had 11 ng of fentanyl in his system.

11 ng is not thought to be a fatal blood serum level, especially if he'd used fentanyl before and had some tolerance. Also, serum fentanyl spikes immediately post-mortem so behavioral cues are just as, or more, telling than levels of fentanyl in the blood post-mortem.

George Floyd didn't exhibit the drowsy, lethargic behaviors that users high on opioids exhibit. Also, based on his toxicology blood fentanyl levels, there is not compelling evidence that Floyd 'did himself in with the fentanyl'.

Evidence does continue to strengthen, though, that David Harris is a massive attention *****.

---

Might be more of a "perfect storm" scenario.

He had heart disease. He used meth. He used fentanyl. He smoked pot. And he got into a stressful situation with the police.
And I disagree about Floyd exhibiting symptoms....the person who called 911 in the first place said he seemed to be intoxicated.

" According to the transcript, the caller told the dispatcher there was a "tall guy" who was "awfully drunk and he's not in control of himself."

He was hammered. Probably from the fentanyl.

Anyone who saw the body cam footage could easily tell Floyd was heavily under the influence of drugs.

To pretend otherwise is to be an outrageous liar.

This is one one of those situations in which the liberal looks you in the face and tells you that the sky is green when it is clearly blue, but fully expects you to go along with him that, somehow, the sky really is green.

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Anyone who saw the body cam footage could easily tell Floyd was heavily under the influence of drugs.

To pretend otherwise is to be an outrageous liar.

This is one one of those situations in which the liberal looks you in the face and tells you that the sky is green when it is clearly blue, but fully expects you to go along with him that, somehow, the sky really is green.

---

Regarding intoxication, the officer is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

He had drugs in his system. That's inarguable from the toxicology.

If it's actually obvious to any layman that watches the footage that he was heavily under the influence of opioids, then it damn sure should have been obvious to the arresting officer.

'Heavily under the influence of drugs' is subjective. The toxicology report doesn't seem to support that he was 'heavily' under the influence and the drugs in his system are speculated to have been taken between 5 and 24 hours before his death. He wasn't exhibiting classic behavioral signs of being heavily under the influence of opioids.

He was large, cuffed behind his back, in a face-down position, and saying he couldn't breathe. Mechanical interference with breathing may well have been added to an already disease-compromised airway or cardio system.

The key question is to what extent the confrontational situation contributed to or caused his death. Drugs being in his system at non-fatal quantities doesn't relinquish the police from their potential responsibility in his death.

To be certain, the drugs in his system and his pre-existing health conditions will be brought up by the defense. To be certain, the arresting officer ignoring signs that Floyd was in severe distress and potentially dying (as he lay motionless for minutes before the officer finally got up) will be hammered home by the prosecution.

Murder is almost certainly not provable but I wouldn't be sleeping a wink if I was the arresting officer facing manslaughter or negligent homicide.

He should sleep just fine, except that the US justice system can be absurd on occasion, and if the jury fails to convict, their own lives would be in danger.

Clearly Floyd's choices before and during the incident ended his life that day.

Don't pass counterfeit bills - likely still alive.
Don't get hooked on illegal drugs - still alive.
Don't resist arrest like a wild animal - still alive.

He very well may have contributed to his own heart condition with his lifestyle - don't have details on that.

If Floyd just makes one right choice amongst that string of bad choices, he would almost certainly still be alive today to continue causing mischief and breaking laws.

The blame for his death is his own.

SupplyChainPack said:

---

He should sleep just fine, except that the US justice system can be absurd on occasion, and if the jury fails to convict, their own lives would be in danger.

Clearly Floyd's choices before and during the incident ended his life that day.

Don't pass counterfeit bills - likely still alive.
Don't get hooked on illegal drugs - still alive.
Don't resist arrest like a wild animal - still alive.

He very well may have contributed to his own heart condition with his lifestyle - don't have details on that.

If Floyd just makes one right choice amongst that string of bad choices, he would almost certainly still be alive today to continue causing mischief and breaking laws.

The blame for his death is his own.

---

You could say the same for any suspected criminal that encounters the police. These aren't random encounters; suspects' choices led them to that point. That's the presumption if they're being arrested. Nearly every single suspect made questionable decisions to become a suspect.

It's the police's job to protect and serve those suspects too, not to cause or facilitate their deaths through their actions or inaction.

Officers that don't accept that responsibility shouldn't be police officers.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

He should sleep just fine, except that the US justice system can be absurd on occasion, and if the jury fails to convict, their own lives would be in danger.

Clearly Floyd's choices before and during the incident ended his life that day.

Don't pass counterfeit bills - likely still alive.
Don't get hooked on illegal drugs - still alive.
Don't resist arrest like a wild animal - still alive.

He very well may have contributed to his own heart condition with his lifestyle - don't have details on that.

If Floyd just makes one right choice amongst that string of bad choices, he would almost certainly still be alive today to continue causing mischief and breaking laws.

The blame for his death is his own.

---

You could say the same for any suspected criminal that encounters the police. These aren't random encounters; suspects' choices led them to that point. That's the presumption if they're being arrested. Nearly every single suspect made questionable decisions to become a suspect.

It's the police's job to protect and serve those suspects too, not to cause or facilitate their deaths through their actions or inaction.

Officers that don't accept that responsibility shouldn't be police officers.

---

All true.

And unfortunately, police being the human beings they are, they screw up once in awhile. And given what they deal with on a daily basis, sometimes their screw ups end up like this. Sometimes the police are the ones who are killed or injured.

As you say, it's the nature of the job. We can always try and find ways in which police can do better, and we probably should....but the bottom line is, human beings are still human beings. And they are going to screw up occasionally. While we should always try and keep that to a minimum, the truth of the matter is, it's something we simply have to accept, given the nature of the job.

Civilized said:

---

SupplyChainPack said:

---

Anyone who saw the body cam footage could easily tell Floyd was heavily under the influence of drugs.

To pretend otherwise is to be an outrageous liar.

This is one one of those situations in which the liberal looks you in the face and tells you that the sky is green when it is clearly blue, but fully expects you to go along with him that, somehow, the sky really is green.

---

Regarding intoxication, the officer is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

He had drugs in his system. That's inarguable from the toxicology.

If it's actually obvious to any layman that watches the footage that he was heavily under the influence of opioids, then it damn sure should have been obvious to the arresting officer.

'Heavily under the influence of drugs' is subjective. The toxicology report doesn't seem to support that he was 'heavily' under the influence and the drugs in his system are speculated to have been taken between 5 and 24 hours before his death. He wasn't exhibiting classic behavioral signs of being heavily under the influence of opioids.

---

It WAS obvious. They were asking what he was on, if he was intoxicated, the entire time. They initial report said he was on something and wasn't in control of himself.

It's going to be up to the courts, but if they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt (and I don't think they can) that the cop putting his knee on Floyd's neck somehow caused him to have a heart attack......he's not getting convicted.
Their best bet is a plea bargain at this point. And if I'm the cop, I might be willing to let them roll on with the 2nd degree murder charge and try and prove I did that, because unless there's a travesty in the court system, he shouldn't be convicted.

However, given the climate of things right now, it's entirely possible that a travesty happens, so I don't know what advice he's getting with regards to a plea.

Pacfanweb said:

---

All true.

And unfortunately, police being the human beings they are, they screw up once in awhile. And given what they deal with on a daily basis, sometimes their screw ups end up like this. Sometimes the police are the ones who are killed or injured.

As you say, it's the nature of the job. We can always try and find ways in which police can do better, and we probably should....but the bottom line is, human beings are still human beings. And they are going to screw up occasionally. While we should always try and keep that to a minimum, the truth of the matter is, it's something we simply have to accept, given the nature of the job.

---

Based on what you've said about this topic I think me and you are largely on the same page about arresting officer's fate.

I don't think he murdered George Floyd. I do think Floyd was under the influence. I don't think the amounts of drugs in his system would have been fatal by themselves. I do think the officer was negligent, maybe criminally, and he'll likely pay a price for that.

I don't envy police officers' jobs, the risks they take, and the snap judgments they are tasked with making. I do think we do them a disservice by not providing superior training regarding how to keep them out of situations like these officers found themselves in, and how to de-escalate them when they're in them.

It's way easier to prevent this outcome when you're not ever physically engaged with a suspect in the first place. With police encounters and outcomes, an ounce of prevention is worth a damn metric ton of cure.

Civilized said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

All true.

And unfortunately, police being the human beings they are, they screw up once in awhile. And given what they deal with on a daily basis, sometimes their screw ups end up like this. Sometimes the police are the ones who are killed or injured.

As you say, it's the nature of the job. We can always try and find ways in which police can do better, and we probably should....but the bottom line is, human beings are still human beings. And they are going to screw up occasionally. While we should always try and keep that to a minimum, the truth of the matter is, it's something we simply have to accept, given the nature of the job.

---

Based on what you've said about this topic I think me and you are largely on the same page about arresting officer's fate.

I don't think he murdered George Floyd. I do think Floyd was under the influence. I don't think the amounts of drugs in his system would have been fatal by themselves. I do think the officer was negligent, maybe criminally, and he'll likely pay a price for that.

I don't envy police officers' jobs, the risks they take, and the snap judgments they are tasked with making. I do think we do them a disservice by not providing superior training regarding how to keep them out of situations like these officers found themselves in, and how to de-escalate them when they're in them.

It's way easier to prevent this outcome when you're not ever physically engaged with a suspect in the first place. With police encounters and outcomes, an ounce of prevention is worth a damn metric ton of cure.

---

Well, yeah. However, what would you have them do? They had to arrest the guy. He wasn't cooperating. He was under the influence...of what, they didn't know at the time. There was no "talking him down".

They're trained to manhandle folks when necessary. I think it was necessary here. Not to the "kneeling on his neck" level of "necessary", but necessary. I think it's just bad luck that they took down a guy who had heart disease, was a heavy drug user, was high on drugs at the time, and was basically a walking, ticking time bomb for a heart attack. And then compounded the perception of what they were doing with the "knee on the neck" videos.
People immediately jumped on that and assumed Floyd was choked by that.

They are wrong. But you can't take back all the incorrect reporting, riots, people killed in riots, and unrest that has resulted. It's a sad situation all around, really.

Did he have meth and Fentanyl? Because if he stacked Fentanyl with meth I wouldn't expect him exhibit the classic behavior of being loaded with opioids. Plus, opiates have different effects on different people. We use fentanyl fairly regularly perioperatively. I have a hard time saying he was acting in way inconsistent with fentanyl use, but it certainly could have been consistent with meth and Fentanyl.

Did he have meth and Fentanyl? Because if he stacked Fentanyl with meth I wouldn't expect him exhibit the classic behavior of being loaded with opioids. Plus, opiates have different effects on different people. We use fentanyl fairly regularly perioperatively. I have a hard time saying he was acting in way inconsistent with fentanyl use, but it certainly could have been consistent with meth and Fentanyl.

Mormad said:

---

Did he have meth and Fentanyl? Because if he stacked Fentanyl with meth I wouldn't expect him exhibit the classic behavior of being loaded with opioids. Plus, opiates have different effects on different people. We use fentanyl fairly regularly perioperatively. I have a hard time saying he was acting in way inconsistent with fentanyl use, but it certainly could have been consistent with meth and Fentanyl.

---

Fentanyl 11 mg/ml
Norfentanyl 5.6 mg/ml

11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL;
Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL

Methamphetamine 19 mg/ml

Damn, he didn't play