This one’s easy. Blake prevented Blake from stopping and complying.
Wait. You think if an officer puts his knee on the back of a person’s neck for 8+ minutes, and that person subsequently dies, he needs to be fired, and “possibly” charged? If we can agree that the officer’s actions were excessive, and Contributed to the victims death, I think we take the “possibly” out of the equation.
Not taking sides here, this is just a question...for the 1000th time, there's no evidence (in the public sphere) the officer's knee on the back of his neck was the cause of death, in fact there is evidence to the contrary that he died from heart failure and not asphyxiation (see coroner's report and leaked body cam video).
Yeah. They are his kids... as reliable as witnesses and the media contend. But, even with their track record, it's pretty certain they were his kids.
How did he put them in that situation? What, he volunteered to get shot in the back?
As many people who have exes on this site, it is just possible that you have an angry woman arguing with her "ex" about taking the kids out for the day. We really don't know at this point. But, I've known too many pitbulls with lipstick to say that Blake brought this all down on himself. I think there is a strong possibility that we don't know the whole story.
I was replying to you saying something to the effect they should just have let the Atlanta guy go. Your conclusion implies your thinking.
Wait. You think if an officer puts his knee on the back of a person’s neck for 8+ minutes, and that person subsequently dies, he needs to be fired, and “possibly” charged? If we can agree that the officer’s actions were excessive, and Contributed to the victims death, I think we take the “possibly” out of the equation.
No, that's not correct. As I teach in Crucial Conversations, there is a difference between facts and stories. The former can be objectively, empirically observed. The latter are judgments (Fact A = good/bad), conclusions (Fact A + Fact B, therefore C), or attributions (Fact A, because of B).
Whatever Alpo said, you are making an attribution about what led him to say it. In doing so, you are making an assumption that is not implied merely by what Alpo said.
Note: this is a very common tactic of the left. (e.g. You are only defending Kyle Rittenhouse because you're a White Supremacist!)
Yeah, yeah. I took logic in college too. It's a conversation. Here's I wasn't trying to invoke logical sufficiency. Saying it the way I did sounds a lot like p implies q, and if you're a logical hawk that might make it sound like a logical argument is being attempted. So I get it. How about I modify that to say "your conclusion betrays your thinking." I AM making a subjective judgement, and in a conversation that's not wrong. I'm not making an argument. I'm saying I think he drew that conclusion because of the anger after seeing yet another black man shot by police.
We all have our triggers. And when we're triggered to anger, we don't think things all the way out. And that isn't saying anything bad about anyone. Later Alpo talked about his emotional response to Floyd, and I related mine too. My emotions brought me to some conclusions about Floyd which weren't completely true, because in my anger I didn't think about not having all the relevant facts after watching that initial video. It felt like the officer's knee on the guy's neck was the only relevant fact.
...
So if there was an EPO why would the police not just say that. And it would have been even more entertaining to watch woke feminists defend a man who violated an EPO.
...
All of this micro dissection of it...
There was an open sexual assault and abuse warrant, they were responding to a call from the complainant on that warrant, according to a couple reports there was a restraining order in effect. All with the full weight of the Duluth Model behind it. Any sort of resistance to the arrest was going to be met harshly, regardless of race. Can layer Wisconsin as a mandatory arrest state for domestics on top of it.
It isn't 100% clear but it has been reported here and there. I haven't been going on about it because we aren't sure that there was one, but the second sentence in the quote here has been right in the front of my brain.... It's... Something.
There is probably not a puppy cuter than a GSD. They look a bit oddly proportioned during their teen years, but so do most creatures. I won't have another one because I'm tired of seeing them suffer with hip dysplasia in older years.
Why should college professors have all the fun?Quoting my self here but relevant to the above.