Eric Garner

Eric Garner's Arrest and Death About More Than Just a Chokehold

|

Begging for your life counts as "resisting"
Cellphone image via New York Daily News

The brutal takedown and arrest of Eric Garner by the New York Police Department in Staten Island, which was quickly followed by the man's death, became top national news after New York Daily News released video of the encounter (check here for more info).

There was a rally about the incident on Saturday (with Rev. Al Sharpton in attendance) and Mayor Bill DeBlasio has said he was "deeply troubled" about the incident and called for more investigation.

The focus, though, seems to be primarily on the chokehold itself used to take Garner down. Two officers involved in the incident have been assigned to desk duty during the investigation. A sample of some headlines about the circumstances of Garner's death: "Death of New York man sparks closer look at police use of chokeholds" (Los Angeles Times); "Complaints About Chokeholds Are Focus of Study" (The New York Times). Nearly every headline surrounding the incident focuses on the chokehold.

This is not to say that the actual manner by which the police took Garner down should not be thoroughly explored. NYPD guidelines apparently forbid the use of chokeholds, yet The New York Times story notes that a review board has received more than 1,000 complaints of police using chokeholds going back to 2009. The Times also notes that one of the officers who has been plunked on desk duty has been sued twice in federal court for civil rights violations, including one case where he pulled over a vehicle for a broken taillight and then strip-searched its inhabitants on the side of the road.

We should be concerned that the reason why the police swarmed Garner in the first place is getting lost. He allegedly possessed "untaxed cigarettes." That is it. There is this press focus on how the police took Garner down, and the problem with that focus is the question, "Well, what do you do when a 400-pound man refuses to cooperate when you try to arrest him?" Or to put it another way: Would there be an objection to police using a chokehold to take down and subdue man who was engaged in violent activity harming others? Because you know that's going to be part of the defense of this behavior.

There needs to be more attention on the absurd reason that a pack of police officers was on top of Garner in the first place: black market cigarettes. It's a crime that only takes place because of the city's own oppressive taxation system. It's a crime that happens when the city makes it too hard for people (especially poor people, of course) to get what they want legally.

Advertisement

NEXT: Happy Birthday Nelson Mandela!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Some low-life fatty resisted the authority of our brave heroes while illegally selling dangerous and noxious items. That’s all the mundanes will take away from all of this.

    Because somethingsomething-priceofcivilization-something.

  2. Failure to pay the King’s tariff has always been punishable by death. And so has not paying deference and bending a knee to themKing’s men.

    Well, fuck the King. And fuck his men.

    1. You are in fine form today my unfortunate Dodger worshipping friend!

      1. Sorry? Couldn’t see you through all that noxious fog.

    2. Y’all can fuck them. I’m picky about where I put that…

  3. The cigarettes narrative doesn’t really line up with the content of the video, in which Garner claims he was only breaking up a fight. It seems to me that information is only out there to establish Garner is a criminal, and appease the left, which might otherwise be outraged.

    1. bingo! This had nothing to do with cigarettes. The cop and garner had a history. Garner was being harassed an said, “enough!”

      He paid for this stand with his life. The cops should now pay for their behavior with a long stint in the pokey – whatever the penalty is for “depraved indifference.” Then tack on 5 more for being a bully with a badge

  4. Here’s what cops think of this.

    http://www.policeone.com/use-o…..ng-arrest/


    1. Posted by SAPDMAS on Saturday, July 19, 2014 04:42 PM Pacific Report Abuse
      If you can’t breath you can’t be able to talk. This POS died because he was a coronary waiting to happen. I am sure if he had just let them cuff him he might of been ok to eat another triple decker burger with double bacon again. But fat boy had to over exert himself and his blocked arteries caught up with him.

      1. Notice the hateful and derogatory language used by cops. This is what happens when you militarize police and train them that all citizens without badges are the enemy and it is ok to hate them for any reason.


    2. DCM and crossfade3, I am sorry to tell you that if an officer says you are under arrest, you are under arrest! DUI is also a citation offense, but I am still going to arrest them. This guy was overweight and smoked a lot. He was a ticking time bomb. The lateral vascular neck restraint is not a “choke hold” and it was not even really applied here. I will take down a suspect the best way I can without causing injury to myself. I could care less if they get injured, because they aren’t following lawful commands. Think about that!

      1. I sincerely hope that second guy dies. He is the definition of a jackbooted thug

      2. Heroes.

        There was a chokehold/death incident on Bluebloods, and just like in real life, Tom Selleck fired the cop.

      3. How is a lateral vascular neck restraint not a choke hold?

        1. And it wasn’t even REALLY applied here.

          1. Obviously you and Kevin47 don’t seem to realize that when dealing with someone of that size that a lateral vascular neck restraint becomes a choke hold. The size of his neck makes it easily turn into a choke hold.

            Also, watch the video again. At about 1:27 in the video, where is the forearm? Across the front of his throat. That is a choke hold, not a lateral vascular neck restraint.

        2. Because they squeeze the sides of the neck, not the windpipe. Since the person is still supposedly able to breath, it’s not technically choking them.

          1. Strangul-ayto, Chok-u-lahto.

            Depriving the brain of oxygen by any name would smell as sweet.

          2. In Judo or similar stuff that sort of move is a choke hold.

            Our cock sucking heroes at PoliceOne do seem to be engaging is a cock gargling daisy chain. I hope none of them choke.

      4. because they aren’t following lawful commands.

        It always comes down to failure to obey.

        Obey or die.

      5. Remember this next time one of these heroes gets killed in the line of duty and there’s a day-long memorial service, complete with bagpipes and a funeral procession.

        1. I feel sorry for the kid cop that got gunned down in Jersey City – probably too young to even get corrupted yet.

          1. Maybe. Maybe not. In college I knew a few guys who were taking criminal justice, and we overlapped on some core requirements. Anyway, before long he got a job as a cop. He came back to the cafeteria one day to talk about the job. He didn’t like it. All he did was sit around waiting for traffic violations. People did what they were told. He was bored. He wanted action. He wanted to get into fights. To crack skulls. And ultimately to kill people. So I don’t feel sorry for that kid. The kind of people who seek out the job are pieces of shit. Period.

            1. I knew a few. One got a job and came back to talk with the others while I was there. Sorry if that was a bit confusing.

            2. I heard that another got on the force, grew his hair out, went undercover, and is now cheerfully busting people for victimless crimes. They’re all pieces of shit.

            3. I had a similar experience with some college acquaintances. Both of them were assholes with inferiority complexes and problems controlling their tempers. They started trouble at the drop of a hat and got into bar fights regularly. Last I heard, both of them were working for the Phoenix PD.

            4. “The kind of people who seek out the job are pieces of shit. Period.”

              Rather like politicians in that, are they not?

              1. Rather like politicians in that, are they not?

                Seeking power is the surest indicator that a person cannot be trusted with it.

                1. “Seeking power is the surest indicator that a person cannot be trusted with it.”

                  In my prior job, I had a boss worse than anything I ever could have imagined. He was kind of like the Kevin Spacey character in Horrible Bosses, but not as self aware. At one point I just decided to mail it in and see how miserable I could make him.
                  Anyway, one day he accused me of trying to undermine him so I could get his job, and I responded that I had too much integrity to do his job. Yes, it was a good day.

            5. They’re all adrenalin junkies who are control freaks.

              1. Most of the ones I’ve known took the job because it’s easy money, little to no work, great benefits, etc…
                Those are the ‘good cops’ that stand around and do nothing to jeopardize the gravy train when the adrenalin junkies get their beat-down on.

                1. Yup

          2. I remember my criminal law class in law school. the second 1/2 of the class was dedicated to the motion to exclude and so covered all the exceptions to the exclusionary rule. In the class were a couple of pigs who were fucking whining about the exclusionary rule. I pointed out that we were to like 22 fucking exceptions and that it appeared that you could shoe horn almost any pig behavior into those exceptions.

            Fuck them all.

    3. Posted by samuelx on Saturday, July 19, 2014 02:50 PM Pacific Of course the media isn’t going to point out how many thousands of dollars of untaxable income a mope can make in a week selling illegal cigarettes (while also receiving welfare benefits)…

      He was making dirty, dirty profits that weren’t going into the hands of the police. That’s why he deserved to die on the street.

      1. OMFG ILLEGAL CIGARETTES!!1!!eleventy!!

      2. I also like that the only reason this untaxable income exists is because the government created a black market by jacking up cigarette taxes too high.

        The government’s own policies create a black market, which then makes it acceptable for government goons to beat people who take advantage of the market to death.

    4. Posted by sgt2278 on Saturday, July 19, 2014 05:42 PM Pacific Report Abuse
      was not a choke hold. he resisted arrest, and was twice the size as the two who tried initially to arrest him. once again, if he would have just turned around and put his hands behind his back, he may still be alive today. he resisted and his heart gave out, not the police fault.

      the more likely scenario is that the officer attacked him unprovoked causing him to have a heart attack and his body responded accordingly and the officer took his twitches of pain as excuse to lay into him rather then seek medical attention. Then after he was dead the officers concocted a reason for the original attack. “Oh he sold illegal cigarettes in the past…we will use that and call it an arrest.”

    5. I can barely read the shit being posted on policeone without becoming enraged. This is what sociopaths posting together looks like.

  5. “Death of New York man sparks closer look at police use of chokeholds”, “Complaints About Chokeholds Are Focus of Study”. Nearly every headline surrounding the incident focuses on the chokehold.

    Yeah, suggesting that a policy change regarding “Chokeholds” ought to solve the problem, suggesting that your law enforcement is run by brutal, out of control sociopaths, who are murdering the public they are sworn to ‘protect and serve’… that’s preposterous…

    1. He can be my wingman anytime.

      1. McCain? He’ll just get shot down again.

        1. He obviously meant Tom Cruise. Duh.

          1. Let’s follow this chain.

            1. The article is about Eric Garner.
            2. The CNN article is about the death of James Garner who played Maverick.
            3. Then a Top Gun Maverick reference.
            4. And then another pilot reference with the “Maverick” McCain.

            Then

            5. The death of a girl who was in a Mel Gibson, (who also Played Maverick) movie.

            *cue Twilight Zone music*

            1. Kevin Bacon!

              1. +1 Heritage Hog

    2. Years ago, I met some college friends of JG’s. They said he really didn’t act. He played himself. Like his characters, he was funny, friendly, smart and fair minded.

      RIP fellow Okie.

      1. Support your Local Sherrif..

        Who, by the way, behaved in a manner completely UNLIKE today’s “Law Enforcement” troglodytes — (Immigration being an exception. I worked with some of them, and they were actually quite fair and reasonable — honestly trying to not screw with people who there is no reason to screw with.)

        Truthfully, I think if we traded today’s cops for WW2 German POW guards, it would be a win for the American public.

      1. Well, the epilepsy still wouldn’t explain her being a mute.
        ….too soon?

    3. At least I understood the Jim Garner reference. RIP Jim Rockford.

  6. What I hear is that this is also a great example of why NYC needs to have stronger regulations against fast food.

    so say the po-po. Fatty was a coronary waiting to happen.

  7. including one case where he pulled over a vehicle for a broken taillight and then strip-searched its inhabitants on the side of the road.

    “Occupants” would have been better then “inhabitants”.

    Do they live in the car?

    1. THE RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!

      1. If you want to marry a shoe, I’ll marry you.

    2. I mean, how else are you going to find possible further evidence of broken tail lights if you don’t check between someone’s ass cheeks?

  8. NYPD guidelines apparently forbid the use of chokeholds, yet The New York Times story notes that a review board has received more than 1,000 complaints of police using chokeholds going back to 2009

    one thousand investigations, and one thousand acquittals.

    1. Obviously that means that they weren’t *technically* chokeholds.

      They were ‘lateral vascular neck restraint’ where the intent was to cut off the blood supply to the brain. Actual *choking* was just a bonus.

      1. In this case you can see that the cop’s arm in on the front of the guy’s throat, cutting off his air, and not on the sides (lateral).

        They lied about why they stopped him, they lied about how they killed him, and they’ll lie some more when the cop gets a medal.

        1. Unfortunately for them, this “unapproved” video is out in public. IF these cops aren’t sent up the river for at least a year, Sharpton will get all of Harlem to burn down the rest of Manhattan. And for once, I’ll actually support what he’s doing.

        2. The idea of cutting off the sides of the neck – used to be called the “LAPD Chokehold” – is to cut off the blood to the brain, not the air to the lungs.

          Done correctly, the victim passes out very quickly. Held too long it causes brain damage, then death. Beyond me why cops need to choke out anyone, particularly a harmless fatty, unconscious.

          The hold was supposedly taught to SEALS who might want to put an enemy out of commission to be captured after the fight was over.

  9. Throats were choked. Breaths were stopped.

  10. The progressives raised the cigarette tax to HELP the poor, by making cigarettes so expensive that they could not afford them, and would therefore stop smoking.

    They also want to raise the tax on alcohol to HELP the poor, by making alcohol so espensive that the poor cannot afford it, and would therefore stop drinking.

    They also want to raise the tax on fossil fuels to HELP everyone, by making them so expensive that the people cannot afford them, and they therefore stop driving and traveling by airplane and heating their homes and buying anything made with fossil fuels.

    They also want to raise the price of healthcare to HELP everyone, by requiring insurance companies to cover all of the procedures that they (the progressives) think should be “free”.

    And when the people don’t do as expected, there ae a LOT of progressive law enforcement officers out there to enforce the law, without worrying about whether anyone gets hurt.

    1. The progressives raised the cigarette tax to HELP the poor, by making cigarettes so expensive that they could not afford them, and would therefore stop smoking.

      They also want to raise the tax on alcohol to HELP the poor, by making alcohol so espensive that the poor cannot afford it, and would therefore stop drinking.

      This is my favorite idiotic progressive idea. Since they’ve raised cigarette taxes, the people who have by and large stopped smoking are wealthy people who don’t want to spend all that money. If you look at the percentages, the poor are vastly more likely to still be smoking.

      The reason for this is obvious. Unlike the idiotic progressive narrative that poor people are poor because they’re just ‘unlucky’ or some mean old capitalist oppressed them, poor people tend to be poor because they make worse decisions and spend their money ineffectively. As a result, when you raise cigarette taxes, people who are more responsible with their money, who tend to be wealthier, stop smoking and low income people don’t think far enough into the future to consider how much money they lose yearly to cigarettes.

      As a result, cigarette taxes actually seriously harm the poor because they don’t stop smoking but now a much higher amount of their income is being stolen from them by the government.

      1. Look at these stats. 28% of people below the poverty line smoke compared to 17% above the line. 25% of people without a high school diploma smoke and 23% of people with only a high school diploma smoke, compared to only 9% of people with a college degree and 6% of people with a post graduate degree.

        So what happens when you have high cigarette taxes? Ding ding ding! You take money disproportionately from uneducated people living below the poverty line.

        What happens then? Poor people who don’t want to pay the onerous taxes buy cigarettes on the black market and the nefarious cigarette dealers, who are themselves mostly poor, get arrested or beaten to death by police officers.

        Progressive ‘compassion.’

        1. And what you end up with is exactly what happened here. “If only those poor people would do what they’re told, they’d be better off!” Progressives like to go on and on about racism, but they have no problem with slavery, so long as they’re holding the whips and everyone is enslaved.

        2. But, but, JOBZ!!

        3. Making the poor “pay their fair share” was not an unintended consequence. The SCHIP tobacco tax, signed by Obama in his first 10 days, increased the levy on roll-your-own loose tobacco by 1700%.

          Stickin’ it to those plutocrats with their yachts and mansions smoking their Tops and Bugler.

      2. Unlike the idiotic progressive narrative that poor people are poor because they’re just ‘unlucky’ or some mean old capitalist oppressed them, poor people tend to be poor because they make worse decisions and spend their money ineffectively.

        Yep.

        Take two people with the same income. The poor person spends all their money every pay period, while the rich one does not. After a period of time, the poor person is still poor, while the rich person is not. With the same income one of them has manged to accumulate wealth, while the other has not.

        But progressives chalk it all up to chance.

        I’m sick of the term “less fortunate.” I didn’t go from homeless to homeowner in ten years because of any fortune. It’s because I worked my ass off to get a marketable college degree and then put it to use. Fortune had nothing to do with it.

        1. I’m always reminded of this retarded guy I worked with at McDonalds back in high school. Willy Williamson I think was his name. He bragged about holding a world record for flipping the most burgers. He’d been with the company for something like thirty years. And he was rich. Seriously. He rode his bike to work, didn’t have cable television, rented a small apartment, and invested the rest. That was a while ago. I assume he is comfortably retired by now.

          1. See, people don’t just want to have their needs taken care of, which they could easily take care of themselves. They want to have expensive shoes, cable television, and cars too…even if they don’t actually need any of those things.

            Think of this. I work with people who go out to eat every day for lunch. I bring my lunch from home. Because of how much more expensive it is to eat out rather than just buying food from the grocery, I legitimately am going to save over $1000 this year entirely because I bring my lunch to work rather than eating out.

            If you do a bunch of simple things like that, you can save thousands upon thousands of dollars every year. I have no sympathy for people who don’t have the self-control necessary to do such minor things.

            I also don’t have cable because I hardly ever watch T.V. That alone probably saves me $600 a year.

            1. My lunch usually consists of leftovers from last night’s dinner.

            2. My wife has a poor person’s mentality with money. She’s always broke. Good thing I put away a couple hundred dollars of every paycheck or we’d be screwed.

            3. feedthepig

              dotorg

              I looked at some of my coworkers who had multiple carpet crawlers and were doing just fine on one income.

              We had 5 vehicles at the time. No kids. Both of us were working. We were saving next to nothing. When we finally got serious about saving, we put away 50% a month. Best decision we ever made.

            4. Sure you eat tuna sandwiches for lunch, but how much money do you waste on hookers and blow?

              1. Well I bring those from home too. Homemade blow is far more cost effective than the sort I’d be able to buy on the street in Chicago around lunchtime.

        2. I didn’t go from homeless to homeowner in ten years because of any fortune.

          Check your privilege!

          1. He didn’t build that.

            Only reason he’s a homeowner now is because he exploited the poor.

  11. Choke holds are not allowed. Proper procedure is to punch and club him to death like they did with Kelly Thomas.

    1. Or shoot him.

      1. They’d probably just miss.

  12. It’d be nice if this incident could direct some attention to that other cardiac-arrest-by-cop from a few months back. I think that bolsters Scott’s argument: It doesn’t really matter if cops stop using chokeholds, as this kind of shit can still happen when cops try to subdue a non-violent person for dumb reasons.

  13. Since we’re all going to hell anyway, behold the wonder that is a blind kid playing football.
    https://vine.co/v/MQwtXUx6A76

    1. Yep, the hellfires are stoked, and the Dark Lord’s imps are waiting.

  14. “The New York Times story notes that a review board has received more than 1,000 complaints of police using chokeholds going back to 2009.”

    A thousand independent complaints?

    That doesn’t mean they’re using these chokeholds. That just means…

    I don’t know.

    But I’ve watched a lot of Law & Order, so I know the cops in NYC mean well.

    Incidentally, this is why people like Bloomberg and de Blasio focus on issues like sugary soft drinks and horse-drawn carriages. It’s much easier to talk about silly distractions than an abusive police department, shitty schools, or other things that they’re supposed to be responsible for but really can’t or won’t do anything about.

  15. He allegedly possessed “untaxed cigarettes.”

    Stealing from the government without a license.

    DEATH.

    1. There are no victimless crimes. You see, when someone commits a crime against the state, the cop is the victim. That’s why violence is justified against people who commit crimes against the state. Because as an agent of the state, the person committed a crime against the policeman. And they take that shit personally.

    2. Everybody knows cigarettes will kill you. The cops were just helping drive home the point.

  16. I blame the videogame industry for teaching people that putting someone in a chokehold is a nonlethal means of subduing an enemy. Though I guess it is still a step up from blackjacking them in the skull.

    1. I blame the Sarah Palin, the Koch brothers, and Insane Clown Posse–in that order.

      The cops don’t know who’s armed anymore, so now they just have to choke everyone.

      Stop resisting!

      1. I blame Bush.

        1. Of course!

          If he hadn’t invaded Iraq, none of this would have happened.

      2. And like in the case of the five-year old girl dying and the Stockton bank robbery hostages case it’s starting to not matter if you’re an innocent bystander or not. Are cops no longer being trained to back off in hostage situations, not engage suspects in high-speed chases where innocent bystanders might be endangered?

        1. The guy shot at the cops. At that point they had no choice but to kill everyone in the general vicinity from which the shots were fired. Officer safety.

  17. There needs to be more attention on the absurd reason that a pack of police officers was on top of Garner in the first place: black market cigarettes.

    And David Turner was murdered by Kern County sheriffs deputies during an “investigation” of underage drinking.

  18. California passes more gun control; bans pistols that can be converted into semi-automatics

    California has banned the sale of single-shot handguns that can be altered into semi-automatic weapons, handing a modest victory to proponents of tougher gun laws while striving to protect antique collectors.

    California already has some of the strictest gun control laws in the United States. But proponents fought to amend the state’s so-called safe handgun requirements, arguing that it exempted for single-shot pistols which meant dealers were selling thousands of modified weapons per year without a required safety feature that indicates when a bullet is chambered.

    “This is a significant step to protect the integrity of the safe handgun law in California,” assemblyman Roger Dickinson, a Democrat who authored the bill, told Reuters. “This exception has been increasingly used by those who wish to circumvent (the law).”

    […]

    Under existing California law, semi-automatic weapons must have an indicator showing when there is a bullet in the chamber. But many manufacturers do not include the feature, leading some dealers to convert guns to single-shot weapons before selling them, though they are later reverted back, Dickinson said.

    1. pppppppppp

      like any of their micromanaging matters anymore.

      Illegal guns will remain illegal, and anyone who actually wants to own firearms sans risk of fines/confiscation/jail time has probably left the state.

      They do this shit just to throw out press releases to the prog-mobs so they can have a group back-patting session about how “Common Sense” they all are in California.

    2. Under existing California law, semi-automatic weapons must have an indicator showing when there is a bullet in the chamber. But many manufacturers do not include the feature, leading some dealers to convert guns to single-shot weapons before selling them, though they are later reverted back, Dickinson said.

      Uh, cite? I’ve never heard of such, and I’m not sure how (particularly under CA laws requiring any handgun be on the “safe guns” list) the conversion could be accomplished.

      And the loaded chamber indicator is useless. No shooter I know would trust one, and the “treat every gun as if it’s loaded” rule.

      1. in related news, California has passed legislation banning Guns that Shoot AIDS

        “we feel this common-sense measure protects all Californians while protecting people’s second amendment rights. Studies have shown that AIDS transmission rates have continued to fall and legislation like this will help ensure that Firearms-related AIDS transmission is kept to a minimum.”

  19. Witnesses claim the police were shouting, “PLAY MISTY FOR ME, DAMMIT!!”

    it was later determined to be a case of mistaken identity. And time traveling.

  20. Ron Paul: Don’t blame Putin for Malaysian airlines incident

    “Putin is a little bit smarter than that,” Paul told John Bachman on “America’s Forum” on Newsmax TV on Friday. “I don’t think he would ever come close to participating in an act like this.”

    The Texas Republican said that the fact that Russians may have provided the weapons to the Ukrainian rebels is not enough to put the blame on the Russian president.

    “That may well be true, but guess what, ISIS has a lot of American weapons,” he said. “We sent weapons into Syria to help the rebels and al-Qaida ends up getting it ? it doesn’t mean that our American government and Obama deliberately wanted ISIS to get American weapons.”

    “So who gets the weapons is a big difference between how they got them and what happened and what the motivations were,” Paul added. “So even if it was a Russian weapon ? doesn’t mean a lot.”

    The former Texas congressman says that he does find it “interesting the way the flight was changed ? make it land in Russia and it would have been a greater detriment to the Russians and the Cold War could be resumed.”

    Paul contends that “there’s a lot of people itching for the Cold War and they don’t want to do anything to even talk with the Russians.”

    This is why we can’t have nice things.

    1. Was over at CNN reading comments. It amazes me how so many people can give a shit about something that has absolutely nothing to do with us.

      Not our conflict.
      Not our missile.
      Not our jet.
      Were there even any Americans on the plane?

      Yet everyone seems to think WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING.

      Condemn the act. Call it good.

      1. Were there even any Americans on the plane?

        If I remember correctly, there was at least one.

        1. Dammit, let’s nuke these SOBs.

      2. There were supposed to be 23 Americans on the flight.

      3. Condemn the act. Call it good.

        Actually, the US has a much greater role to play in this matter.

        In addition to condemning this as an inexcusable atrocity, the US should offer its resources to investigate the crash. Based on what I’ve read in the media, the US NTSB is well-regarded internationally.

        Following the investigation, the US should name and shame the perps. If the Malaysians or the Dutch want to do something once the facts are known, maybe the US could covertly provide some intelligence and training for Malaysian or Dutch special operators.

    2. “That may well be true, but guess what, ISIS has a lot of American weapons,” he said. “We sent weapons into Syria to help the rebels and al-Qaida ends up getting it ? it doesn’t mean that our American government and Obama deliberately wanted ISIS to get American weapons.”

      Actually, they did deliberately want ISIS to get weapons because American foreign policy is retarded and it never occurred to the Top Men that sending rockets and rifles to random rebel groups might redound not necessarily to our benefit.

  21. Speaking of smoking: Manhattan Beach Becomes Smoke-Free City

    Manhattan Beach became an entirely smoke-free city Friday by putting into effect one of the strictest smoking bans in the state.

    The city’s smoke-free ordinance, which was approved by the Manhattan Beach City Council last month, expands its existing smoking ban to include e-cigarettes and all streets, sidewalks and outdoor dining areas.

    Smoking is only allowed in designated hotel and motel rooms, private residential properties, like a resident’s home and a moving vehicle in the city.

    Stated reason: protecting everyone from second hand smoke, and yet they ban e-cigs.

    And best quote:

    Officials said they hope the ban is self-enforced so that police resources aren’t strained. There will be a one month grace period for residents and visitors to get up to speed on the new restrictions.

    1. How much liberty will you exchange for sunshine and the beach?

      1. There are only so many decent places to live in LA County.

        What are you gonna do? Move to Santa Clarita?

        1. What are you gonna do? Move to Santa Clarita?

          JUST GET OUT! SAVE YOURSELVES AND YOUR SANITY! FLEE!

          RUUUUUN! RUUUUUUUUN!

          FLY YOU FOOLS!

          1. I know!

            The next stop after Santa Clarita is, what, Palmdale?

            And those people are like…have you ever seen The Hills Have Eyes?

            1. The next stop after Santa Clarita is, what, Palmdale?

              And those people are like…have you ever seen The Hills Have Eyes?

              I read this to my roommate and she’s still laughing.

            2. All roads lead to Lancaster!

              1. All roads? Or just the 405?

            3. That’s New Mexico! Palmdale is more like Deliverance, but with less forest.

      2. How much liberty will you exchange for sunshine and the beach?

        I live about five minutes from a beach that’s as nice as any in California (and I’ve lived all over California, so I know), and I have to jump through a lot fewer hoops to own the weapons of my choice. Not that I should have to jump through any hoops, mind you, but the fact remains that I was required to trade much less liberty in exchange for beach access.

        1. Yeah, but you’re living in Florida….so there’s that. I prefer my beaches alligator and python free, thank you very much.

          1. The pythons are in the everglades, and alligators don’t like salt water. Gators are typically found in fresh water, or sometimes in the brackish water of the Intracoastal. In all my years of living here, I’ve never seen an alligator on the beach. Either way, I’d rather contend with gators and pythons than I would the vipers that run California.

            1. All of those things you listed I already knew, I was just being catty.

              1. The correct answer was MRSA, Los Doyers, MRSA.

      3. You have no idea how low my rent is and I live in a ritzy beach community. Probably quite a lot.

        1. I was paying a little more than $400 a month on Catalina Ave near where Hollywood Riviera starts about ten years ago.

          Hermosa used to be full of UCLA and USC students.

          No way they could afford to live there now.

    2. Oh this is such a steaming pile of bullshit. I’m going straight to MB when I get back and lighting one up. Jesse, you film me, just in case those “busy” (lol beach cops busy? yeah right) cops put me in a chokehold. I ain’t scared of death.

      1. Done and done. Just don’t ask me to film it in portrait mode because I’ll encourage the police to bludgeon you to death if you do.

        1. Actually, maybe I could stand right on the hermosa/manhattan beach city line and continuously do some hokie pokie over the boundary while smoking, preferably in front of a copper.

    3. Officials said they hope the ban is self-enforced so that police resources aren’t strained.

      “Oops, looks like we need to hire more cops. Didn’t see that coming!”

      1. We either hire more cops, or the children start dropping like flies from secondhand smoke. C’mon people, do the right thing.

      2. I can think of a better way to self-enforce so that police resources aren’t strained. How ’bout not having a ban?

        Anyway, there’s always been a push/pull in the Beach Cities between the interests of the people who live there and the interests of the people who run businesses there that cater to tourists.

        If this is popular with the locals, it’s only as a means to hassle tourists. Nobody that lives in the Beach Cities likes tourists–fucking tourists suck. Can’t even find a place to park in your own damn neighborhood! Most of those bungalow lots weren’t even built with driveways!

        It’s the same thing in Hermosa and Redondo. You’ve got local politicians who see things like Restaurant Row as cash cow for the city–and you’ve got people who live there, who’d like to see the pier in Redondo burn down again (and take the weekend drunks with them)–since it’s the kind of place where people from Inglewood go on their honeymoon.

        Anyway, I think this is just meant to hassle the tourists. Looks like the pro-resident side of the equation got the upper hand for a bit. The sick thing is, it’s only the minorities that stray into town that’ll get hassled by this.

        1. I thought the homies from Inglewood all gathered around the Hermosa strand for their honeymoons? Or maybe that’s the San Pedro Valentine’s Day crowd…

        2. Maybe. Or it’s just the usual class war.

        3. Did you hear they’re planning on razing the International Boardwalk at the Redondo Pier and replace it with high-end shopping?

          My childhood would’ve been vastly different without a local sketchy arcade (Fun Factory), and my adulthood has been vastly improved since someone introduced me to the divey Russian place Gambrinus.

          I have no idea why they’d add high end shopping that far away from freeway access as the Galleria and Del Amo malls are imploding.

          1. They’ve been wanting to do that for decades, though.

            It isn’t about the appeal of the retailers who would go in there. It’s about keeping their undesirables out–who are attracted to that place.

            There’s just nothing about that place that the local yuppie property owners want.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTFJY8Bjz08

            The place gentrified.

            It was still a punk rock/hardcore surfer/skateboard mecca as recently as the early ’90s. People from Hermosa used to lie about where they from at parties!

            I’m sure the old surfers from the 60s thought we ruined it–but yuppies ruin everything they touch.

            And hasn’t the whole area always been highly dependent on police harassment of minorities? Two miles down Manhattan Beach Blvd., and you’re in as rough a neighborhood as you’re likely…you might as well be in Wilmington! How do they keep those people two miles down the street?

            And I’m not just talking about keeping them from living in the neighborhood–how do they keep those people from coming down the street on weekends?

            I guess they’re not as effective at that as they used to be–but there’s always been a push among yuppie residents to close those places down for that reason.

    4. Second-hand smoke? Party of Science?

  22. Are cops no longer being trained to back off in hostage situations, not engage suspects in high-speed chases where innocent bystanders might be endangered?

    It’s better that one thousand civilian bystanders die than a single crook be allowed to think he can evade the law.

  23. Wait, this happened in good old “progressive” New York City, and not in some backwoods redneck hamlet in the deep south? Well, I’m sure that Warren Wilhelm, the Italian Obama, will take care of these awful cops.

  24. How the Wheel Turns

    “on Monday, Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) will headline a $10,000-per-person VIP fundraiser at the home of GEO Group Chief Executive Officer George Zoley, Mother Jones reports. Attendees can also attend a general reception for $3,000 per person. The proceeds will go to both Rick Scott’s gubernatorial campaign and the Republican Party of Florida.
    Scott has long been a proponent of private prisons, even as he has maintained a cozy relationship with prison executives. In 2010, he campaigned on pledges to save the state money by turning more state-run prisons over to private companies. But several years later, prisons were costing Florida more money.”

    http://thinkprogress.org/justi…..ceos-home/

    1. Larry SchumannI’m just not sure there is a limit to Scott’s lunacy.Privatizing prisons is not a solution, nor isprivatizing prison health care.Privatizing anything means higher cost and less or incompetent service. But then, Scott is a right-winger: therefore, nuts.11 hours ago

      So true. We should all listen to what the progs say.

  25. I wonder how quickly things went to shit if people actually started resisting this sort of abuse with deadly force, especially in armed areas of the country.

    1. Didn’t the Indiana legislature pass a law overruling their Supreme Court and allowing citizens to forcibly resist an illegal arrest recently?

      1. In my skepticism, I’d apply the rofl-it’s-just-a-piece-of-paper principle to that law. That is, it’s all well and good that it passed the legislature, but what about its effectiveness in practice? I’d love to see what happens if some homeowner shoots dead a cop illegally fucking with him, especially at home. Would it carry through, or would courts meander and loophole into screwing the homeowner over anyway?

        1. I’d love to see what happens if some homeowner shoots dead a cop illegally fucking with him, especially at home. Would it carry through, or would courts meander and loophole into screwing the homeowner over anyway?

          The entire department would descend upon the home and kill every living thing inside, then concoct some story to justify it.

          And nothing else would happen.

    2. Looking at the comments on mainstream news sites, I think if that happened there would be rapid wagon-circling around the cops and we would end up much worse off.

      1. Unless mass defections and outright, violent mutiny throughout the military occurs when that happens, I’ll lose faith in humanity and shoot myself and save the fuckers the trouble.

        1. “…. defections and outright, violent mutiny throughout the military…”

          When the shit starts hitting the fan what the political class fears even more is a military coup. Remember that jack-wad Alexander Haig?

          When Kennedy was shot they tried to get out in front of it. Orders went out that no soldier or sailor would take any orders whatsoever from any superior officer that they were not personally acquainted with.

          If the military were ordered to move against the American people I think there would be substantial numbers who would side with the people. It would be a huge fucking bloody mess.

          1. Maybe I’ve just got extremely unrealistic standards here, but the thought that even a single man or woman in federal uniform would so much as contemplate obeying orders from the leadership to disarm/attack/detain members of the general population makes me sick to my stomach.

            1. I think only a minority would.

              1. The oath is to the Constitution.

                1. I know. I just hope that so do DoD personnel.

                2. A similar oath that just about every police officer takes and oh look…

                  Various facets of the military have willingly used violence against unarmed American civilians just in the last 100 years. Armed criminals (which is how someone failing to comply with a disarmament law would be characterized) would be a much lower bar to hurdle.

                  My feeling is that such a law wouldn’t be enforced so much as something that could used as an add-on charge to any other common police interaction. If it did come down to a house by house confiscation, troops would be used as backup for police actually doing the work. If someone offers armed resistance, there’s less likely to be sympathy with someone sending hot lead in their direction.

                  1. Various facets of the military have willingly used violence against unarmed American civilians just in the last 100 years.

                    Other than the Bonus Army, I can’t think of any time regular Army have fired upon unarmed civilians as part of a planned operation.

                    1. I wouldn’t limit it to regular Army so Kent State would go there along with the Bonus Army. Take away the unarmed part and that would include JTF-6. And while it didn’t come down to actual use of force, I think you can lump in deployment of active duty troops and federalization of the Guard at several points during the Civil Rights era.

                      Look, I’d like to think that such orders would not be obeyed but judging from the past, I think they generally would be and such actions would be done in a way to minimize refusals. Any would did would be remembered like SPC Michael New.

            2. Remember Waco?

              The Army volunteered to provide tanks and other armored equipment as well as air support to Federal agents who killed Americans.

              Sure, they were whacky religious zealots, but do you really think that the modern Progressives think that libertarians are less whacky?

  26. Heroes:

    Charleston police plan to sting UberX drivers, Uber says it will pay fines

    I have little personal use for Uber, but I really appreciate their balls.

  27. We should be concerned that the reason why the police swarmed Garner in the first place is getting lost. He allegedly possessed “untaxed cigarettes.”

    No, we shouldn’t. You’d have to be very na?ve to see that video & believe that was the reason they swarmed him.

    You’d like to make this about victimless crime, but it’s about vicious police. It’s not about the chokehold either; they slammed his head onto the sidewalk. It’s not about the correct amount or type of force to use against someone resisting arrest, because there was no attempt to arrest him before the cops got violent. They didn’t want to give him a chance to surrender. He’d obviously been marked for some reason. And it wasn’t cigarets that drew their att’n to him this time, but the fight that occurred in his vicinity.

    1. A cop acquaintance, after he had been in law enforcement for a few years, told me “This job isn’t about the law and it isn’t about keeping the peace. It is about making people do as they are told”.

      1. But in this case, he wasn’t told to do anything.

  28. Evidently it isn’t that violence in being used, it’s the quality of the violence. Why can’t we apply this logic to drugs? Only the highest of quality coke should be legal.

  29. Yep, its high time someone put these cops in their place.

    http://www.AnonToolz.tk

  30. “There is this press focus on how the police took Garner down, and the problem with that focus is the question, “Well, what do you do when a 400-pound man refuses to cooperate when you try to arrest him?” Or to put it another way: Would there be an objection to police using a chokehold to take down and subdue man who was engaged in violent activity harming others? Because you know that’s going to be part of the defense of this behavior.”

    Ummmm….. isn’t that why they carry tasers, pepper spray, and guns?

  31. Looks like Mafia turf protection to me.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.