- 01 Jun 2020 05:06
#15096165
No, I'm not. This is a conversation you are having with yourself in your own head. What Chauvin did is indefensible. Rules in this case have to be generic enough that police have the flexibility to function. It's like the court used to say about obsenity--I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. I have heard nobody defending Chauvin. I'm sure there are some out there, but he had no good reason to do what he did. You can apply a general rule, and pretty much everyone can see that Chauvin is wrong.
He was not willing to get into the police car. That does not justify what Chauvin did. You don't need to make a saint out of Floyd to make a demon out of Chauvin. In fact, you don't need to do either. You just need to uphold the law.
Godstud wrote:You are trying to apply the exception(even in the case of a felony shooting) to what happened to George Floyd.
No, I'm not. This is a conversation you are having with yourself in your own head. What Chauvin did is indefensible. Rules in this case have to be generic enough that police have the flexibility to function. It's like the court used to say about obsenity--I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. I have heard nobody defending Chauvin. I'm sure there are some out there, but he had no good reason to do what he did. You can apply a general rule, and pretty much everyone can see that Chauvin is wrong.
Godstud wrote:George Floyd was not resisting arrest. If he was, the other 3 officers present would not have been standing around picking their noses.
He was not willing to get into the police car. That does not justify what Chauvin did. You don't need to make a saint out of Floyd to make a demon out of Chauvin. In fact, you don't need to do either. You just need to uphold the law.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
-- Joe Biden