Try saying "I can't breathe" 11 times without taking a breath.

[Coloradomtnman]

Ok, then can you explain how it was that while being choked Eric Garner could breathe but died of suffocation anyway?

He could talk.

Avoiding the question?

He could talk, therefore he could breathe but died of unrelated asphyxiation. That's your answer?

I answered it. You don't have to like it or agree for it to be a valid answer. What you dickheads need to learn is that getting the answer you want doens't make it incorrect. All he had to do was stop resisting. When he fought back more, the police fought at an equal level to his resistance. What should they have done, let him go because he didn't want to be arrested? Garner initiated the entire thing. If he doesn't commit a crime FIRST, nothing that happens second, third, and so on occurs. All people like you see is black thug and white officer. What occurred that led up to it doens't matter to you.

I don't know what the police officer should've done, as I have no experience arresting people, especially people who are resisting arrest. Perhaps the officer reacted in the best way he knew how at that time.

Nice try at changing the subject...

But this thread was about Eric Garner faking that he couldn't breathe because he was able to say that he couldn't breathe. You say he could breathe because he was able to speak. I am curious as to how he could breathe but died of suffocation. Your answer was: "He could talk".

So either your answer is unrelated to my question, or you realize that your premise is flawed and are unwilling or ashamed to acknowledge it.

I didn't change it just showed how the end as it currently exist wouldn't have had a chance to be that way if Garner's actions hadn't taken place FIRST.

My premise is if you can talk you can breath. My medical training, something apparently you don't have, treats people differently if their airway is obstructed vs. not being obstructed. If someone has a full airway obstruction, I take a different action than if it's partially or not obstructed at all. I don't do the abdominal thrusts on someone that isn't choking and one of the best ways to make that determination is if they can talk and/or are making sounds.

I went through combat first aid in the USMC, CPR certification and Wilderness First Responder training as a climbing guide. But that is irrelevant because I already knew that when a person can't breathe they suffocate, and without treatment or relief the result is death.

According to your "medical training", a person who says they can't breathe is breathing, and if they subsequently die, it must be something unrelated to suffocation.

So when the NY City medical care examiner determined that Eric Garner's cause of death was suffocation, your superior "medical training" informs you that he must be wrong because Eric Garner could speak and therefore breathe.

So how did Eric Garner die, according to your "medical training"?

 

[Conservative65]

He could talk.

Avoiding the question?

He could talk, therefore he could breathe but died of unrelated asphyxiation. That's your answer?

I answered it. You don't have to like it or agree for it to be a valid answer. What you dickheads need to learn is that getting the answer you want doens't make it incorrect. All he had to do was stop resisting. When he fought back more, the police fought at an equal level to his resistance. What should they have done, let him go because he didn't want to be arrested? Garner initiated the entire thing. If he doesn't commit a crime FIRST, nothing that happens second, third, and so on occurs. All people like you see is black thug and white officer. What occurred that led up to it doens't matter to you.

I don't know what the police officer should've done, as I have no experience arresting people, especially people who are resisting arrest. Perhaps the officer reacted in the best way he knew how at that time.

Nice try at changing the subject...

But this thread was about Eric Garner faking that he couldn't breathe because he was able to say that he couldn't breathe. You say he could breathe because he was able to speak. I am curious as to how he could breathe but died of suffocation. Your answer was: "He could talk".

So either your answer is unrelated to my question, or you realize that your premise is flawed and are unwilling or ashamed to acknowledge it.

I didn't change it just showed how the end as it currently exist wouldn't have had a chance to be that way if Garner's actions hadn't taken place FIRST.

My premise is if you can talk you can breath. My medical training, something apparently you don't have, treats people differently if their airway is obstructed vs. not being obstructed. If someone has a full airway obstruction, I take a different action than if it's partially or not obstructed at all. I don't do the abdominal thrusts on someone that isn't choking and one of the best ways to make that determination is if they can talk and/or are making sounds.

I went through combat first aid in the USMC, CPR certification and Wilderness First Responder training as a climbing guide. But that is irrelevant because I already knew that when a person can't breathe they suffocate, and without treatment or relief the result is death.

According to your "medical training", a person who says they can't breathe is breathing, and if they subsequently die, it must be something unrelated to suffocation.

So when the NY City medical care examiner determined that Eric Garner's cause of death was suffocation, your superior "medical training" informs you that he must be wrong because Eric Garner could speak and therefore breathe.

So how did Eric Garner die, according to your "medical training"?

I teach much higher level certifications than that clown.

A person can say all he/she wants. If they are saying anything they are breathing.

When your piss ant level of medical training meets mine son, let me know. Then you can tell me what you think. Until then, fuck off.

 

[Conservative65]

Didn't say that. Chris Rock had a skit about this, to all young black men (or just stupid people with anger/aggression issues): Don't mess around with the police. They will kill you. That is all I am saying. It is pretty simple, it's more a stupid people vs reality thing.

It's obvious that that is the reality of things. I thought we were discussing whether that reality is something that we as a country should tolerate. I don't think cops have or should have a 007 style license to kill whenever the mood hits. Do you?

That's not what happened.

What do you call it when the man was on the ground, and hand cuffed, but the cop continued choking him? Don't say that didn't happen. We all saw the video.

I saw the video. I am like, why did this unhealthy obese man put him self in this situation and just...not resist the police and follow a healthier lifestyle that didn't put him in harms way to begin with. Nah, let's blame da cops instead.

Wow. I knew being a teabagger precluded clear thinking, but I didn't know it affected your sight too.

It depends on how much you see and how you want to see it.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Avoiding the question?

He could talk, therefore he could breathe but died of unrelated asphyxiation. That's your answer?

I answered it. You don't have to like it or agree for it to be a valid answer. What you dickheads need to learn is that getting the answer you want doens't make it incorrect. All he had to do was stop resisting. When he fought back more, the police fought at an equal level to his resistance. What should they have done, let him go because he didn't want to be arrested? Garner initiated the entire thing. If he doesn't commit a crime FIRST, nothing that happens second, third, and so on occurs. All people like you see is black thug and white officer. What occurred that led up to it doens't matter to you.

I don't know what the police officer should've done, as I have no experience arresting people, especially people who are resisting arrest. Perhaps the officer reacted in the best way he knew how at that time.

Nice try at changing the subject...

But this thread was about Eric Garner faking that he couldn't breathe because he was able to say that he couldn't breathe. You say he could breathe because he was able to speak. I am curious as to how he could breathe but died of suffocation. Your answer was: "He could talk".

So either your answer is unrelated to my question, or you realize that your premise is flawed and are unwilling or ashamed to acknowledge it.

I didn't change it just showed how the end as it currently exist wouldn't have had a chance to be that way if Garner's actions hadn't taken place FIRST.

My premise is if you can talk you can breath. My medical training, something apparently you don't have, treats people differently if their airway is obstructed vs. not being obstructed. If someone has a full airway obstruction, I take a different action than if it's partially or not obstructed at all. I don't do the abdominal thrusts on someone that isn't choking and one of the best ways to make that determination is if they can talk and/or are making sounds.

I went through combat first aid in the USMC, CPR certification and Wilderness First Responder training as a climbing guide. But that is irrelevant because I already knew that when a person can't breathe they suffocate, and without treatment or relief the result is death.

According to your "medical training", a person who says they can't breathe is breathing, and if they subsequently die, it must be something unrelated to suffocation.

So when the NY City medical care examiner determined that Eric Garner's cause of death was suffocation, your superior "medical training" informs you that he must be wrong because Eric Garner could speak and therefore breathe.

So how did Eric Garner die, according to your "medical training"?

I teach much higher level certifications than that clown.

A person can say all he/she wants. If they are saying anything they are breathing.

When your piss ant level of medical training meets mine son, let me know. Then you can tell me what you think. Until then, fuck off.

I appreciate the use of the word piss ant. That's old school.

You may be telling the truth, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Nonetheless, one needs no medical training to know that being unable to breathe can lead to death.

So, if Eric Garner could breathe, and therefore didn't suffocate to death, what was his cause of death?

 

[Care4all]

I answered it. You don't have to like it or agree for it to be a valid answer. What you dickheads need to learn is that getting the answer you want doens't make it incorrect. All he had to do was stop resisting. When he fought back more, the police fought at an equal level to his resistance. What should they have done, let him go because he didn't want to be arrested? Garner initiated the entire thing. If he doesn't commit a crime FIRST, nothing that happens second, third, and so on occurs. All people like you see is black thug and white officer. What occurred that led up to it doens't matter to you.

I don't know what the police officer should've done, as I have no experience arresting people, especially people who are resisting arrest. Perhaps the officer reacted in the best way he knew how at that time.

Nice try at changing the subject...

But this thread was about Eric Garner faking that he couldn't breathe because he was able to say that he couldn't breathe. You say he could breathe because he was able to speak. I am curious as to how he could breathe but died of suffocation. Your answer was: "He could talk".

So either your answer is unrelated to my question, or you realize that your premise is flawed and are unwilling or ashamed to acknowledge it.

I didn't change it just showed how the end as it currently exist wouldn't have had a chance to be that way if Garner's actions hadn't taken place FIRST.

My premise is if you can talk you can breath. My medical training, something apparently you don't have, treats people differently if their airway is obstructed vs. not being obstructed. If someone has a full airway obstruction, I take a different action than if it's partially or not obstructed at all. I don't do the abdominal thrusts on someone that isn't choking and one of the best ways to make that determination is if they can talk and/or are making sounds.

I went through combat first aid in the USMC, CPR certification and Wilderness First Responder training as a climbing guide. But that is irrelevant because I already knew that when a person can't breathe they suffocate, and without treatment or relief the result is death.

According to your "medical training", a person who says they can't breathe is breathing, and if they subsequently die, it must be something unrelated to suffocation.

So when the NY City medical care examiner determined that Eric Garner's cause of death was suffocation, your superior "medical training" informs you that he must be wrong because Eric Garner could speak and therefore breathe.

So how did Eric Garner die, according to your "medical training"?

I teach much higher level certifications than that clown.

A person can say all he/she wants. If they are saying anything they are breathing.

When your piss ant level of medical training meets mine son, let me know. Then you can tell me what you think. Until then, fuck off.

I appreciate the use of the word piss ant. That's old school.

You may be telling the truth, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Nonetheless, one needs no medical training to know that being unable to breathe can lead to death.

So, if Eric Garner could breathe, and therefore didn't suffocate to death, what was his cause of death?

Restricted blood flow (from the choking) to his already weak heart....? or something like that...