NewsVine_Mariyam
Platinum Member
Do you understand that if someone shoots you, even if they're not intending on killing you, there is a high probablity that you will die from the gunshot wound depending upon where you're hit? That's why the first rule of gun safety says never to point your weapon at ANYTHING that you're unwilling to destroy or kill.but it was not reckless or malicious....he was not trying to kill Floyd --just like with life long criminal Garner, they are trying to arrest violent criminalsYou honestly cannot distinguish the difference from being a random (or not) crime victim versus being killed with reckless/malicious disregard for your life and your rights by your own government (the police)?The name Black Lives Matter is wrong for one thing. It should be Black Deaths Matter Sometimes (BDMS). Clearly the tens of thousands of Blacks who have died in the inner city killing fields don't matter one bit.
But if they are killed by a White cop CHA-CHING! Instant fame, and a sweet payoff from the city usually in the millions.
.....you can't distinguish between INNOCENT blacks being murdered vs jackass criminal thugs?? !!!?
Therefore how reasonable is it to shoot someone but not intend to kill them when a firearm is a lethal weapon and is known to be very efficient at causing grevious bodily injury or death.
In case you don't see where I'm going with this, restricting the airflow of another human being, if done for a long enough period can cause grevious bodily injury or death whether that's your intent or not, and anyone who works in law enforcement should be intelligent enough to know and understand this.
Lastly, you don't know whether Chauvin's acts were malicious or not because it has not been revealed to the best of my knowledge, his statement on why he acted as he did. The fact that the police chief fired all four of the cops who were on scene indicates that in the very least Chauvin acted in reckless disregard for Floyd's life and rights, presumably in violation of the police agency's policy.