cameron83's forum posts

#1 Edited by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

@The_Deathstroker said:

@force_echo: I saw that earlier, doesn't change my opinion in the slightest. I'd like to see you try to live in a world without police officers. I really would. Then I'd get to see you, and all your smart@ss friends take that back. People like you make me sick, and sad that I live in this world. I won't respond to your next post, so don't expect a rebuttal. @jezer: I told you to tell me what you are in my second response..... I never said it had to be one of the two

......

While I don't at all agree with the people or the phrase "f*ck the police" or the generalizations behind it,that doesn't mean that it's unreasonable for people (especially a certain group,depending on who we're talking about,but usually the ones that are targets of abuse by the specific cops in question) to have some sort of uneasiness around them. It's not like every cop is the Knight in Armor that some people make them out to be,there are far too many acts of police brutality and power abuse. At the same time,that shouldn't apply to all cops,and I can't even say most.

So while a world without police officers or some sort of law enforcement would be far worse,it doesn't really change the fact that many officers might as well make it such that that world exists since they abuse their power (many times with impunity).

Basically,I don't think a person should generalize all of them (so I can't really say all are "good"/"bad" by my standards),but at the same time,a person shouldn't be naive. (not really grouping you in either category,just explaining that a person questioning those in power isn't really outrageous,especially when many of them could care less about the responsibilities of being a cop)

#2 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio
#3 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

@cable_extreme: I'm not saying this was right, I'm just saying the people that say "f*ck the police" couldn't be any more ignorant. @cameron83: That's nice. I never said or implied he did.

I never said that you implied that,but it was among one of your options when it seemed like an odd option given that his posts don't really seem to have any sort of bias against the police,especially where he would say something like that. :-[p (<-----mustache)

Basically what I am saying is,that those are pretty weird and limited options. That's all.

#4 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: I'm either too tired or too lazy to read because I'm not sure if you're one of 'em "f*ck the police" fellows or just someone that thinks this was too far.

Care to clarify?

I don't think he ever said or implied "f*ck the police"

#5 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

Both tire themselves out and fall asleep

#6 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio
#7 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

Is this the best fight scenes currently or of all time in comics?

If the latter,I like Black Widow vs Elektra from Black Widow's old book.

#8 Edited by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:

@cable_extreme said:

@jezer: blood choke is similar to a modified coratid restraint. A blood choke is meant to effectively kill, or make unconscious . A modified coratid restraint isn't a choke as much as a restraint. Notice the guy didn't pass out from it, or die from the initial choke, but from a heart attack.

The police commisioner doesn't speak for everyone in the department, he has an opinion just like everyone else, and it is a judge'a job to decide what is legal or not. Based on what I see, a guy who has been arrested 31 times for drug charges and assault, resisting arrest after breaking the law. I have actually been taught a modified coratid restraint, not in wrestling but in my college programs.

To be clear, you're backstepping from your words earlier in the thread? Because earlier, you called it a "blood choke." And, even from the link you posted earlier [http://www.policemag.com/channel/patrol/articles/2014/01/reconsidering-carotid-control.aspx], it is described as functioning by choking the blood to the brain. Do you deny that it works by choking the blood to the brain?

The Police Commissioner said it in a news conference. So, not only is he in a position(Commissioner) where his position on the conduct guidelines is more relevant than any given, but he said it in a context where he presents the current canon opinions of the police department, regardless of any given/specific person's opinions.

Last, I don't understand your argument. The issue of whether the cop was following their given NYPD police procedure.....is decided by the NYPD. Since he's accused of misconduct(correct me if I'm wrong). How has this reached the point of a judge being relevant? lol

This thread needs more of my corny comedic relief :P

#9 Edited by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:

There isn't really good arguments on both sides, its as simple as this:

@cable_extreme argues that it was not an illegal chokehold, but a blood choke, called a carotid restraint control hold. Thus, it was justifiable police conduct. He says this based on his substantial wrestling experience and view of the incident through a youtube video/crowd of police officers obscuring the view.

However, NYPD's police guide apparently bans all choke holds, saying "Members of the NYPD will NOT use chokeholds,” the NYPD patrol guide clearly states. 'A chokehold shall include, but is not limited to, any pressure to the throat or windpipe which may prevent or hinder breathing to reduce intakes of air.' "

The key words there are "but is not limited to", meaning that the NYPD considers not only holds that apply pressure to the "throat or windpipe", but other holds that apply pressure to other areas, as chokeholds. So, regardless of the legality of the hold in wrestling, or specific technical terms in that domain, the carotid restraint control hold - which Cable_Extreme called a bloodchoke - could be regarded by the NYPD as a banned chokehold.

Additionally, this possibility that the "bloodchoke" could be regarded as a banned choke is confirmed by NYPD Commissioner Bratton who's says outright "As defined in the department’s patrol guide, this would appear to have been a chokehold.” The issue of whether it was an "illegal" chokehold versus a blood chokehold is not mentioned--because it is not an issue, since "chokeholds" in their totality are what's banned.

Consequently, Cable_Extreme disagrees with the NYPD Commissioner. But, his reasoning (illegal vs legal choke, bloodchoke vs suffocation choke, etc.) has been disapproved, flaw pointed out, by me above.

/thread?

Meh,I meant more in terms of the factors involved in the guy's death,and many people seem to believe that all involved,to different degrees,are at fault.

I know nothing of chokehold's and the different types,though (or NYPD guidelines,or anything like that ;_;)

And I skimmed through Cable's responses,no offense

#10 Posted by cameron83 (6642 posts) - - Show Bio

Big Boss dominates