@ech Did you not watch the video? You literally see the cops use the color of law (a lawful command that isnt lawful) for him to leave the ambulance, then a moment or to later he falls to the ground unresponsive, and for several minutes neither police nor EMT who were still there even bothered to check on him (thinking he was faking)... then only after several minutes does anyone bother to look and few moments later he is declared dead.

Watch the video, it is the worst violations ive ever seen.

@freemo https://thecivilrightslawyer.com/2024/01/17/cops-kick-dying-man-out-of-ambulance/ "Eventually they take him to the hospital. He died a couple of weeks later."

@freemo is that a different cops-kick-guy-out-of-ambulance story?

@ech On the video you hear them reacting like he is dead. But yes this is the same video. So it would seem he didnt die he was just unresponsive and then died at the hospital.

I stand corrected. But given this new information I dont see how it changes anything about the scene or our level of outrage. The man appeared to everyone there to be dead and no one cared. The fact that he lived on a short while longer is irrelevant to the morality of the situation.

@AncientGood You seemed to completely ignore what i said and then just flapping your gums arguing against something I didnt even say. I am happy to debate you, but you need to make some effort at actually understanding what I say before you disagree iwth it or else your just wasting my time.

AS I said before, if him ODing as the underlying cause is literally not remotely relevant to the morality of the situation. He sat on his neck so he couldnt breath, evne if he then ODed (not due to the strangling) the cop still remained strangling a lifeless body for a very long time.

Your argument is idiotic because it assumes the cause of death is remotely related to the outrage... it isnt. The fact that a man was choked while dying (of any cause) and continued to be choked when dead is what matters, and that remains true OD or not.

@AncientGood You realize when you quote someone and leave out the one part that proves you wrong, you dont look smart, and you wont trick people.

The sentance I said that you left out that makes your response disconnected with mine was this very important sentance:

> In fact even if he somehow managed to survive he deserved the exact same level of outrage.

So now all you showed is not only did you argue against a different point than I made, but you proved it was intentional, twice.

> and somehow I am flapping my gums (by typing, I guess?) and not even trying to understand what you said?

Yes, both because you responded to a different argument than I made, and then when you quoted me left out the only sentence that made that clear.

@AncientGood

> oh, I see now that part I missed, thank you for pointing - let me assure that wasn't intentional, just English not being first language sometimes plays jokes with me

I appreciate you saying this rather than digging in. My apologies for my tone as it did seem intentional, or at the very least it is usually intention on the internet. I am legitimately in the wrong for assuming that was the case with you rather than giving you the benefit of the doubt. I will admit your tone about talking about a person suffering with drug addiction gave me a very negative impression of the quality of your character. And while that statement is problematic still I did lean to heavily into that in my tone.

> If not his death, what else could provoke outrage? If he miraculously survived, it would be yet another case of police work - called for crime in progress, arrest, jail, nothing to call home about

Becase how a person acts based on what they perceive is what tells you about their character, not if they get lucky with the consequences or not. If someone shoots at an innocent person trying to kill them they arent a better person if they happen to miss.

The outrage comes from the absolutely deplorable quality of character of the police in handling these situations, the outcome just piles remorse on top of that. Specifically in floyds case, the man choked him well beyond compliance to the point the man appeared dead, to the point people asked if he was dead, and even after people started seeing he was dead he went on to be choked for a very long time rather than giving him medical attention.

Him being dead or not, caused by drugs or not, doesnt change the quality of the character of those cops, the fact that those cops clearly were ok with his death, even wanted his death. Him being easier to kill because of drugs really doesnt exonerate the cops in the least. In fact it has no relevance at all to the morality of the situation.

People cant tell the future, the morality of your actions is the same regardless of if you get lucky with things turn out or not.

@AncientGood

To be clear and put numbers onto it. After George Floyd died and people started screaming he was dead, the police continued to choke the man for over nine minutes.

That alone is all that needs to be said as to why outrage is deserved. Full stop.

@AncientGood

> ok, let's agree on the fact that police needs real reform and have another police, so they could investigate each other's misbehavior and not covering every situation like "we investigated ourselves and concluded that we did nothing wrong". Police should be held to way higher standards than regular people, and corruption/unlawful behavior should result at least triple punishment

while the last part of triple punishment deserves some debate (not because i disagree but just because its not nuanced enough). The rest I agree with in principle.

I would argue polie should just not have qualified immunity anymore, and in exchange for that we pay them as much as we need to to hire them to put their lives at risk. I am ok paying them MORE if they are actually held accountable.

> but I disagree with this, that not what happened, nobody chocked Floyd, quite the opposite, there is footage that they tried to help him before even ambulance arrived, the famous viral video when cop was kneeling on the neck - it's just wrong perspective of this particular video, body cam showed that cop was holding his knee on shoulder blade which is not a chocking hazard, but they decided to build wrong narrative and didn't bring this footage

Even if we take away the term choking from the equation to give you the benefit of the doubt there.. doesnt matter. After the moment he was clearly lifeless and people said he was looked dead on camera begging them to help him. from that moment they still "pinned him down" for 9 more minute while he lay there dead/lifeless/unconscious. The fact that after 9 minutes of him being dead they finally decided to "help" him is too little too late.

@freemo @AncientGood

I got this link sent to me from someone I don't suspect of conspiracy theories a while ago:
https://www.thefallofminneapolis.com/
presenting a very different picture of the situation,
i.e., that the Chauvinists were sacrificed to an enraged public.

How would one even start to fact-check this?

I don't _want_ to believe it.

@adiz

That checks out, I agree.