Minneapolis cop with knee on neck of motionless, moaning man

Post Reply New Topic

So, can someone please indicate what was "racist" about the series of events, or how this was handled in a lesser manner than if Mr Floyd had not been of a different race to the officers?

white cop + compliant black man = dead black victim

What don't you understand?

I think Bric wants you to refer to knowing the racist murderer's thoughts instead of just understanding the context. Why would a man who's documented as a racist with a long history of complaints for using excessive force murder a complaint black citizen under arrest for a relatively minor crime? It's probably not because he was hyped up from the brawl they just went through since they didn't do that even though that's an excuse that's been used dozens of times in the past.

white cop + compliant black man = dead black victim

What don't you understand?

I can't 100% say he set out to kill the man. It's obvious he wanted to do him harm, but did he want to kill him?

Ah...Racial aspect of an interaction automatically means it HAS to have been a "racist" event.

Thank you for the "objective" clarification.

Although, thinking about this, do you have actual evidence that they would have acted otherwise had Mr Floyd not been "black", or that what followed would have occurred differently? I understand there's this pesky thing where guilt (in this case "racism") needs to be proven through evidence (rather than insinuation, or "suggestion") by those making the claim.

No rational person, in his position, would have wanted to kill George.
The policeman's life is pretty much destroyed now.
I'm sure he didn't want to do that to himself and his family.

The considerations:
Will "they" get a fair trial, in either direction, based on the facts?
Or will it be a "Political" verdict to send a social message?
Time will tell.

Ah...Racial aspect of an interaction automatically means it HAS to have been a "racist" event.

Thank you for the "objective" clarification.

Although, thinking about this, do you have actual evidence that they would have acted otherwise had Mr Floyd not been "black", or that what followed would have occurred differently? I understand there's this pesky thing where guilt (in this case "racism") needs to be proven through evidence (rather than insinuation, or "suggestion") by those making the claim.

I'd agree with the facts as presented.

The difference (as I see it) seems to stem from one group who seek to insert racist motives behind any interaction between people of different race (seemingly to stoke division, or possibly to lessen the effect of the term racism when used appropriately), and the other who are trying to explain the difference between an event with a racial aspect and true racism, so as not to lessen it's meaning when used appropriately.

Sadly, it seems (based on posts here) that any interaction between people of different races is now a racist event, with the "non-minority" party automatically guilty because of their race.

Unfortunately, not everyone seems willing to give objectivity a try.

One thing I haven't understood about the "racist" George Floyd event:
The standard procedure (from what I understand) is that the police would be "stood down" following any death in custody, until cause of death was determined.
Following this, they would either be charged (and probably fired at the same time) or returned to service.

In this case, the officers were fired (with one charged) BEFORE the cause of death was known, with other charges following once cause of death was known.

In none of this was there any evidence of actual racism shown (unless there is audio regarding racist terms being used?), with charges being laid much earlier than would normally occur...

So, can someone please indicate what was "racist" about the series of events, or how this was handled in a lesser manner than if Mr Floyd had not been of a different race to the officers?

If he didn't want to kill him he sure did a bad job of accomplishing it. What the hell would someone expect to be the outcome of cutting off the blood to a man's brain for 9 minutes? Oh, maybe he just wanted to leave him with catastrophic, life-altering brain damage?

I think Bric wants you to refer to knowing the racist murderer's thoughts instead of just understanding the context. Why would a man who's documented as a racist with a long history of complaints for using excessive force murder a complaint black citizen under arrest for a relatively minor crime? It's probably not because he was hyped up from the brawl they just went through since they didn't do that even though that's an excuse that's been used dozens of times in the past.

This isn't a criminal court, he's entitled to evaluate the evidence he has access to and make his judgment based on that. Perhaps you'll accept nothing less than a full confession as evidence but your ability to pretend away hundreds of years of vicious racism doesn't make this not appear to be a racially motivated incident.

I wouldn't be surprised if the policeman *was* a racist.
There *is* a lot of that in the American police force, I believe.

But, once again, it is about the intent to kill.
And also, the consideration: Did he use undue force because his victim was Black?