3 ms·

Certainly we do not have perfect information here. But while it's possible that three or four cops might be needed to take down someone irrational and strong, t

Certainly we do not have perfect information here. But while it's possible that three or four cops might be needed to take down someone irrational and strong, there's no indication this was the case with the man in the article (the author was there) and the numbers are way off — more than a dozen officers. I've worked with folks in situations perhaps similar to yours (I did social work myself) and as part of that I had to work with the police too, and found (like you say) a sort of ecosystem at work there. And knowing that I am more willing to excuse certain behaviors by those on either side. But did you watch the video? They were stomping on his prosthetic leg, crushing his head into the ground. They weren't trying to take him to the hospital, they were working to send him there. That said, the way homelessness and mental illness are handled in this country is generally speaking just plain bad. Social services are being cut all over the place and everyone wants to pretend that doesn't have consequences. Not to mention the treatment of vets, societal denial of mental illness, etc. Anyway. It's a nasty business and never pretty, but what we've seen here is inexcusable — and as others have pointed out, an everyday occurrence.

Mz 11y ago
But did you watch the video? They were stomping on his prosthetic leg, crushing his head into the ground. They weren't trying to take him to the hospital, they were working to send him there I watched a portion of the video. That isn't what it looked like to me. It looked to me like they were trying to reduce the odds of him smacking his head on the sidewalk in his struggles. Furthermore, the article itself states that although there were up to 14 police officers, many of them were trying to shield the man from view. It assumes they were doing this for nefarious reasons of covering up police brutality while simultaneously conplaining that the man's butt became exposed and was on view. The author seems to not allow for the possibility that cops were trying to hide the man's half naked state from view, both to protect his privacy and protect passersby from something most people would find offensive. I have two special needs sons. As a parent, I am abundently familiar with how hard it can be to prevent someone from endangering themselves or others without looking like an abusive asshole in the process. But, then, my father and ex husband were both career army, so I have very little patience with the ignorance of many civilians who have never dealt with genuinely violent situations. There are times when please and thank you simply do not work and stronger methods are required.
- devindotcom 11y ago
  Look, it sounds like you want to give the benefit of the doubt to the cops, when there's a well-established trend of unarmed black men being targeted and brutally suppressed by an overreaching and over-armed police authority. I think it is disingenuous to award the benefit of the doubt to the police in this situation. Also, it is a long way from "please and thank you" to what we see in this video. Police have a large variety of means at their disposal, as well as the advantage of numbers and implicit authority. The way this man was subdued appears to be way, way over the top. The only way we can really know for sure is if cops wear cameras. That's the best solution all around.
  - Mz 11y ago
    In America, we have this principle called innocent until proven guilty. In my own life, I have found that is a good rubric to apply. Applying anything else makes racism, classicism, sexism, etc. worse, not better. I have had people call me naïve and told me "It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, only a fool would believe it is not duck." But that kind of position only deepens problems. Of course, you are free to be driven by your personal biases. But arguing that "it is a general trend, therefore waiting for actual evidence is foolish" doesn't fly with me. It never has. It never will. I will continue to wait for actual evidence and try to not jump to conclusions. I am aware it is a hard path to take. It is a path I take regularly and I see payoffs for trying my damnedest to stick to that path, in spite of how hard it legitimately is.

Mz 11y ago

But did you watch the video? They were stomping on his prosthetic leg, crushing his head into the ground. They weren't trying to take him to the hospital, they were working to send him there I watched a portion of the video. That isn't what it looked like to me. It looked to me like they were trying to reduce the odds of him smacking his head on the sidewalk in his struggles. Furthermore, the article itself states that although there were up to 14 police officers, many of them were trying to shield the man from view. It assumes they were doing this for nefarious reasons of covering up police brutality while simultaneously conplaining that the man's butt became exposed and was on view. The author seems to not allow for the possibility that cops were trying to hide the man's half naked state from view, both to protect his privacy and protect passersby from something most people would find offensive. I have two special needs sons. As a parent, I am abundently familiar with how hard it can be to prevent someone from endangering themselves or others without looking like an abusive asshole in the process. But, then, my father and ex husband were both career army, so I have very little patience with the ignorance of many civilians who have never dealt with genuinely violent situations. There are times when please and thank you simply do not work and stronger methods are required.

devindotcom 11y ago
Look, it sounds like you want to give the benefit of the doubt to the cops, when there's a well-established trend of unarmed black men being targeted and brutally suppressed by an overreaching and over-armed police authority. I think it is disingenuous to award the benefit of the doubt to the police in this situation. Also, it is a long way from "please and thank you" to what we see in this video. Police have a large variety of means at their disposal, as well as the advantage of numbers and implicit authority. The way this man was subdued appears to be way, way over the top. The only way we can really know for sure is if cops wear cameras. That's the best solution all around.
- Mz 11y ago
  In America, we have this principle called innocent until proven guilty. In my own life, I have found that is a good rubric to apply. Applying anything else makes racism, classicism, sexism, etc. worse, not better. I have had people call me naïve and told me "It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, only a fool would believe it is not duck." But that kind of position only deepens problems. Of course, you are free to be driven by your personal biases. But arguing that "it is a general trend, therefore waiting for actual evidence is foolish" doesn't fly with me. It never has. It never will. I will continue to wait for actual evidence and try to not jump to conclusions. I am aware it is a hard path to take. It is a path I take regularly and I see payoffs for trying my damnedest to stick to that path, in spite of how hard it legitimately is.