Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Police Use Of Force Warranted In Keenan Anderson Taser Death? Brie, Robby, u0026 Olayemi DEBATE" video.

In no other country do police act like this. Congrats.
4
She certainly did call Ole out for what she said to Robby, and she did so immediately, without hesitation. Maybe you need to calm down and watch the entire video. Or maybe you need to believe this cannot happen to you in order to function. If the latter, then ignore me. It's not my place to tell you what to think. Think what you need to think to live in this police state hellhole, because that is what the US has become.
4
@hasan7786 Why? What does this imply to your mind? How does that lead to the conclusion that he is dangerous and must be taken into custody no matter what, as being a threat to the public? Once he was unable to use his car, they could confiscate that and find out who he was, and get a warrant for his arrest. What dangerous instrumentality was he handling that tasing him six times was necessary to protect the public? Also, how would you know he was "high as a kite?" A significant proportion of the public is on the verge of psychosis now. I'm sure you recall the last three years, and it was already bad before that. What they surely didn't protect the public from are lawsuits. Our property taxes are through the roof in large part because of exactly that. If you don't know a human life is worth more than what we saw the police do to this man, I'm sure the money part is important to you.
4
@jackgranger6539 You tell me what YOU saw that you think justified using a taser one time.
3
@heartysteer8752 After what we've been through since March 2020, you are going to have a lot of people around who are like that. Better come to some rational understanding of what to do about it. Six shots from a taser ain't it.
3
@dingfeldersmurfalot4560 He died while being black.
2
@poolerboy You cannot reason with these people. That is hard to accept. I'm trying to, because understanding the truth about what we are confronting requires a different approach at this point. I don't know what approach that should be, but I am going to start thinking hard.
2
@accrualworld318 Well, thanks for letting us know about your discernment.
2
@fabiofernandes9122 Tyre Nichols died in the hospital, too. Well, he had Crohn's disease. /s
2
I don't care what race the cop was.
2
Robby can't really mean this. He's here as a confederate, to create controversy for click$.
1
A body is soft and a car is hard. Yes, it could happen that a motorist swerving to avoid him could hurt himself or some other innocent motorist. But that was not likely in this case, as anyone could see.
1
@deadgolfer6345 If they have no probable cause to arrest you, then they don't. Exactly. If this "sounds strange" to you, maybe you should wonder why. It is, in fact, normal. You do not have to engage with the police at all. That is the law. Why don't you know that?
1
@bradspringer2372 Oh brother. What part of stating a principle (as opposed to whether or how it applies in a given case) is SO lost on you? Every part. Never mind. I give up. BTW, "not complying" is generally not a crime. You don't have to do what police tell you to do. It may be wise to comply, but it is not always legally required. If you didn't hear "you are under arrest" then in principle, a person is free to go. If there is any ambiguity, then the person should ask in a direct but polite way, "am I under arrest?" My immigrant father knew this. What's your problem?
1
@dominickarisman9 How? By emigrating. More and more of these peopled killed during police encounters will look like Christian Glass. YOU decide whether that's fine with you. I don't care anymore. Got it? I'm going to join the global 96%.
1
@heartysteer8752 The "officers" who beat Tyre Nichols were black, too.
1
@lingoistj1956 No. You let me know what you see that made subduing him a necessity, to the point of risking his death by tasing him six times. They would have had no problem getting an arrest warrant -- they knew who he was, and he was no longer operating a motor vehicle, and they knew he was unarmed, having held him down once. Hence they knew he was no danger to others. He was obviously very afraid of the police -- and for no reason?? It didn't take long for another case to come to light, that of Tyre Nichols. Do you know how many have been killed by the police at this point? No one can remember them all. We need a written list. Just like we don't know how many countries we have bombed over the past twenty-five years. No one does. Nor do we know how many mass shootings so far this year. What has to happen?
1
@lingoistj1956 I'm an attorney who speaks three languages and went to university in two of them -- and read Plato in two of them, as well as studying Ancient Greek I think you need to start looking at the bigger picture, which is one of unremitting violence and worship of force. I have no "new-found political identity." My family lives in one of the places the US bombed. You FOOL. Once you've done all the close examination of facts, and documents, and texts, -- which is certainly necessary, as far as it goes -- it becomes equally necessary to step back and see the horizon. I've heard the refrain that this is "just one case" enough times to know that there is a lot more going on. You were right to feel threatened, and to suggest I shut up. I cannot fault you for that. I know why you did, if you don't. (The edit is a test to see whether I'm sha dow-ban ned. It sometimes works. Outright sense or ship is generally revealed that way.)
1
@lingoistj1956 Of course you also failed to answer my question. Instead you went straight for ad hom and the Identity-Guessing Game. That's how it always devolves. (Are you happy with your society? Can you leave if you need to go? You're sure it will all be all right, huh? Good to be sure. "Optimists live longer, and make more money.")
1
@frankvonfrauner I didn't make that argument. What I stated would follow for someone who turned out to be a gangbanger, or a billionaire. That's how justice and the rule of LAW work.
1
@frankvonfrauner "Give us your wallet or we'll shoot you."
1
@lingoistj1956 I'm not sure what you're referring to on a thread this long. Sounds to me like you either are not familiar with the legal system in the States, or you have me confused with someone . . . never mind. Blocked.
1
@accrualworld318 What is a "passive question?" P. S. blocked for wasting my valuable time
1
No he didn't.
1
@heartysteer8752 Taser someone who "is a danger to himself?" Do you hear yourself? Funny, every "nice" suburban police department northwest of the big city where I live carries that antidote for opioid overdoses. I forgot what it's called. Our local public library does now, too. How is it we don't have a comprehensive policy yet, or even some notion of what proportionality means? One person gets an antidote, another, like Keenan, gets tased. Or tased, then shot, like Christian Glass.
1
@johnnyfive9815 Yep. Christian Glass, too. So terrible those cops were fired and put on trial! They tried so hard!! /s
1
@hasan7786 And now we have Tyre Nichols. It did not take long. Are you sure this is a good idea? Oh brother.
1
@hasan7786 You must be trying hard to have missed it until now, and I cannot blame you this time. Indictments have already been returned. Not to mention, there has been another mass shooting in California. It's over for this society. What we're doing isn't working. It's not going to work.
1
Yes it is. You do not have to submit to police unless and until they have probable cause to place you under arrest. Did anyone state, "halt, you are under arrest?" Did he do anything that placed other people in any jeopardy? Was he a danger to anyone but himself? Police do NOT have "the authority" to order you to get down on the ground absent probable cause to believe you have committed a crime or are about to commit a crime. If they cannot articulate a reason for arrest or for believing you are a danger to them or to others, no, they CANNOT do that.
1
@deadgolfer6345 Whether he had drugs in his system was determined after the fact, and is thus irrelevant to probable cause. I guess we are so used to living as though we were not a free people that we don't seem to remember that absent probable cause, you do NOT have to deal with the police at all. Did he get into a car accident? Apparently he did. Does he have an obligation to report it, if he hopes to keep a driver's license? Absolutely -- and I am for lifting the licenses of a lot more people than get them lifted -- for impaired driving, for not reporting accidents promptly, and pretty much all other significant infractions. And guess what? THAT is the penalty. There is something called a Terry stop -- which is a very brief encounter based on reasonable suspicion, and does not involve taking you physically into custody. It just means talking to you. Of course police can talk to you. BUT you cannot be arrested without probable cause, prior to the arrest, and not based on stuff that happened afterwards. If that does not "sound right," you need to ask yourself why. You are used to not being free, perhaps? Thanks bin Laden, thanks COVID. Isn't this just swell?
1
@jackgranger6539 False, and I have absolutely no idea what you might be referring to, if anything. But more to the point, why are you following me, and purporting to assert to have determined that I, and not you, are lying? I don't know you. I do, however, know the law on probable cause and Terry stops. I am guessing that you are not well versed in that area. I don't know of course. As I said, I don't know you. |Perhaps you edited law review at Yale. I am blocking you now, which I think I would have done before if what you claim were true, and if you persist in this manner, defaming me even under a pseudonym (which actually has a basis), I will report you. See how that goes. It's not my problem anymore. (Whether it turns out to be yours is also not my concern either way.)
1
@deadgolfer6345 Precisely what was his crime? A person no longer operating a motor vehicle but apparently in a state of inebriation has committed what crime, exactly, that should result in arrest rather than deprivation of the use of a car -- his car, or any car? But that already happened. Assuming there was probable cause to arrest him for that crime, what was the level of force reasonable under the circumstances? He was already deprived of his car. He could be permanently deprived of the right to drive (please, God, every time). Had he evaded law enforcement, there was no doubt as to his identity and where he could be found. I think they arrested him for disobeying an order. Since when is that a reason to use potentially deadly force? The only time there is a reason to use deadly force when the person presents a danger to the lives of other people. I think we are used to allowing police to do things that subjectively make us feel safer, but objectively make everywhere more dangerous. That's what I think.
1
@deadgolfer6345 No, actually, I did not say that at all. Quite the contrary. But all right. Whatever.
1
@deadgolfer6345 I tend to argue in hypotheticals.
1
You deserve the country you live in. You count on it never happening to someone of your race, that's all. Well, it already does.
1