I find it somewhat incredible that people could ignore the fact that the police banned that hold altogether years ago. one can quibble over whether the deceased was resisting in a way that justified being gang-tackled, or whether his actions merited being apprehended at all. However, if the hold was banned, and the officer used it, OK, why no charges?
cops get away with murder all the time, and when the 'good' cops provide cover for the bad cops, is there really such a thing as a righteous cop?
That's a really good question. I want to believe there is a righteous cop, but the voice of the righteous cop is getting drowned out by the sound of the crickets chirping. Or maybe we only have crickets.
6 comments:
And the murderer is walking, no?
And the murderer is walking, no?
That's one conclusion that could be drawn.
"You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
-Robert Heinlein
wiki 'kelly thomas beating'
cops get away with murder all the time, and when the 'good' cops provide cover for the bad cops, is there really such a thing as a righteous cop?
I find it somewhat incredible that people could ignore the fact that the police banned that hold altogether years ago. one can quibble over whether the deceased was resisting in a way that justified being gang-tackled, or whether his actions merited being apprehended at all. However, if the hold was banned, and the officer used it, OK, why no charges?
cops get away with murder all the time, and when the 'good' cops provide cover for the bad cops, is there really such a thing as a righteous cop?
That's a really good question. I want to believe there is a righteous cop, but the voice of the righteous cop is getting drowned out by the sound of the crickets chirping. Or maybe we only have crickets.
Post a Comment