billsfan1959 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 8 hours ago, SectionC3 said: Yeah I agree. Intent to cause physical injury is part of that charge, right? (I could look it up, but not into doing that two minutes of work now.) I just don’t see it. I suspect assault third is a lesser includes of this assault charge, as might be harassment. Maybe they get torgalski on a lesser as part of a compromise. Charging McCabe with assault second based on what I’ve seen is ... odd. I like John Flynn A LOT. But this is not right. I was wondering what your take on this was going to be. Thanks. I can’t say I am surprised. I understand the emotion of so many seeing the video. Tough times right now. I don’t think it is right. 1
SectionC3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 1 hour ago, billsfan1959 said: I was wondering what your take on this was going to be. Thanks. I can’t say I am surprised. I understand the emotion of so many seeing the video. Tough times right now. I don’t think it is right. It’s an awful video and torgalski is probably going to get fired but this is not assault second. Flynn did not have to charge this case this way. 1
Chef Jim Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 3 minutes ago, B-Man said: Chicken ***** mother *****. ??????? 1
Doc Brown Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 Just looking at the guy's twitter feed he's not some innocent bystander. He's a far left agitator who obviously wanted a confrontation to occur. The cops obviously should've handled it better but you can see why so many came out in support of their fellow officers.
Beast Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 (edited) The bottom line is those two officers, 100%, used proper tactics. That shouldn’t even be up for debate. Second, since the aforementioned is a true statement, the arrests were purely politically motivated. Though it was unsettling to watch, only because of his age, nothing in the New York State Penal Law covers age being a factor, with the exception of if there is intent to injure. There simply was no intent. DA Flynn is going to look like a moron when this is said and done. Those two officers, plain and simple, are paying the price for the four in Minneapolis and Flynn is a political hack that cares nothing about justice. Edited June 7, 2020 by Beast 2
B-Man Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 Did an aged activist set up the Buffalo police? American Thinker, by Andrea Widburg Original Article Many Americans understand that the riots aren’t righteous protests but are, instead, leftist activism aimed at destabilizing America and (the activists hope) destroying Trump’s chance at reelection. Still, people found shocking a video showing police in Buffalo pushing an old man to the ground Before you howl, read it.
Warren Zevon Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 1 hour ago, Beast said: Those two officers, plain and simple, are paying the price for the four in Minneapolis and Flynn is a political hack that cares nothing about justice. Has the gray area you talked about two days ago been erased? On 6/5/2020 at 12:33 AM, Beast said: And the bad part that sucks for them is that is the exact way they are trained for riot training. To push back and continue forward. They will lose their job for doing their job correctly but there is always gray area and they were in that gray area. You probably shouldn’t shove an elderly person.
Beast Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 1 hour ago, Warren Zevon said: Has the gray area you talked about two days ago been erased? Yes, it totally has because those are the tactics they are trained to use. Like everyone else, I felt a little queezy watching that. Taking out the emotions, there is nothing criminal there. None.
Numark3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 8 hours ago, Doc Brown said: Just looking at the guy's twitter feed he's not some innocent bystander. He's a far left agitator who obviously wanted a confrontation to occur. The cops obviously should've handled it better but you can see why so many came out in support of their fellow officers. that’s the one and only point. But so many of you can’t admit that without saying “but” or adding a ton of irrelevant fluff like his twitter feed 2 hours ago, Beast said: The bottom line is those two officers, 100%, used proper tactics. That shouldn’t even be up for debate. isn’t that the real problem? I agree they wouldn’t be charged under any other circumstances. But isn’t the problem that police handled the situation as they did?
Numark3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 17 hours ago, Chef Jim said: At what age does harmlessness set in? it isn’t age. It is when you are outnumbered 100 to one by militarized police while being unarmed. Why in the world is anyone defending police resorting to violence (even if within their right) in that situation? it is okay people to admit “they should not have been arrested, but the police should have handled that better and that is an issue we should try to fix.” I swear some of you would be defending the tank running over the guy in Tiananmen Square: “well he did approach the tank and he wasn’t allowed to be there and people weren’t protesting peacefully ... ... ... blabla Darwin Award ... ... derp derp”
billsfan1959 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 6 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: it isn’t age. It is when you are outnumbered 100 to one by militarized police while being unarmed. Why in the world is anyone defending police resorting to violence (even if within their right) in that situation? it is okay people to admit “they should not have been arrested, but the police should have handled that better and that is an issue we should try to fix.” I swear some of you would be defending the tank running over the guy in Tiananmen Square: “well he did approach the tank and he wasn’t allowed to be there and people weren’t protesting peacefully ... ... ... blabla Darwin Award ... ... derp derp” Hyperbole much?
Numark3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said: Hyperbole much? To most people, yes. To the few on this board that refuse to ever reasonably admit anything wrong with the police, no. You could have a tank run over a protestor today and there would be the same four people defending it Edited June 7, 2020 by Crayola64
billsfan1959 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: To most people, yes. To the few on this board that refuse to ever reasonably admit anything wrong with the police, no. I am being completely honest when I say I haven't seen any posters "refuse to ever reasonably admit anything wrong with the police." I have seen posters defend some actions and denounce other actions. However, I haven't seen anyone that has refused to admit any wrongdoing on the part of police, or that there aren't areas for improvement. Maybe I missed some posts ; however, I just haven't seen that Edited June 7, 2020 by billsfan1959 1
Numark3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said: I am being completely honest when I say I haven't seen any posters "refuse to ever reasonably admit anything wrong with the police." I have seen posters defend some actions and denounce other actions. However, I haven't seen anyone that has refused to admit any wrongdoing on the part of police, or that there aren't areas for improvement. Maybe I missed some posts ; however, I just haven't seen that For all the morons saying all police are evil/pigs/should die, there are their (very) special counterparts on the other side who refuse to see anything wrong with police. There are few of both on this board. 2
Penfield45 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 16 hours ago, Beast said: Yes, Go around him and have your back to him. Smart tactics. it was like 300 cops vs 1 elderly man you ***** moron. the right thing to do is maybe talk to him and let him know he needs to move, not push him down like an animal. god I hope I never see some of you folks in real life or at a game
billsfan1959 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 4 minutes ago, Jaraxxus said: Decries violence, threatens violence. 2 BILLION DOLLARS! Rage always trumps reason.... 1
Numark3 Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 (edited) This should be the perfect example that everyone should agree highlights what needs to improve. I do not think there was any intent to injure (it was a light shove). They probably shouldn’t be charged with anything (but let’s ignore that as there are many factors at play, fair or not). And the police probably acted with their right. but you had a situation that should not end with an elderly man bleeding and injured. Why our police decided to lightly shove him instead of resolve the situation better is a giant issue. Police have strayed far to away from members of our community into something else...creating an “us verse them” mentality. And it’s not all their fault, but collectively everyone’s fault. We need to bring them and their roles back into the community....but both sides keep pushing each other farther away it is hard to say you are protecting us and are on our side when you leave an unarmed elderly man injured. Just like it’s hard for us to say we want you protecting us when we want to defund them and demonize all of them. Edited June 7, 2020 by Crayola64
Beast Posted June 7, 2020 Posted June 7, 2020 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Crayola64 said: isn’t that the real problem? I agree they wouldn’t be charged under any other circumstances. But isn’t the problem that police handled the situation as they did? If someone got in your face attempting to prevent you from doing your job after having bricks thrown at you, cars running you down, being spit at, no....they handled the situation properly. Why isn't the problem the man getting in their face, not complying with verbal requests, and then getting in their personal space? 21 minutes ago, Penfield45 said: it was like 300 cops vs 1 elderly man you ***** moron. the right thing to do is maybe talk to him and let him know he needs to move, not push him down like an animal. god I hope I never see some of you folks in real life or at a game Is that a threat? LOL Edited June 7, 2020 by Beast 1
Recommended Posts