Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 27, 2016

No expressions of sympathy or regret can resurrect Eric Garner, the New York City man killed by police in July. Garner died after an officer placed him in what appears to be a chokehold during an arrest for allegedly selling untaxed cigarettes, an offense not usually regarded as a capital crime.

But, at the very least, officer Daniel Pantaleo (or his representatives) showed a spark of decency after a Staten Island grand jury decided not to indict him for any crime. “I feel very bad about the death of Mr. Garner,” he said in a statement. “My family and I include him and his family in our prayers and I hope that they will accept my personal condolences for their loss.”

That’s just one contrast to events in Ferguson, Missouri, where Officer Darren Wilson showed no hint of sympathy for teenager Michael Brown or his family. “I don’t think it’s haunting. It’s always going to be something that happened,” Wilson said in a televised interview.

There were other equally stark contrasts. While Brown’s response to Wilson will always be the subject of dispute, bystanders recorded video of Garner’s arrest and posted it on the Internet, where it went viral. There is no disputing Garner’s tragic last words as Pantaleo’s arm lingers around his neck: “I can’t breathe. I can’t breathe.” Even Fox News’ bellicose Bill O’Reilly was moved to observe that Garner “didn’t deserve what happened to him.”

But the greatest contrast between the deaths of Garner and Brown may have been in the reactions of elected and civic leaders. Backed by its politicians, Ferguson’s police force responded to criticism of Brown’s death with excuses, equivocation and armored personnel carriers.

In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio took to the podium to express sympathy for Garner’s loved ones, and equally important, a simple shared humanity. Compassion. Understanding. Empathy. “This is now a national moment of grief, a national moment of pain,” he said. Members of Congress — liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats — joined to criticize the grand jury’s decision.

That matters. All citizens, regardless of color or creed or religion, want to believe that the people who govern them share their fears, their hopes, their aspirations. Or, at the very least, that their leaders can understand their frustrations.

Even now, that’s not always the case in the United States, especially when it comes to law and order. The criminal justice system is one of the last bastions of blatant racism, a tangled net of explicit prejudices and implicit biases, of rank stereotypes and unfair perceptions, a web that ensnares black men disproportionately. Countless studies conducted by experts have borne out the view held by so many black Americans: We do not stand equally before the bar of justice.

Black motorists are subjected to more traffic stops than white drivers. Black men and women are arrested more often for drug offenses, even though we are no more likely to be drug users than whites. And the use of the death penalty tilts against black defendants and devalues black lives: It is more likely to be meted out if the victim is white.

Has there been progress? Of course there has. The nation’s top law enforcement official, the attorney general, is a black man. But the nation’s criminal justice system started out in a hellishly low place — where officials were complicit in lynchings, where the wealthy extracted unpaid labor from black men by having them arrested, where black crime victims were ignored. De Blasio referred to that unfortunate history: “We’re not dealing with years of racism leading up to it, or decades of racism — we are dealing with centuries of racism that have brought us to this day.”

For all the striking contrasts between the reactions to the deaths of Brown and Garner, there was one stunning consistency: Grand juries saw no evidence of wrongdoing by a white police officer who killed an unarmed black man. Bear in mind that a New York City medical examiner, citing “compression of his chest and prone position,” ruled Garner’s death a homicide. Still, a Staten Island grand jury found nothing to suggest that Pantaleo committed any criminal offense.

Some things haven’t changed at all.

Photo: Demonstrators in Baltimore protest the Staten Island, NY, grand jury’s decision not to indict officer Daniel Pantaleo in the Eric Garner chokehold case, on Thursday, Dec. 4, 2014. (Amy Davis/Baltimore Sun/TNS)

  • leadvillexp

    As someone that has taken people out of bars as a bouncer I understand the use of choke holds. I watched the take down. I feel it was not the so called choke hold but after, the pile on of police. The officer used the means necessary to get the man on the ground. The other officers piled on. I have seen this in white and black incidents. It is to many police on top of the person and they can not comply. The officer taking hi down did not choke him to death, it was his health along with to many officers piling on top of him ta caused his death.


      I have seen the video and Garner is a large man. Garner also appears to be resisting arrest. If Garner had went along peacefully then he would probably still be alive. If you are correct and Grner had health issues then he might have had a heart attack if they had used a Taser..I have a permit to carry a concealed weapon and there have been several times when I have been stopped by the police and I am white. Once i got out of my car and the gun flashed as I got out and somebody called the police. . Three of them showed up. One in a car and two on foot. . I do not give them the slightest excuse or appearance of being hostile. and there has never been a problem . I think there has been an atmosphere created by this Administration and the Media. If you turn on the News and the Media refers to Garner they emphasize “UNARMED Black” killed by the “WHITE OFFICER”. There have been instances where a black officer has killed a white person. This in not mentioned by the Media. The Whites do not Riot and Eric Holder doesn’t threaten to try the white officer for violating Civil Rights if not indicted. . It is the Atmosphere.

      • Joseph Kelsall

        If a black cop shot an unarmed white person, it would hit the headlines.

        • InformedVoter

          Hello Joe, Let’s try these numbers: In the USA 10% of law enforcement are black; 54% of blacks injured by law enforcement are from that 10%. I guess that makes those black officers racists. Or might it be that there is something “in the water” that makes those injured more likely to cause officers to injure them?

          • WhutHeSaid

            What it means is that black officers are actively deployed in predominately minority neighborhoods, so overall percentages of black versus white police mean nothing. What is also means is that you are grasping for logic to support your racist beliefs where none is to be found. Bigotry and racism are mental deficiencies and are incompatible with logic and reason.

          • Canistercook

            Most white cops would prefer that more minority cops police the minority neighborhoods. They just need to be qualified and apply for the jobs!

          • WhutHeSaid

            Is that so? Please publish the proof of your claim and be sure to cite the source(s).

          • Trevor Carlson

            Right, ’cause common sense isn’t to be listened to until the government fronts money to study the obvious.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Bigoted opinions without facts to back them up aren’t the same thing as common sense — just in case you were wondering.

          • joe schmo

            How many time have you are any of the others on this site produced facts? Rarely. It’s just not in your scope of thought.

          • WhutHeSaid

            I’ve supplied many facts, but lying bigots don’t care about facts. They care about their bigoted hate, and facts just get in the way of their lying.

          • joe schmo

            Not really, I see many of your posts…..

          • joe schmo

            Yes, and let’s just spend some more of that taxpayer money foolishly so that the debt keeps exceeding that 18 trillion…

          • WhutHeSaid

            Yes, why not spend another billion dollars of taxpayer money for more useless votes against Obamacare?

            In case you didn’t get the point, nobody falls for the claim that bigots are worried about spending taxpayer money. Everyone knows better.

          • joe schmo

            Why don’t you just look it up yourself.

            CC – I really think this would be the best possible answer to the dilemma.

          • WhutHeSaid

            I know that Canistercook has no idea what ‘most cops’ believe, and neither do you. For that matter neither do I, but then I’m not claiming such a ridiculous thing.

          • joe schmo

            Seriously! I have family in law enforcement.

          • WhutHeSaid

            So are you claiming that all 675,000 white cops in the US are your relatives? Perhaps you are just claiming that you spoke to all of them, and that’s how you know what they think. Let’s see: If you took an average of 5 minutes to ask each police officer what he or she thought, it would take about 27 years if you worked at it for 8 hours a day, Monday through Friday.

            How about just admitting that you really have no idea what most white cops think?

          • ralphkr

            I must take exception with your statement that “bigotry and racism are mental deficiencies”, WhutHeSaid, since racism stems from an extremely vital survival instinct. Early humans with a fear of the strange & unknown (racism) and either fled or killed upon encountering that which was new survived to have progeny. Those humans without the fear of the strange (non-racists) did not survive to have progeny. Consider the non-racist upon encountering a cave bear or sabre-tooth, “Oooh, all furry and soft. I’m going to cuddle it.” and you shall see why fearful humans survived to be our ancestors and pass that ‘racist’ trait on to their progeny.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Sorry, I must strongly disagree. There are a great many vestiges of early human development that are now overridden by the most important human development of all: The human brain. Intelligence has long been the primary survival tool in the human ‘survival toolkit’, if you will, and is expected to replace more primitive instincts. Let me give you a couple of examples to consider:

            Example 1: There is nothing natural about submitting one’s self to the control of a police officer. The natural instinct when confronted with an aggressive stranger is the old ‘fight or flight’ instinct which is common to all animals, including humans. Yet humans are taught and required to allow this aggressive and dangerous stranger to place their person into a confined and compromised state (handcuffs, prone position, inside police cruiser) that effectively renders them helpless. To my knowledge nobody has ever successfully argued in court that they should be excused from killing a police officer because early humans who submitted to aggressive strangers often did not survive.

            Example 2: To early humans it was preferable to engage in reproductive acts as early and as often as possible because the expected lifespan of a human wasn’t even close to what it is today. Natural instinct no doubt played a major role here since reproduction is in and of itself one definition of survival. We all know about the stereotypical depiction of early cave dwellers knocking out females and dragging them off by their hair, and such stereotyping probably had a good bit of it’s basis in actual fact. Yet to engage in such behavior today is far from acceptable, and in fact will actually lesson one’s chances of survival. We are expected to override primitive reproductive impulses with our conscious intelligence, and failure to do so will not be excused by citing successful dating practices of Neanderthals.

            Aside from the points above, I don’t believe that racism was ever truly a valid survival mechanism. A sabre-tooth tiger isn’t a good comparison to make with another human who has a different skin color. Here you are talking about two completely different species, and both of them likely considered the other a perfectly acceptable candidate for the evening meal. This is far different for humans of different races as the two humans are still so closely related biologically that not only is there a strong natural revulsion to considering each other a potential snack, but there is also a very real possibility that they could produce offspring, and this instinct has probably always been much stronger than just about any other one. Also, reproduction between humans who are not related to each other is a superior survival tactic over mating withing one’s close relatives, and what better way could there be to assure a wide range of genetic traits than to select a mate who appears to have come from a distant area where close relationship is very unlikely.

            I believe that racism probably didn’t really exist until humans evolved into more complex societies and adopted different religions. To Native Americans, Europeans and Africans were not considered either inferior or superior to my knowledge, rather, it was a learned behavior that was more common among the Europeans. At any rate, humans are perfectly capable of using their intelligence to override any bias that may be a vestige of early development — IF such bias ever did have any foundation in survival instincts. I don’t believe that it did.

            Of course, some humans are more capable of using intelligence than others, and it doesn’t appear to be confined to any particular race. That was my point.

          • ralphkr

            Sorry, Whut, but you are confusing the thin veneer of civilization and learned behavior with deep seated natural instincts. One of your statements about human & sabre-tooth as not valid in comparing races because each would consider the other as a potential meal is inconsistent with the fact that humans have considered other humans as a potential meal (still true today). Sorry but racism stems from deeply embedded instinct just as fear of heights (but we still fly) and being burned (but we still gather around camp fires & burning buildings).

          • WhutHeSaid

            Sorry, I still disagree. Humans have engaged in cannibalism, but it is extremely rare given the sheer number of opportunities (interactions with other humans). The fact that we fly despite a natural fear of heights and use fire every day despite an innate fear of being burned reinforces my point. Our intelligence trumps instinct every day.

            Also, you’ve given no indication why humans would instinctively fear other humans with a different skin color. That a different skin tone would inspire fear due to ancient experience begs the question of which came first and why — bad experiences or fear?

          • ralphkr

            Since today’s newborns display distress at new stimuli (loud sound is an obvious stressor) it is obvious that fear of new is inborn. Experience in the form of punishment for unacceptable actions gradually covers instinctual behavior with a thin veneer of civilization. You have glossed over the fact that early humans survived because they feared the unfamiliar and would either run from or kill a new entity which would include strange humanoids (not necessarily of different shade but merely not familiar). Even Chimpanzees have been observed waging battle and killing those not of their band.

          • WhutHeSaid

            My personal experiences with my own children and grandchildren do not agree with your observations on this subject. As far as I can tell, it takes far more than mere unfamiliarity to produce distressed or fearful behavior even in infants. Sometimes an unfamiliar person, object or sound will create a fearful reaction, but at other times it produces simple curiosity or even obvious delight. On the other hand, even something that the infant has experienced many times previously can produce a fearful or startled reaction. A good example of this is a loud noise.

            You haven’t offered any explanations regarding why an unfamiliar skin tone would prompt a fearful or otherwise negative reaction any more than, for example, the sudden appearance of a green-eyed person where brown eyes are the norm. Further, historical records seem to indicate that one of the ultimate expressions of human discrimination — slavery — has existed for far longer than the relatively recent race-based version of slavery. In fact, slavery throughout most of history seems to have been based upon political considerations or the results of wars rather than race.

            Yet another observation that contradicts your claims is the fact that racial discrimination is more prevalent and pronounced in areas where large groups of people who belong to different races live in close proximity to one another yet still remain separated. An example of this is an area where a Native American reservation abuts a European American (white) community. I have personally noticed that the animosity in areas such as these is far greater than is the case when people of either race are found in an area predominantly populated by the other yet no large groups of those people are nearby. This tends to disprove, for me at least, that unfamiliarity is the cause of racial animosity or fear.

            You have made the claim several times now that early humans developed racial bias a a survival mechanism, and you have further claimed that those who did not exhibit such bias suffered dire consequences including death. Where is the evidence that you are relying on to make such a claim? I haven’t heard of any such theory being advanced by anthropologists or historians to any significant degree, and my personal observations and beliefs are much different. I believe that racism was largely a product of religion and the beginnings of industrialization, where manufacturing a reason to enslave other people had an economic benefit.

            In modern society there is no benefit to be found in racial discrimination. In fact, the opposite is true — racial discrimination is a destructive behavior. Given that humans rely primarily on their ability to apply their intelligence to navigating the world around them (what you refer to as a thin veneer), engaging in a useless and destructive behavior that has no logical basis to begin with is indeed a defect in the thought process of those who practice racism. If you have some evidence to support your contention that racism ever had a beneficial application or was necessary for survival, please post that evidence along with your references.

          • ralphkr

            I am sorry that you are unable to follow deductive reasoning, Whut, but I never stated that racism, per se, was a instinctive survival mechanism but that it stems from the instinctive wariness of the new and different which IS a vital survival instinct just as jerking your hand away from a hot pan is instinctive. You don’t have to think it through as your hand has already left the proximity of the pan before your consciousness has even registered the heat.

            Your comparison of different groups living in close proximity despising each other is another example of something that often stems from learned behavior. For instance, I had noticed in my travels that within about 100 miles of the US-Canadian border the US citizens hate Canadians and the Canadians despise the US citizens but when you get further away from the border that bias disappears unless you are in an are heavily frequented by obnoxious US tourists. Another interest case of racism was brought home to me when an older friend traveled to Africa in search of his roots. When he came home he said he had never been so in fear of his live, even as a young man in 1940s Mississippi, as in Africa. It seems that everywhere he went he was the wrong shade of black (sometimes too dark and sometimes too light) and the only thing that saved his life was when the locals found out he was from the US. I also agree that racism has nothing what soever to do with slavery as enslaving of all races has been, and still is, all too common.

          • joe schmo

            In your last statement you mention that a Black American friend of yours felt fearful of the Africans after visiting his homeland. This is also the case in Mexico where we encountered a very sweet Indian Mexican girl who was being mistreated by the lighter skinned Latinos she worked with. She loved us because we treated her like everyone else and we made her feel special. Mexicans tend to be quite racist in that they believe that the darker the skin the less status you have.

          • JPHALL

            What you have described happens everywhere. Usually it stems from colonialism where it was common for the whiter the skin the better the treatment.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Bigotry and racism isn’t confined to any particular race even if some groups have a more notorious history.

            But I’m curious: Regarding the Mexican girl, you say that you ‘treated her like everyone else’ and in the very same breath said that you ‘made her feel special’. Just how do you make somebody feel special by treating them like everyone else?

          • joe schmo

            There’s a word in the human language that speaks volumes. Everyone tries to live by this standard word and everyone demands it. You cannot ignore this word or turn a blind eye to it because that would be sacrilege. To be exact, a fighting word. Yet, it is a word that is overlooked and non-prevalent and not taught within todays society. It is a very very important word. Without this word there would be carnage. What do you suppose that word is?

            …and that is ‘whut’ you don’t get.

          • joe schmo

            Give it UP! You spew the same drivel to everyone…. You are a bigot, for sure, and you hate Whites so that makes you a racist as well.

          • WhutHeSaid

            As usual, you are dead wrong, I don’t hate ‘whites’.

            People like you assume that your behavior is equivalent to that of other people with white skin, because you see everything in terms of race. But the truth is that most ‘white’ people don’t behave like you and would be horrified to think that they would be compared to such a bigoted baboon.

          • joe schmo

            Nope, I have been on this site long enough to know what you have said. Don’t try to even deny it. Do my words sound familiar? Just like yours only your words have been worse.

            My tolerance is wavering however because of people like you who have tried to peg ALL Whites as racists when we are not. I’m a bigot just like you, however; racist I am not. I’ve had friends who are not White who I admire much more than many Whites but you wouldn’t know that because you are playing the blame game and don’t even see how far race relations have come until now…..and who do you suppose instigated this mess….your Man. You only have yourselves to blame.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Oh yes, the old “I have black friends” chestnut. I don’t care about your tolerance — wavering or not — because you don’t really have any to speak of. I’ve never pegged all white people s racists – ever. You get that impression because YOU are a racist and you stupidly think that all white people are just like you. But they aren’t.

            I have no “Man” who instigated anything. You were a racist before anyone even knew who Obama was and you’ll be a racist long after he leaves office. You can’t blame anyone else for your racism — it’s your own defect.

          • Joseph Kelsall

            Your figures mean nothing without explaining how they were arrived at and the demographics of their area.

          • joe schmo

            Here you go moron. Too lazy to look it up yourself? Same percentage of Black cops. Higher percentage of Blacks killed, but I believe ‘InformedVoter’ meant injured…..

            “Black officers account for a little more than 10 percent of all fatal police shootings. Of those they kill, though, 78 percent were black.”


        • joe schmo


      • WhutHeSaid

        As if we needed more bigoted lies about the Garner killing, here you are with ridiculous suppositions, flawed observations, and outright whoppers.

        The fact that Garner was a big man is meaningless in this situation for a number of reasons. First, there were enough officers present to subdue a horse, and that would be IF Garner decided to react with violence — which he didn’t. Second, Garner was TOO big, meaning that he was grossly overweight and unhealthy. A man who is this obese cannot be expected to outrun police or have enough stamina to put up much of a fight, again, IF he had decided to react with violence — which he didn’t. Third, police officers are trained to deal with this situation, but Pantaleo obviously ignored his training and used a long-prohibited and dangerous tactic while the other officers — including Pantaleo’s supervisor — likewise ignored their training and department rules.

        You have no idea if Garner would have survived the encounter if he had ‘went along peacefully’, rather, you are just speculating. It’s entirely possible that Pantaleo would have administered a choke hold anyway, or perhaps used another dangerous tactic. Characterizing Garner’s behavior as not peaceful is a stretch. He didn’t threaten the officers with violence by taking any sort of fighting stance, rather, he merely tried to protest being harassed over nothing. Pulling one’s arm away from somebody isn’t the same thing as violence, nor is talking a criminal act.

        Finally, your account of encounters with police as an armed white man prove nothing at all, but your apparent belief that it does perfectly demonstrates the problem. You haven’t the first clue what it’s like to be a black man in the same situation, and it doesn’t take much intelligence to calculate what might have happened were Garner actually armed as you were. If that was the case we might be talking about 57 bullet holes rather than a choke hold — a frequent enough occurrence for black men being confronted by white officers that you really have no excuse for not understanding it.

        There is a big problem with the way that law enforcement deals with minorities in this country, and it’s a vestige of a long history of institutionalized racism. You post only reinforces the correct belief of African Americans that they will be treated differently and that people like you will do everything they can to excuse racist behavior. And despite your claim to the contrary, white people DO riot and commit all manner of crime and mayhem. But you can be sure that this situation is going to change, and you can also take pride in the fact that intentionally clueless arguments like yours will help bring that change about by demonstrating that racism hidden under the guise of faux reason is still a popular methods used by those who support racist behavior.

        • plc97477

          I am sorry so many decent people have had to die to get us to the place where we are hopefully going to have the conversation on race we should have but I really hope it happens now.

    • Joseph Kelsall

      Bouncers have an intellect between educationally subnormal and criminally insane. I think we can safely disregard your comment.

      • oldtack

        Ddo you know leadvillexp? How many bouncers have you ever met? Bouncer is usually an extra job. Do you know what leadvillexp does for a living? Lastly – what does your assinine statement have to do with the issue in discussion?

        • Joseph Kelsall

          Could you write in English please?

          • oldtack

            Why should I write in English? From what I have read from your tripe you are incapable of understanding truth in any language.

  • Joseph Kelsall

    I wonder if it had been a white police officer in the chokehold and a black man applying it, the decisions would have been the same?

    • WhutHeSaid

      Most likely not. All you have to do is examine some historical statistics, and calculating the odds that the black officer would probably be charged becomes a simple mathematical task. Mind you, if a black officer did such a thing to a white citizen, though, his likely prosecution would be the correct result.

    • Lord_Reaper

      I just want to know why when a black man or black officer kills a white person it doesn’t end up news like this. There has been times this has happened near my community and the only time you “might see anything about it was in one of those small neighborhood papers in a very short article. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.

      • WhutHeSaid

        If a scenario like you describe was a recurring theme, and the official response to the killing was to blatantly thwart justice, it would be very big news. But scenarios like what you describe just aren’t happening in the way that those like Ferguson, Cleveland, and Staten Island are happening.

        • joe schmo

          Gee, I wonder why………

  • hjs3

    Probably be safe to say that the Fed. Grand Juries in both incidents are going to have thier hands full. In Ferguson, you had a grand jury that was read directions that preceded the “probable cause” ruling by the S/C in 1985. Of course these instructions or direction were handed in physical format to each jury member just prior to Officer Wilson’s testimony….Twenty-nine years later and the State of Missouri still doesn’t include this in their Statuets?
    Lowering the bar is one thing but flttening it all together is embarassing.
    Meanwhile in NY the only thing missing with the grants of immunity etc. was Monty Hall and a later episode of “Let’s Make a Deal.”

  • EaglesGlen

    Lets do the Obama Acorn big fits over any dead black attack to camouflage Obama’s illegal alien attack upon America and America’s Employment Infrastructure.. Timing is no coincidence.

    • ExRadioGuy15

      ssmdh….do you usually repeat the Fascist GOP’s propaganda, Eagles? Seriously? There seem to be two typers of GOPers now: Cons and Suckers….it appears you’re a member of the latter group, Eagles…what a shame…

    • WhutHeSaid

      Uh-huh, I see.

      Everything is going to be OK, oh yes it is. You just cuddle up with your pet dog turd and let other people do all the worrying. We wouldn’t want you to get over-stressed — no, not at all.

    • Irishgrammy

      EaglesGlen, almost intolerable to be civil with your insufferable idiocy! I would love to have all of you DISGUSTING bigots live one week in the skin of a Black American in this country, which has special meaning after Wednesday’s NAACP march and the horrid racist behavior from the low class townspeople of Rosebud, MO., or work at back breaking and dangerous jobs and paid pennies on the dollar from those AMERICANS who take advantage…. You would be begging for mercy within minutes!!!

    • joe schmo

      Isn’t this always the case. Let’s do something corrupt and redirect the media so we can do something else corrupt and it just goes on an on, doesn’t it?

  • ExRadioGuy15

    I’m reading in the paper today that the NYC cops are upset because they feel “demonized” and “thrown under the bus” by the President and other elected officials. In fact, they’ve developed a “counternarrative” (aka, Fascist propaganda) to refute those who correctly criticize them for their use of unnecessary deadly force in the Garner case. Here’s that “counternarrative”:
    “Garner would still be alive if he had obeyed orders”, “Garner was in poor health”; “Garner’s poor health was the main cause of his death” and the officer who took down used an authorized “headlock” move that wasn’t a “chokehold”
    Let’s address each statement individually…

    Garner would still be alive if he obeyed orders….the NYC police admitted that Garner was a “nuisance” and that shopkeepers had complained about his alleged selling of “loosies”, untaxed and loose cigarettes. So, if he was a “nuisance” why was any physical force necessary? As I pointed out at the time, Garner was not a felon nor was he in the “commission” of a felony, therefore, any use of force was completely unnecessary. The cops’ are trying to set a dangerous precedent here: if even you’re just a “nuisance”, you can have force applied on to you. Bullshit, guys…. that’s a Fascist ideology plus it’s a strong indication of psychopathology.

    Garner was in poor health….that’s a completely bogus argument and is highly irrelevant. Again, that sounds like Fascist psychopathology.

    Garner’s health was the main cause of his death…again, irrevelant.

    Garner was taken down by an authorized “headlock” that wasn’t a “chokehold”….wow, that takes some balls to say something like that even though we could all see that it was a chokehold…ssmdh

    Another point the cops make: “if he could say, ‘I can’t breathe’, he could breathe”. Again, Fascist psychopathology with a tinge of “smartassery”.

    My advice to the whiny cops: QUIT YER WHININ’!

    BTW: I’ve done extensive study of Fascism and its components. One of those components is “obsession with crime and punishment”, where the Fascist regime violates whatever civil rights the people are supposed to have to assert and maintain “control” of the masses. While not nearly all cops are Fascist psychopaths, too many of them are. If you want people to refrain from correctly calling you Fascist psychopaths, guys, don’t act like Fascist psychopaths. Actions speak louder than words, after all…

    • Buzz Waldron

      . Garner died of self-created heart attack…

    • joe schmo

      Honestly, I too have done plenty of research on Fascism and your opinions regarding ‘obsession with crime and punishment,’ are quite false. We have always had laws that all Americans have had to abide by. Now they are Fascist? The rules police officials have followed for decades? This incident has nothing to do with fascism, rather, it has to do with a fellow selling a product (in this case tabacco) on the street corners illegally. The police never would have bothered if the shopkeepers had not complained. Garner was a repeat offender. If he would have just given it up and put his hands behind his back, he would still be alive today. Problem is their is no longer respect and responsibility. No respect for authority or responsibility for your OWN actions.

      When you read the above statements submitted by Charleo with regards to modern laws you can see how very extreme everything has become. That includes crimes committed by unsavory individuals. If we realize that the criminal has all rights and the innocent are becoming increasingly the guilty, then we can also note that laws are being misconstrued to fit criminal activity. It has nothing to do with the color of skin. Thank god the legalities of these two situations were rightfully decided upon by a judicial system that still works somehow. I thought we were a Nation of laws. Guess that is becoming less and less the case.

      Anarchy anyone?

      • ExRadioGuy15

        You’ve done extensive research on Fascism, Joe? It sure doesn’t look like it…
        But, that’s probably because you’re a Republican (or Libertarian) and you’ve swallowed the Fascist “gaslighting” propaganda of the GOP, something they started to do in 1920.
        When one side (GOP/Libertarians) decide that the truth doesn’t fit their ideology/activities, that’s a strong indication of Fascism….Fascist regimes like the GOP depend on millions of stupid and/or gullible people to keep power.
        In addition, when Republicans/Libertarians spew the “listen to both sides” talking point and aren’t willing to believe the truth of matters, that’s a strong sign of mental defect.
        Unfortunately, Joe, you seem to be a victim of all this. If you’re not, you’re then one of the Fascist and psychopathic Cons, those whom spread the propaganda…
        Your choice…psychopath or sociopath, Joe?

        • joe schmo

          My Father lived under 3 regimes in his life. Two of which he deplored. One of which he escaped from. The one he escaped from is the same one he sees this country turning into because of the Dems and RINO’s. Since he talked about the two worst ones all the time and since I still had family living in the East Zone, I know all to well about these two despicable forms of governments. The third one is Capitalism. He found that American Exceptionalism and living the National dream used to be the best way to live in the world. Not anymore……… I seriously doubt that you know all that you do because I dealt with people who actually lived through each of these establishments. Books and articles can either be false or half true. You can tell me what you want something is always left out or exaggerated. I tend to believe people who have been there done that.

  • Canistercook

    These two sad cases are very different. If the grand jury is right they both don’t demand any action on the part of justice. However in the New York instance I find myself questioning why government agencies are allowed to use abusive taxation to curb behavior they disagree with. I do not smoke, but feel sorry for those hooked on smoking as a result of a society which at one time lauded the production of tobacco as an American invention and applauded its production and sale. Garner was the unfortunate victim of
    a government agency send out to enforce taxation laws on hooked smokers and to some extent the victims health problems. Taxing a product to curtail its use is not fair or ethical, education is the proper way to curtail the use.

    • charleo1

      I’ll be honest. I don’t know about these two GJs lack of indictment. I’ll tell you what I do know. That a decent Prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich if he wants to. So skewed is the State’s advantage in a case at that juncture. On the other hand, if I were a Black person, my perception of the system might be so compromised, I would assume Michael Brown was just another kid cut down by a White Cop, for which there would never be any justice, unless I took to the streets. See, I’m White, and can’t really walk in their shoes. I do think they deserve our respect of their feelings, irrespective of our own opinions. And if a Federal investigation of Civil Rights violations helps, it will be at least as productive, and helpful, as another hearing on Benghazi. Of which at least the last two were held at the request of another minority, that feels as though another system is corrupt, and so also seeks investigation, and justice of a another sort, and got it. In the case off Garner, I totally agree. His death was the result of Police enforcing legislation that springs from that certain kind of busybody Liberal, that quite frankly truly believes they know better what’s best for me, you, and everybody else, than we know for ourselves. It’s how you get poor people, the largest consumers of tobacco, coping with $12.00 a pack prices. Because theses people don’t think they should smoke. And so, with deliberate intent, set about to punish them for it. It’s the same mentality that produces the inane stupidity of prohibiting serving soft drinks in 20 oz. cups, but buying two 10 oz. is okay. It’s the mentality that believes a rigorously enforced, stop, and frisk policy will improve Police relations with the inner city minorities. Because, they will get the message, they care about them down at City Hall. It’s what happened to the best french fries in the World. However, my feelings, or anyone else’s, are valueless to this subset of know it alls. Who would prefer, I only ate tofu, and bean sprouts, and rode a bicycle my 20 mile commute to work, and back. And would mandate that too, if only they could. It is these numbskulls that are responsible for the completely predictable black market in cigarettes. That once again, just as in the days of the Volstead Act, are the organized criminal’s best friend. And it is these high, and mighty, thinkers that absolutely created the situation that led to Mr. Garner’s running afoul of their laws, and paying for it with his life. They are forever inventing, as it were, the perfect example of that road to Hell, being paved with a nitwit’s best intentions.

      • joe schmo

        Enter….the Liberal law makers……..How ridiculous do we want to get?

    • Buzz Waldron

      . Garner a “victim” of his own crimes and unhealthy lifestyle… blame no one else…!!!

  • Buzz Waldron

    . The 99% are PROUD of what BOTH grand juries did!!!

  • plynth

    These comments blaming Garner for his own death is just the desire of some for the police state which naturally occurs with far right-wing politics. When the police start over-policing right-wing militia groups it will be a much different story.

    • joe schmo

      Just who is doing the violence? Who is protesting? Who do the police have to deal with? Certainly is not the supposed ‘right-wing militia groups’ is it? Sorry won’t be the Right……