If I take a shitload of opiates but then someone comes along and strangles me to death, I don’t think anyone with sense would be acting like it was the opiates that killed me. They certainly would not help my chance of survival but like, if I literally cannot breathe and am suffocating that would be what does me in. The county medical examiner agreed as such in this case. Why is this so difficult to grasp?
If anything, that’s more damning for Chauvin. He’s saying he has breathing issues? Okay well let’s just put all of a grown man’s weight on his next for nearly 10 minutes straight. Idk why it’s so hard for y’all to drop the mental gymnastics and look at the most obvious cause of death. Having your airflow restricted through direct force for that long would harm anyone.
Okay analogy then. I could authorize you as an officer to shoot someone on sight for no reason at all. The board and I decided to say that is an approved decision you can make. You are now legally allowed to shoot someone for no reason. But is that morally right? No. So the whole idea of whether they were authorized to hold someone down for some number of minutes, that’s not a justification for whether that is safe or not. That’s all I’m just saying that can’t be your argument
That’s a stupid analogy. Police officers and people in the military are required to disregard illegal orders. If a city official ordered a police officer to shoot somebody that would be an illegal order. Therefore, the police officer is required to disregard it. WTF is wrong with you? What are they teaching you in high school now?
Omg are you actually stupid you can comprehend a hypothetical. Okay I’ll dumb it down for you even further. Have you seen/heard of the movie The Purge? In that movie crime was made legal. Does that mean that crime is morally right? No ofc the fuck it isn’t. I’m not even trying to tell you whether your original point is right or not. I’m just saying you can’t argue it from the perspective that you have been you have to find another way to argue your point.
The fact you think someone can order a police officer to shoot someone for no reason and the fact you’re using fictional movies to make your point shows you don’t have a grasp of what happened in Milwaukee. Also, you redshirted to name calling so that tells me you’re too emotional to present a valid argument.
Your comprehension skills are actually immaculate. A I’m not talking about ordering a police officer to do anything. Where you made this up from I have no idea. B I illustrated a point using an example. It being fictional is irrelevant. I had to go that far because you couldn’t understand what I’m saying. And apparently you till don’t. So critical thinking does not seem to be apparent for you C you going “WTF is wrong with you” is an emotional response too. Have a good day dude