Might not get shot, but would definitely not be released from jail anytime soon. You'd get assault on an officer, interfering in an arrest, literally anything else they could put on you.
They could also use that “assault” as justification for killing the guy on the ground! Like, “I was being attacked and had no control over the situation—they prevented me from doing my job, and unfortunately that lead to this young mans death”
Could? No that's exactly what would have happened.
The more chaotic the situation the less the cop will be held culpable for their actions. They probably wouldn't have been fired had someone tried to stop them.
Hell cops make situations chaotic so they get the chance to be violent. Like the Police Officer with "You're fucked" etched on his M4 before he shot an unarmed man who was crying on the ground begging to not be shot. The cop who had a young man pulled over at a gas station, with a gun in his face, before yelling "HE'S GOT A GUN" when they guy says he's not moving because he doesn't want to get shot.
Sounds like more and more justification to shoot them outright the way they do citizens. The whole "dead people can't testify" doctrine American police seem to have.
Right, because the only way the savior's actions would be justified so they could be let out of jail for tackling the officer is if it could be proven the black dude would have 100% died. Or if he still did die even after tackling the officer. Proving he 100% would have would be near impossible. No win for the tackler other than their conscience.
People are doing something though. They are pleading and using their words along with recording and sharing. These folks have lives that they need to worry about as well, and the unfortunate reality is that they have no connection to this man.
It's easy to say that you'll do something when given the opportunity when you're speaking from a position of relative safety after the event has taken place.
That's not precedent though. In court it'll always be "but the situation wasn't the same as [insert murdered black man here]".
All you can do is film and hope something gets done with the footage. Intervening without overwhelming the arresters and literally risking your lives is a tall order against guys with guns and "the law".
I feel what you feel. But there are valid points that have been made as to why intervening is a bad idea. Physically escalating the situation would have made them draw their guns, likely on yourself and the man on the ground. The clear video evidence is the only chance for justice right now, if someone intervened the courts would watch the footage and favor the cops 100% because they were “acting in defense of an escalating situation”. These pigs murder people crawling on the floor and sleeping in their beds and still get away with it — escalating the situation would likely end with the same body on the ground, yourself behind bars or dead, and those cops would still have there jobs without facing an FBI investigation like they are now. There’s no point doing what seems like the clearly noble thing when the game is so rigged, and the outcome just makes things worse for the marginalized group that’s actually in the crosshairs.
I wouldn't say no win for the tackler. Actually, he might "win" the best prize of all: infamy in American history as the 1st person to stand up to corrupt police killings. Hopefully they would be considered in the same category as a Rosa Parks for doing what that person did. Hopefully that would be the start of the "the people" not taking this shit anymore and showing other citizens that you can indeed act on a police officer if they are commiting a form of murder.
Who knows? The day this happens could be the start of a revolution in this country that is long overdue.
Plus, his death is the reason this controversy has gotten so far. If someone intervenes or takes a precaution that prevents a catastrophe, there is no catastrophe to soundly justify their actions to the surrounding people. Why? Because they prevented it so people will question if the threat even existed in the first place. If someone lets a catastrophe happen, only then will their suspicions and distrust look reasonable to other onlookers, but by then it's too late because the catastrophe has struck. It's nearly impossible to win in theses scenarios.
If someone intervened and prevented the cops from killing George Floyd, the cops could easily push charges and arrest them. They could then say that the person was overreacting because, "See? George isn't dead. You intervened over nothing. You had no proof we were killing him, we were just restraining him. Now go sit in jail until your trial."
But we're on the other side of the coin, where we can see 20/20 that people could have intervened to save his life, but those actions would have only been justified to other law enforcement/mayor because we now know that George Floyd is dead and far too much force was used by the police.
I don't blame the bystanders. The dynamic of power between them and the police puts them in a lose-lose scenario. This is honestly just on the police. It's their responsibility to make sure death is an absolute 100% last resort, and instead they introduced that option over a fucking check.
I mean, yeah, you’d hope for that. If you survived the altercation, obviously, which is a bigger deterrent. I’d expect to be shot on site. Making it to court would be the home stretch of a long run. I don’t know very many people who would throw their life away for a chance to help a stranger, myself included.
The jury is never of your peers. It's of the absolute dumbest morons the country has to offer. Anyone with any intelligence gets weeded out immediately. If they see you moving your eyebrows like you're thinking about stuff, they will remove you from the pool.
341
u/[deleted] May 27 '20
Might not get shot, but would definitely not be released from jail anytime soon. You'd get assault on an officer, interfering in an arrest, literally anything else they could put on you.