Tape shows New Orleans cops beating black man

[SLCPUNK]

The video is on this thread.

[sandman]

yo dude - your post makes no sense. read my fucking posts - i've said several times these cops should be reprimanded by their department.

not sure what your point is about Guantanamo Bay. but don't make baseless assumptions? about my beliefs.

on the first point, you say the cops should be reprimanded yet you say you believe in "innocent until proven guilty"...since that obviously doesnt make much sense i thought i would point out to you some facts about the video and that there is plenty of evidence to support guilt...which by my reckoning is something you have already observed

on the second point, the US law system obviously gave up its "innocent until proven guilty" 2 years ago since guantanamo prisoners are readily accepted as being guilty without proof...as i recall, in other threads werent you supporting the fact that people were being detained in guantanamo without proof of guilt? if so, then why should the "innocent until proven guilty" matter to you now?

let me clarify....IMO, innocent until proven guilty is a court of law issue. not a real life issue. therefore, it is obvious the cops used too much force; therefore, their department should punish them (they should get a slap on the wrist IMO). now, if that loser brings a civil suit (like there's any chance of that NOT happening), then these cops are innocent until proven guilty.

war criminals are a completely different topic. completely different system as well. still, i've NEVER stated war criminals should not be afforded due process of law.

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

[SLCPUNK]

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

You are forgeting that those people are being held without being charged.

Big difference.

[Charity Case]

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

You are forgeting that those people are being held without being charged.

Big difference.

Their charge is understood.  And I'm not sure that the rules for prisoners of call for them to be charged with anything anyway.  If so, if it would make you feel better, we could charge them with jaywalking with an ak47.  It's irrelevant really.

Anyway, who concerns themselves with the treatment of suspected terrorist or suspected terrorist allies or former members of the Taliban?  If you think the majority of people in this country (not the vocal liberal majority but the real middle America majority) care about the treatment of prisoners in gitmo after seeing the beheadings of prisoners by Al Quada, then you are reading to much liberal media.   I don't know a single American that would waste 4 seconds caring about such a thing.

You are free to start with the "well we need to be better than them" speech, but keeping them alive and feed in gitmo is better than beheading them is treating them better IMO.


As for the cops, they look guilty for sure.  If they are proven guilty in a court of law, they should be charge to the fullest extent.

[sandman]

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

You are forgeting that those people are being held without being charged.

Big difference.

like i said, it's a completely different system. and i don't claim to be an expert on all the differences. but there are MAJOR differences. and to my knowledge, plenty of americans that have not followed the law have been investigated and prosecuted. as well they should.

[Axls Locomotive]

let me clarify....IMO, innocent until proven guilty is a court of law issue. not a real life issue. therefore, it is obvious the cops used too much force; therefore, their department should punish them (they should get a slap on the wrist IMO). now, if that loser brings a civil suit (like there's any chance of that NOT happening), then these cops are innocent until proven guilty.

war criminals are a completely different topic. completely different system as well. still, i've NEVER stated war criminals should not be afforded due process of law.

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

well for example...beating up an innocent man is not a real life issue? and spending years in jail for no reason is acceptable to you? i speak from a solid moral POV where guilt is decided by the same method no matter what crime has been committed...you find that 2 methods (innocent until proven guilty, and guilty until proven innocent) in the same system are acceptable...i do not...

[sandman]

let me clarify....IMO, innocent until proven guilty is a court of law issue. not a real life issue. therefore, it is obvious the cops used too much force; therefore, their department should punish them (they should get a slap on the wrist IMO). now, if that loser brings a civil suit (like there's any chance of that NOT happening), then these cops are innocent until proven guilty.

war criminals are a completely different topic. completely different system as well. still, i've NEVER stated war criminals should not be afforded due process of law.

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

well for example...beating up an innocent man is not a real life issue? and spending years in jail for no reason is acceptable to you? i speak from a solid moral POV where guilt is decided by the same method no matter what crime has been committed...you find that 2 methods (innocent until proven guilty, and guilty until proven innocent) in the same system are acceptable...i do not...

you're changing my words around, AND putting words into my mouth.

NEVER DID I SAY...."beating up an innocent man is not a real life issue".

NOR DID I SAY that both methods are acceptable in the same "system".

it's a waste of time arguing with someone who does this.

[SLCPUNK]

i guess you are forgetting that many people facing trial are held in prison for long periods of time BEFORE their innocence or guilt is determined in a courtroom.

You are forgeting that those people are being held without being charged.

Big difference.

Their charge is understood.  And I'm not sure that the rules for prisoners of call for them to be charged with anything anyway.  If so, if it would make you feel better, we could charge them with jaywalking with an ak47.  It's irrelevant really.

Many people were released without being charged after being held for months upon months.

It's irrelevant that somebody is held by the USA (who claims a fair justice system) without being charged? Huh?

 I prefer to follow the laws we set, not use them only when we feel like it. If you are going to arrest somebody and take them in, you must charge them and give them a trial. Not arrest them like some secret police, not charge them, not allow them a lawyer and beat them. Sorry, but while you obviously support that (since they are all "towelheads" to you anyway) I do not. And it goes directly what the America stands for.

[Timothy]

Hlding people in prison with out being charge is wrong no doubt.

I remeber a few years ago a hacker named Kevin Mitchnik"I think that was his last name" was held for like 1 to 2 years without being formely charged .All because they thought he could launch nucs by using a telophone. so I believe he wasn't even alowed to us one.

[Axls Locomotive]

you're changing my words around, AND putting words into my mouth.

NEVER DID I SAY...."beating up an innocent man is not a real life issue".

NOR DID I SAY that both methods are acceptable in the same "system".

it's a waste of time arguing with someone who does this.

amusing, lame reply indeed