Homeless Man Killed by Fellow Passenger on NYC Subway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chokeholds are coming under scrutiny at the local, state, and federal level. To state the obvious, they can be lethal when done improperly.

*Federal officers are now prohibited from using chokeholds and executing warrants unannounced in some circumstances, per Justice Department.

*Local governments or law enforcement officials in at least 23 cities completely or partially banned the use of chokeholds, carotid restraints, or both following the protests.

*At least 17 states, including Minnesota, also enacted legislation to ban or restrict the practice.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/16/justice-department-bans-chokeholds-limits-no-knock-entries/8360832002/#:~:text=Local%20governments%20or%20law%20enforcement,or%20both%20following%20the%20protests.

LOL...maybe there are a few exceptions, but choke holds have been considered lethal force in LE for over 20 years.

So why are they still being used by LE in some places, and why was the marine in NYC applauded for using it on the homeless guy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A drug addict posing danger to law-abiding passengers on a NYC subway train subdued by several bystanders tragically died. It's a shame that he was allowed to walk the streets untreated, and that the NYPD cannot put officers every hundred feet to deal with the addicts who have taken over a deserted city.

Yep.
Face it. This is an indictment on the city of NY and their inability to take dangerous people off the streets. Whether it is because of their laws, the lack of prosecutors taking crime seriously, or a lack of enforcement.... this is what is inevitably going to happen when the populace is unsafe on the streets.

And, as far as these protestors.... where were they when a young woman was attacked and lost an eye as a result?

Or, this woman who lost her life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chokeholds are coming under scrutiny at the local, state, and federal level. To state the obvious, they can be lethal when done improperly.

*Federal officers are now prohibited from using chokeholds and executing warrants unannounced in some circumstances, per Justice Department.

*Local governments or law enforcement officials in at least 23 cities completely or partially banned the use of chokeholds, carotid restraints, or both following the protests.

*At least 17 states, including Minnesota, also enacted legislation to ban or restrict the practice.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/16/justice-department-bans-chokeholds-limits-no-knock-entries/8360832002/#:~:text=Local%20governments%20or%20law%20enforcement,or%20both%20following%20the%20protests.

LOL...maybe there are a few exceptions, but choke holds have been considered lethal force in LE for over 20 years.

So why are they still being used by LE in some places, and why was the marine in NYC applauded for using it on the homeless guy?

Don't call him homeless. It's a disservice to the many peaceful unhoused individuals to try to garner sympathy for this man by calling him homeless. Many people with homes are aggressive addicts, so unfair to use that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chokeholds are coming under scrutiny at the local, state, and federal level. To state the obvious, they can be lethal when done improperly.

*Federal officers are now prohibited from using chokeholds and executing warrants unannounced in some circumstances, per Justice Department.

*Local governments or law enforcement officials in at least 23 cities completely or partially banned the use of chokeholds, carotid restraints, or both following the protests.

*At least 17 states, including Minnesota, also enacted legislation to ban or restrict the practice.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/16/justice-department-bans-chokeholds-limits-no-knock-entries/8360832002/#:~:text=Local%20governments%20or%20law%20enforcement,or%20both%20following%20the%20protests.

LOL...maybe there are a few exceptions, but choke holds have been considered lethal force in LE for over 20 years.

So why are they still being used by LE in some places, and why was the marine in NYC applauded for using it on the homeless guy?

Sometimes, it is the only way to restrain someone out of control.

Have you ever seen a person jacked up drugs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chokeholds are coming under scrutiny at the local, state, and federal level. To state the obvious, they can be lethal when done improperly.

*Federal officers are now prohibited from using chokeholds and executing warrants unannounced in some circumstances, per Justice Department.

*Local governments or law enforcement officials in at least 23 cities completely or partially banned the use of chokeholds, carotid restraints, or both following the protests.

*At least 17 states, including Minnesota, also enacted legislation to ban or restrict the practice.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/16/justice-department-bans-chokeholds-limits-no-knock-entries/8360832002/#:~:text=Local%20governments%20or%20law%20enforcement,or%20both%20following%20the%20protests.

LOL...maybe there are a few exceptions, but choke holds have been considered lethal force in LE for over 20 years.

So why are they still being used by LE in some places, and why was the marine in NYC applauded for using it on the homeless guy?

Because LE break the law all the time.

Why do people applaud murder? Why did tucker applaud alt-right beating an antifa?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in NYC and take the F train most days. The myth or rumor that policing is down is just that. There are more cops in subway stations and patrolling subway cars than I’ve ever seen in my 20 years of living in New York. Obviously homelessness and mental health crisis are also up, and there are a lot of almost tragedies and true tragedies like this happening all the time.
I also believe a trained marine should know the difference between chokehold to subdue and chokehold to kill. Obviously, this guy had some sort of white savior act to “protect others bothered” going on. From
The eyewitnesses it doesn’t sound like the man murdered was doing anything dangerous.

I guess all the witnesses were wrong to be frightened and to feel threatened.

I wonder if he did anything dangerous before he hit the 67-year-old woman in the face?

No one on that train. Could have known about his priors, nor is it appropriate for a vigilante to kill a man for past crimes.

They wouldn't have know his priors, but his past record does suggest that his actions weren't benign and that many people felt rightfully threatened by him. Agree he still shouldn't have been killed, but restraining him doesn't seem unreasonable in that case.

This is why being a vigilante is illegal, no his priors do not matter. You can't assume somebody is dangerous based on priors, you can't kill somebody unless they are a threat to your life. That does not mean looking or sounding scary.

I think it makes sense to try to restrain a violent person before they attack other people.

I don’t think we’d be having this conversation if the person had simply restrained him.

Obviously he went too far in restraining him. I don't think he should have been killed and I think it's appropriate that he be tried for manslaughter. I just think it's ridiculous to act like the guy posed no threat to others.

Or that it's completely unreasonable (without actually having been there) that people might have been frightened by his behavior.

Being frightened does not raise to a level of needing to kill or even assault someone by restraint.

You can only defend yourself or other when assaulted or your life is in danger (like pointing a gun at you).

Says who? You? And verbal assaults count.

The law.

There are 5 things that have to happen with verbal threat to be considered actionable, only 1 happened in this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chokeholds are coming under scrutiny at the local, state, and federal level. To state the obvious, they can be lethal when done improperly.

*Federal officers are now prohibited from using chokeholds and executing warrants unannounced in some circumstances, per Justice Department.

*Local governments or law enforcement officials in at least 23 cities completely or partially banned the use of chokeholds, carotid restraints, or both following the protests.

*At least 17 states, including Minnesota, also enacted legislation to ban or restrict the practice.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/09/16/justice-department-bans-chokeholds-limits-no-knock-entries/8360832002/#:~:text=Local%20governments%20or%20law%20enforcement,or%20both%20following%20the%20protests.

LOL...maybe there are a few exceptions, but choke holds have been considered lethal force in LE for over 20 years.

So why are they still being used by LE in some places, and why was the marine in NYC applauded for using it on the homeless guy?

Sometimes, it is the only way to restrain someone out of control.

Have you ever seen a person jacked up drugs?

But since a chokehold is lethal force, shouldn't the marine have known that holding someone in that position for so long carried a high risk of killing them?

Have I seen a person jacked up on drugs? Yes, I have lived and/or worked in several US cities, so I have seen that--several times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A drug addict posing danger to law-abiding passengers on a NYC subway train subdued by several bystanders tragically died. It's a shame that he was allowed to walk the streets untreated, and that the NYPD cannot put officers every hundred feet to deal with the addicts who have taken over a deserted city.

Is this city deserted, or are there law-abiding passengers and bystanders populating the subway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

Specifically how was he dangerous? There are 1000s of people experiencing mental health and/or substance abuses crises in NYC and other large cities. Most are a danger to themselves only. He was apparently in the chokehold for 15 minutes. That's a lifetime. Cops and EMTs could have been called and passengers could have gotten off at the next stop and alerted the driver. Several male passengers could have tried to subdue him at once until help came. Does everyone have carte blanche now to kill people they perceive as dangerous? Because if that's the case, don't venture into cities or onto subways.

It seems likely that the use of force was excessive. We need more information about why he was perceived as a threat.

Tell me, were you this upset when Michelle Go was pushed onto the tracks to her death for no reason?

+1 or about the woman who lost an eye?

Of course that was upsetting. But in this particular case, there is no indication that the guy was going to push anyone in front of the train. He was ON the train. Anyone who has lived in a city has encountered people--on subway trains and off--who are clearly mentally ill and acting weird. As a woman, I try to get off the train as soon as I can or I move to the other side of the car I am in. When you take public transportation, you will eventually encounter high people, mentally ill people, homeless people, weird-looking people, etc. It comes with the territory.

But it shouldn’t be like this in a civilized, developed country. We should not encounter high, mentally or homeless people. Not even dirty smelly people, or people screaming and throwing things. They should be picked up by police and places in appropriate institutions.

That is what we did until Reagan defunded the MHSA

Well then someone should reinstall what was before Reagan
For some reason no one will touch it with a 10 ft pole
Why is that?

“Install what was before Reagan”?? Are you 12?! How do you have no idea “what was before Regan”???

You said Reagan defunded mental health services
It was not ideal but at least there were no crazies in the streets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

Specifically how was he dangerous? There are 1000s of people experiencing mental health and/or substance abuses crises in NYC and other large cities. Most are a danger to themselves only. He was apparently in the chokehold for 15 minutes. That's a lifetime. Cops and EMTs could have been called and passengers could have gotten off at the next stop and alerted the driver. Several male passengers could have tried to subdue him at once until help came. Does everyone have carte blanche now to kill people they perceive as dangerous? Because if that's the case, don't venture into cities or onto subways.

It seems likely that the use of force was excessive. We need more information about why he was perceived as a threat.

Tell me, were you this upset when Michelle Go was pushed onto the tracks to her death for no reason?

+1 or about the woman who lost an eye?

Of course that was upsetting. But in this particular case, there is no indication that the guy was going to push anyone in front of the train. He was ON the train. Anyone who has lived in a city has encountered people--on subway trains and off--who are clearly mentally ill and acting weird. As a woman, I try to get off the train as soon as I can or I move to the other side of the car I am in. When you take public transportation, you will eventually encounter high people, mentally ill people, homeless people, weird-looking people, etc. It comes with the territory.

But it shouldn’t be like this in a civilized, developed country. We should not encounter high, mentally or homeless people. Not even dirty smelly people, or people screaming and throwing things. They should be picked up by police and places in appropriate institutions.

That is what we did until Reagan defunded the MHSA

Well then someone should reinstall what was before Reagan
For some reason no one will touch it with a 10 ft pole
Why is that?

Politics. Republican presidents and Republican Congress won’t vote on it.

Will democrats?! No one ever brings that up on the federal level

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This - the mentally ill roaming the streets - is such an intractable problem. Many on this thread saying they need "help," we should "help" them . . . you need to realize there is nothing that can be done to cure the mental health issues. They are a permanent defect that can't be fixed. Other than restraining them in mental health wards, or forcibly drugging them into zombie-like states, the mentally ill will do what they are going to do. I am speaking as the sister of a schizophrenic here; my parents spent decades and $$ trying to "help" to no avail. It is very sad, but it is a fact, and people need to come to grips with that fact, and decide what measures are warranted to keep the rest of the public safe.

But of course no one will say it out loud or all the human rights orgs will go crazy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’d been arrested 42 times.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12045021/Eric-Adams-starts-war-words-AOC-Jordan-Neely-death.html

Time for him to be off the streets
It’s the government who refused to do anything about him in danger. Sad that a man will suffer though he tried to help

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he was dangerous and needed to be subdued. Why wouldn't someone understand that?

He didn’t do anything dangerous

How do you know? We’re you there?

There have been several statements collected by witnesses, if you have been keeping up. Yes, he was yelling and screaming.

This is not a crime. If it were, I’d be entitled to choke out your brats when they have a tantrum in public. I’m honestly shocked and sickened by the attitudes here. Do we live in Minority Report, where people can be killed for futurecrime?

Not at all surprised it was a Marine who killed him. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I have read a number of articles about this and watched an interview with the man who took the video. In his interview (in Spanish with a translator), he did note that the man had not assaulted anyone (although you could argue that throwing trash at people might be assault). The witness did, however, note that he was frightened by the man. He also said, in a comment that I found very telling, that if the police had come five minutes earlier, the marine would have been hailed as a hero. I think the fact that two other men were helping the marine subdue the man speaks to the fact that they genuinely viewed his behavior as a threat.

Of course whether they went too far is the question, and it sounds like the force used was excessive.

I ride the NY subway every day, and encounter loud, erratically behaving people regularly. If I deem one of them to be an actual potential threat (and the vast majority are not), I move further down the car, or switch cars. Removing oneself from the threat is the appropriate, and usual, tactic.

The fact that you normalize the necessity to get away from people who pose danger is very telling
It shouldn’t be like that in a civilized country

[Anonymous]

If more of this happened they wouldnt act up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This - the mentally ill roaming the streets - is such an intractable problem. Many on this thread saying they need "help," we should "help" them . . . you need to realize there is nothing that can be done to cure the mental health issues. They are a permanent defect that can't be fixed. Other than restraining them in mental health wards, or forcibly drugging them into zombie-like states, the mentally ill will do what they are going to do. I am speaking as the sister of a schizophrenic here; my parents spent decades and $$ trying to "help" to no avail. It is very sad, but it is a fact, and people need to come to grips with that fact, and decide what measures are warranted to keep the rest of the public safe.

Yes I really struggle with this lately. I have a friend who is essentially slowly killing herself between mental illness and substance abuse. My heart is breaking every day and I have tried everything that I can do. She refuses help, as in she won't even try. I don't know what the answer is. I understand that folks have personal freedom and I don't want to go back 50 plus years when folks were hospitalized for a long time and treated horribly. But I feel like there should be some middle ground, but maybe it isn't possible.

They shouldn’t be treated horribly but they should be locked up