Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
How about an opinion from someone with no dog in the hunt?
|
I spent time as an armed occupier myself. Some of that time was doing what the MPs call "detainee operations". If I have a dog in this hunt, as it were, I'm coming from the viewpoint of the guy with a uniform, a weapon, a ton of buddies and the ability to literally write history by being the one to report the official version of the truth, with a ton of buddies to corroborate. Yet even with those duties and ability to act with impunity, I behaved the way I always had. Similarly to when people get old, they don't get crazy, they just become more fully themselves.
I was Chauvin. I was the armed guy in charge of the other armed guys, one who valued my guys' lives very highly; much more than I valued the locals' lives. I'm not ashamed of that- you can't have an army without "us" and "them" being baked into everyone from day one. And coming from a career that devalues the lives of everyone who doesn't wear the same uniform, I still can't come up with a story that makes Chauvin's actions reasonable. I can't even come up with one that makes them excusable.
All I'm asking is to examine Chauvin's actions. With Floyd in cuffs and on the ground, I can't come up with an excuse, much less a legitimate reason to kneel on his neck. I've never felt threatened by someone in restraints and I've never felt threatened even in a crowd as long as one of my guys had me covered. Killing or maiming a cuffed guy who hops up and charges you is child's play. Stopping a cuffed guy trying to hop up and get away is almost as easy, and would be much more entertaining. There are easier and safer (for the armed guy) ways to keep a cuffed guy on the ground than kneeling on his neck.
So let's stop focusing on backstories. I saw in the news that they had worked at the same place, saw that they had "butted heads" and saw that
that person retracted his statement.
That's why I brought in the dog. Bringing Floyd's backstory into it is a distraction, because it's not relevant to the incident. Bringing Chauvin's backstory into it by introducing a relationship to Floyd takes it up to first degree murder because now you're making it look premeditated.
Let's simply look at what happened: Police responded to a report of a nonviolent crime. Four officers cuffed one man, and the senior officer knelt on the cuffed man's neck until well after that man died. The other officers audibly protested, but they did not have enough seniority to have enough confidence to protest more effectively. I agree they are legally liable for Floyd's death, but I am saddened by it.
They were overawed by the officer who had been on the force for 19 years. They should have done better, but they deferred to seniority and are suffering for it.
But we aren't rookie Minneapolis cops at a crime scene with a 19 year veteran. It's clear why the new guys acted the way they did, but why did the 19 year veteran in charge of them act the way he did?