This debate won't be able to proceed until we can get the whole: " there was never a chokehold" narrative out of the way.
"Lawrence Kobilinsky, a forensic scientist and professor at New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice, says that the chokehold he saw in the Garner video had the potential to be deadly. It seemingly cuts off the airway, which can lead to a condition called asphyxia -- which includes unconsciousness and suffocation, by cutting off one's oxygen supply -- "and ultimately cardiac arrest and death."
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/04/us/eric-garner-chokehold-debate/
And did you conveniently ignore this fact.
"In order for a "lateral vascular neck restraint" shouldn't it require the crook of the elbow be positioned over the mid of the neck (to prevent it becoming an air choke)? In this case, if you look at the videos, the crook of his elbow was definitely positioned to the side of the neck and his wrist was placed firmly where the throat is." Ergo (the banned) air choke hold.
Also, where did you read that a lateral vascular (blood choke hold) restraint was allowed by the NYPD anyway? I can't find that anywhere where it's mentioned to be an allowed method in restraining suspects. All I'm seeing is that choke holds in general are not allowed.
There are literally other fronts that actually have legit debating points but this forced false narrative has got to go.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
