That is good for you but I hope you never find yourself having to make that decision.  People always talk a good game until they are the victim.  I have seen this time and again so I will not question what you will or will not do.  

On the bolded point, that is the difference you just do not get.  It has nothing to do with his past, it has everything to do with the moment.  His past is not what got him killed.  Even if he was drunk and on drugs should not be something that gets him killed.  The difference between your mentality is that you just accept his death because its easy.  Floyd was a bad guy so he deserve to die but a lot of people just see the situation as another murder by a police officer.

I can see you never had the fear that you might do or say the wrong thing in front of a cop and then you are dead.  You might move the wrong way, misunderstand some instruction, do nothing or do to much.  You never had to worry about a cop following you for blocks because they thought you were in the wrong neighborhood, pull you over for some BS and then threaten you with their guns drawn before ever asking you a question.  Your whole world revolves around never experiencing what a lot of people of color face every day.  They deserve what they got because "Fill in the blank".

Either way, I am not putting any defense for Floyd more than I am getting tired of police officers being able to get off with murder.  People pick and choose their cases to defend but this isn't something that just happen but an on going occurrence that has been happening for decades.  The only difference between today is that everyone has a device that can record video and upload to reach millions of people.

Social media is the culprit because people see video constantly on abuse of power either real or imagine.  Its a situation that put police on notice that the good old times when just your word was enough to send people to prison or justify killing someone is over.  I would more than happy to pay for better equipment for police officers to be able to do their job without having always resort to lethal force but with mindsets like yours, it will never occur because you will always defend the death because you will always find something where that person death is justified.

Now that you've been having a conversation on this thread for the last page, I believe you can see that it is possible.

Murder may be the wrong charge here, but I find it remarkable that you regard Kyle Rittenhouse as some kind of noble martyr morally superior to, and more persecuted than, George Floyd. I feel that there is genuine reason to believe that Rittenhouse is, in fact, a white supremacist. I say this as someone who does NOT embrace today's liberalized definition of the term "white supremacy" that really doesn't mean anything or carry any weight anymore. No, I mean that he's been known to the use white power signs and hang out with Proud Boys. It also wasn't even his community. He went out of his way. With a gun. He was there to cause trouble. And cause trouble he did. Two people wound up dead who were not him. Now as anyone does, he had a right not to be maimed or killed, but I mean...THIS is your great hero?

People like you are why I'm not a conservative and never will be.

I highly, highly, doubt I would, as it's far, far more likely that the kid would be the cop in this situation if they were one of the two. 'You don't know yourself', or 'I know you better then you do', especially in this context, says a lot. As I said it wasn't a political response. No talk, just game. You screw up, you pay some price. That's how the world works, and it ain't perfect.

Something said by sports coaches is, "what you do in a practice, you'll do in a game", and they mean it, because it's mostly true. Which is really saying what you do now will greatly impact your future. To say the present has no or little connection to the past isn't being wise or honest. Why did the media constantly bring up Chauvin's past, if that had nothing whatsoever to do with the situation? Could it be because they were onto something, or maybe it's just fake news?

Don't break the law, don't deal with the police. There's another saying that you might have heard before. It goes something like, "f*ck around and find out". Mess with drugs and the cops and it might not end well. 'Peacefully' protest around the cops and it might not end well. Don't get vaxed, or do get vaxed, and you still might get covid and have people pre celebrate your death, especially for past, unrelated reasons. Now I'm not a fan on this mindset, but some are.

Some criminals are dealt with to harshly, some not harshly enough. Some police take things to far, others are basically useless. Now how to make them all perfectly balanced individuals? Where did I say it was completely acceptable that Floyd died? Where did I say Chauvin was completely innocent and should've walked? When did the world become one or the other, because that's not the world I live in.

Another difference, since there's obviously many, not one, is that the media constantly spins the truth or flat out leaves out vital facts that completely change the narrative, and way too many people buy into it. Then those who expose that, typically on social media, get silenced. Social media has fixed everything? It seems it led to a mass defunding of the police, which led to an unfathomable increase of crime across the nation, mostly in cities, which coincidentally eventually led to the police being refunded again. Around and around we go on the carousel of progress.

Well you said earlier that, "It doesn't matter if another factor played a part, if your actions were the ones to push that person over the edge."

-Based on that:

-If another cop had egged Chauvin on, then how can anyone be certain that Chauvin would've knelt on Floyd regardless? The verifiable cause for the kneeling would have been the other cops negligent idea he pushed on Chauvin. Kneeling on someone's back or neck doesn't magically cause them to pass out or die either, which is why so many police manuals had that as a tactic and why you never hear about it being a problem.

-Floyd kept saying he couldn't breathe when standing, which the police didn't seem to believe, since it was tied to Floyd apparently feeling claustrophobic. Well when the cop put down the window to fix that problem, Floyd immediately calmed down for a few seconds, then started saying he couldn't breathe again for no apparent reason. So, if the cops had pushed Floyd into the back seat, and didn't get him medical attention immediately while on the way to the station, if Floyd passed out and died (while medical attention was surely called at this point), wouldn't the cops have been negligent? Floyd did say he couldn't breathe multiple times prior.

-Well who doesn't know you can still spread covid once vaxed, while wearing a mask? The vax reduces symptoms, to the point you don't show any for some people, so wouldn't it be negligent to be around people without knowing their medical condition so as not to potentially spread covid to them? If someone walks around saying, 'I'm weak', or 'I'm unhealthy', does that provide the right to sue or press charges if it's possible they caught covid from you?

If intent matters so much, then Chauvin shouldn't have faced trial at all. Obviously it doesn't in some cases, which is why I proposed some. The point is, being charged and potentially facing jail time for these kind of things seems insane. Especially the fact that if someone is practically on their death bed, if you accidentally do something to push them over the edge you can pay a terrible price. That's foam padding on every corner and edge everywhere thinking.

Then what the heck are you saying.  No spinning in circles just be clear and concise. 

Stop with the media BS, that is the crux you always go back on.  No one needs the media to see injustice, there is tons of proof that police abuse their power and there is tons of proof that show that police will continue to protect those that do because they have the mentality its US against them.  Social media is why we are hear, as I stated, because video can be upload and shared to millions whether true or false it doesn't really make a difference but because of social media, the police must change.  They will always have a spotlight on them and they should because they continue to protect the bad apples that infest their ranks.  Social media isn't a fix for anything, instead its the new world we live in.  Information at the speed of light.  You have a problem with police being defunded, I personally believe that everyone is not cut out to be a police officer.  That every situation does not need an armed person with a twitchy finger for every incident.  That every incident doesn't have to escalate to death because someone moved the wrong way.

I tend to wonder the same thing much of the time, but not everyone speaks or understands every word and phrase of every language. It's been implied that's it's better to just shut up instead of ever responding, but it seems that only applies to specific side. I've also been told silence is violence though.

If the media can't be used, then we're at a standstill. A form of media as a point for you but not for me? Then again, unless you think instant information without explanation of the context is always a good thing, since everyone always understands everything, especially when many only bother to consume a small portion at the start or finish, then instantly comment on it, not even attempting to understand the whole, then maybe it's good it was brought up.

Social media doesn't mean much as to anyone having to change. Plenty have given the middle finger to social media and continue on doing whatever they did prior, regardless. Some face a form of punishment for what they did, but how many people, groups, or businesses actually change? How many change and change back, like defunding then refunding the police? Not to mention how little good it does overall when it comes to changing politicians for the better. The growing alternative social media platforms also tend to have a different take on many matters. It's unwise to disregard the minorities point of view.

So, I think all police are great and shouldn't be punished like defunding, and you think some might be bad apples? What? Didn't you highlight where I said, "some police take things to far, others are basically useless". "Now how to make them all perfectly balanced individuals?" What's unclear about that? 

As for this idea that's been going around where you send someone other than a police officer, how many unarmed professionals have to show up to help, leading to their injury or death, before they require a cop by their side at all times anyway? How long before the unarmed professionals won't do it at all, or unless they have weapons and basic training? How long before you've basically got two cops dealing with situations again anyway?

Think about it this way. You pretty much have to send a cop to make a judgement call initially just in case it requires deadly force, potentially immediately. You can't send someone unarmed who get's blown away instantly. Ok, so now you want a potentially stupid, useless, racist cop, to make a decision on whether the police or another professional should handle the situation? You really trust them to make the right judgement call? If the cop chooses a professional, and that person shows up but unexpectedly get's blown away anyway, is it the cops fault? What if social media decides it is? What's the next policing solution?

If you ban guns, people just start using knives. You ban knives, and people start using bow and arrow. Eventually it ends up sticks and stones. The answer is to understand and respect guns, just like better understanding and respecting of the police. That's about as good as it get's. You go after the police or guns, you get sky high crime and stabbings that just replace them.

Citizens have to do their best to respect the police, and the police have to do their best to respect citizens. If the morals and rules aren't working to accomplish that, besides rare accidents and mistakes, then they need to be adjusted or better enforced by the people. If that somehow can't be accomplished, I'd suggest moving elsewhere that's more receptive, or not a problem to begin with. An out of control fire will eventually burn itself out.

-So who would be more at fault, or would they be equally at fault? If Chauvin is clearly less guilty in this scenario lets say, but the people seem furious and want hard time, does that get to influence the trial whatsoever?

-Restraining people in certain ways is dangerous, so we shouldn't do it. Ok then. Crime is dangerous so we shouldn't do it. Policing is dangerous so we shouldn't do it. Visual recordings or written history of your thought's and opinions is dangerous, so we shouldn't do it. Yet it still happens, a lot.

-I'd say based on the narrative of the Floyd situation, they'd definitely be seen as negligent in this situation, so those cops may have been screwed either way. We don't know for certain if Floyd would've had life threatening breathing problems on his own accord, but based on the shape Floyd was in, he very well could've. Nothing like potentially being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

-Intent doesn't really matter with the law you brought up. It's for unintentional accidents. Which should certainly mean that passing covid to someone else with some type of condition, causing harm, because of negligence, should lead to punishment. I'd like to say your medical situation is legally no one's business, so how could anyone be expected to know, but that's clearly not the case today where you're excluded from gatherings or close quarters without providing medical status.

-The action wasn't intended to kill Floyd. Floyd already wasn't in good condition. If a plane is in flight has a slight problem, and the pilot makes a decision to deal with it, and let's assume based on the situation they're likely screwed no matter what they do, and the plane crashes killing some on board. Is the pilot going to be charged here? Sully's Hudson landing only had a few people injured, one seriously, and it was investigated but I don't believe he ever was on trial. Based on this law it's hard to believe it wasn't used against him, unless perhaps everyone on board was deemed Master Chief crash proof.

It just seems crazy to me. I personally think Chauvin should've been punished in some way, as I believe he took it to far, but I don't think the cops truly understood Floyd's poor condition at that point. I don't see why kicking him off the force and pulling his badge for good wouldn't have sufficed.

The problem is how terrible US cops are. Poorly vetted, poorly trained, and poor professionalism. Instead of professional law enforcement, they act like a gang of goons who tamper with evidence and maintain a culture of oppression over certain communities. What a police force should be is not some kind of brotherhood, but a professional department responsible for maintaining the law - if they see one of their own breaking the law, they need to apprehend them, not help cover the tracks.

Poorly vetted - I mean violent racists and murderers get into US police forces. People of low moral standing, low intelligence, people who have no business being anywhere near a gun let alone being an armed police officer.

Poorly trained - they made fun of this on The Simpsons, but apparently the truth is even worse. No legal degree, nothing like that. Some police are trained for just a few weeks in the US. It takes longer in many countries to acquire a license to drive than it does to become an armed police officer in the US.

Rittenhouse case will be interesting because two main factors intersect. 1) Antifa/anarchist rioters are regime proxies and the regime protects them so you would expect a guilty verdict for Rittenhouse 2) BUT Rittenhouse might get away solely because he shot white lefties and those are disposable useful idiots for the Empire with no racial standing. No golden casket for Rosenbaum and Huber, that much is for sure. 

Not sure what any of this really means but Rittenhouse will get off because its not an open and shut case of murder.  The Prosecution went for the wrong crime and thus he will definitely walk.  Even though he may walk on this part, there could be a civil suit that comes up that would be interesting to see.  Everything is not over for Rittenhouse and his family.