|
>Liang as being in actuality how he was represented, as an >'accidental shooter', vs. say, a purposeful strangler. If it's >true, and they believed it to be true, that Liang shot his gun >in a panic in the staircase and the ricochet killed Akai >Gurley with no intent to kill someone, how do you compare that >to the deliberate choking of somebody to death? This is the >logic they are viewing the case within.
Well you start with the fact that they both ended in death of innocent people. You continue with the fact that trained officers should have done neither. Fuck that stupid logic and their hair and nail shops. Shoulda starved 'em out.
>"given all the recent deaths in NYC and nation-wide, why is >the Asian cop the only officer to get charged?" was their >question
That's their "message"? So again, were they fighting for all to get punished, or were they fighting for him to get off like the rest of them?
>it's a myopic, stupid, narrow-minded viewpoint, since it does >not consider the egregiously violated rights of Akai Gurley >and other victims of the police, nor does it consider the >larger scale brutality against Black people in America by the >judicial system.
^^^You're really talking sense right here.
>The protest against Liang's charges should >have been considered in a more humane light. These people >should have been advised against their protests and made to >see that Liang was wrong and should face consequences. But
But? Can't believe there's a "but" after all that. Lemme finish tho...
to >say they were, in fact, fighting for their own personal right >to kill Black people is so inflammatory I can't just read it >and not respond to it.
Good lord. We acknowledge folks completely disrespecting and devaluing our lives and still gotta defend them. The sickness is real. They were, in fact, fighting for his right to kill niggras as freely as any white cop. It doesn't sound good, because it isn't. That's how the truth is tho.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Days like this I miss Sha Mecca
|