Current Events > The marine that killed a homeless man in NYC will be getting charged

(+) Yeah! (+)

Everyone justifying this should be banned

hockeybub89 posted...

Everyone justifying this should be banned

forever banned.

I need a goddamn manager!

InfinityMonster posted...

It's pretty hypocritical asking for reform and then getting mad it also applies to people you don't like. Especially when you have no idea how the process works. People want to go back to the old ways where he would have been immediately charged with murder and thrown in Rikers

Yes, Yes I do. It not hypocritical to want people to be treated the same. I am for reform. When it is kind of funny that the only people who get the benefit of these reforms are people like that Ex-Marine. We literally have the gov. of Texas giving a pardon to another other vet who said he was going to kill an BLM protesters and went out and killed a black lives matter protester. Also to go to think the NYC is easy on crime ha.

cjsdowg posted...

Yes, Yes I do. It not hypocritical to want people to be treated the same. I am for reform. When it is kind of funny that the only people who get the benefit of these reforms are people like that Ex-Marine. We literally have the gov. of Texas giving a pardon to another other vet who said he was going to kill an BLM protesters and went out and killed a black lives matter protester. Also to go to think the NYC is easy on crime ha.

Everything you just said was completely wrong and uninformed. Low information nonsense.

Why the fuck would anybody go back to the old ways when it would negatively affect minorities more? Dumb as fuck.

Yes, only Marines benefit /s. This Marine was held on $100k bail when there's been no bail for manslaughter in the second degree since 2020. Your narrative is complete BS. A black man on parole choked his 15 year old stepson to death a bit back and was arrested, but a judge ordered him released. So no.

Yes, Jordan Neely and Daniel Penny are both proof of how lightly things are taken. Explain to me why some guy was able to beat and fracture the skull of a 67 year old woman, after tons of other priors, and was able to just walk away from it all?

Also, Texas has absolutely nothing to do with NY's laws, so it was a completely irrelevant thing to bring up.

InfinityMonster posted...

Everything you just said was completely wrong and uninformed. Low information nonsense

Show me were someone is on video choking someone to death, in the middle of a train and the police let him go that night.

cjsdowg posted...

Show me were someone is on video choking someone to death, in the middle of a train and the police let him go that night.

You have 24 hours to charge in NY and there were tons of witnesses there that gave their own accounts of him being dangerous, as well as two other men, one black as well, assisting in restraining.

They immediately started an investigation and instead of fucking it all up, they let him go, but likely told him to expect charges, hence why immediately got a lawyer. Penny was obviously not a danger to anyone, since the video and the witnesses would have shown that.

They eliminated this shit so people wouldn't have to suffer rotting in Rikers if they weren't actually dangerous, and you want this one person to go through that because??? Reform means reforms. It's not selective.

Anymore dumb shit you want to say?

InfinityMonster posted...

You have 24 hours to charge in NY and there were tons of witnesses there that gave their own accounts of him being dangerous, as well as two other men, one black as well, assisting in restraining.

They immediately started an investigation and instead of fucking it all up, they let him go, but likely told him to expect charges, hence why immediately got a lawyer. Penny was obviously not a danger to anyone, since the video and the witnesses would have shown that.

They eliminated this shit so people wouldn't have to suffer rotting in Rikers if they weren't actually dangerous, and you want this one person to go through that because??? Reform means reforms. It's not selective.

Anymore dumb shit you want to say?

Don't expect anyone on CE to think rationally.

He can get quite a lawyer with that

hockeybub89 posted...

Everyone justifying this should be banned

How come then that no one has brought up the fact that Neely has had 42 prior arrests, many for violence and including the kidnapping of a 7 year old?

Did he deserve to die? No. Am I sad that he did? Also no.

Edit: the marine also put him in a recovery position and was still breathing:

https://twitter.com/stclairashley/status/1655362877035802626?t=wXlbcDHjYk5E3LFUD--fCw&s=19

AI_TechGam3FAQS posted...

He can get quite a lawyer with that

chewbacca defense.

Nazanir posted...

How come then that no one has brought up the fact that Neely has had 42 prior arrests, many for violence and including the kidnapping of a 7 year old?

Did he deserve to die? No. Am I sad that he did? Also no.

Because that's all fucking irrelevant.

"He didn't deserve to die, but nobody will miss him" is implicitly defending extrajudicial killing.

And this is where people get cute and say shit like "Why are you defending a career criminal like he's a perfect angel? ... but I totally think it was a bit rude that someone killed him."

From my understanding this is entirely dependent on whether or not the force the marine guy applied to Neely was more than what he should have considered reasonable.

If true, that might be a bit difficult to pinpoint.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Stop defending murder just because the victim was a criminal. I thought we couldn't hurt people for saying words, no matter how hateful or hurtful, but now killing them before they can hurt anyone is a-ok?

Maybe some century the human race will stop acting like savages.

We might as well abolish the concept of justice, maybe just abolish society. We're just gorillas with cellphones.

Neely could have been a serial killer. Vigilantes are still bad for society.

hockeybub89 posted...

Stop defending murder just because the victim was a criminal. I thought we couldn't hurt people for saying words, no matter how hateful or hurtful, but now killing them before they can hurt anyone is a-ok?

Maybe some century the human race will stop acting like savages.

We might as well abolish the concept of justice, maybe just abolish society. We're just gorillas with cellphones.

Neely could have been a serial killer. Vigilantes are still bad for society.

hockeybub89 posted...

Stop defending murder just because the victim was a criminal. I thought we couldn't hurt people for saying words, no matter how hateful or hurtful, but now killing them before they can hurt anyone is a-ok?

Maybe some century the human race will stop acting like savages.

We might as well abolish the concept of justice, maybe just abolish society. We're just gorillas with cellphones.

People are bringing up his history to show that the threatening shit he was saying to people in the enclosed cart was not without merit. That he really could have hurt them, especially when he has hurt tons of other people. This is not vigilantism. It's people reacting in self-preservation, especially when there was a mass shooting in the subways last year.

It doesn't justify murder, which is why everything shown so far points to manslaughter. Saying otherwise is being dishonest and you know it.

Some people really just want to live in a purge world where anyone can just decide to kill anyone else and it's okay.

Good. There was no reason to kill that man.

Punching Nazis is bad

And also choking the fuck out of a homeless guy saying mean words on a subway for 5+ minutes until he fucking dies is fine

Conservative shitposter logic, all of these clowns should be banned immediately

The question to ask is: would someone have been justified in using deadly force to stop Penny from choking Neely to death?

BurmesePenguin posted...

From my understanding this is entirely dependent on whether or not the force the marine guy applied to Neely was more than what he should have considered reasonable.

If true, that might be a bit difficult to pinpoint.

I think its more so if he had him in a choke hole after they guy stopped moving.

He may have been tunnel visioned and not noticed, he did put him in the recovery position btw

DarthAragorn posted...

Punching Nazis is bad

And also choking the fuck out of a homeless guy saying mean words on a subway for 5+ minutes until he fucking dies is fine

Conservative shitposter logic, all of these clowns should be banned immediately

InfinityMonster posted...

People continuing to frame it as just some erratic behavior and not threatening to kill people in an enclosed cart, to the point he would serve a life sentence, are 100% being dishonest. He didn't deserve to die, but there's no reason to downplay things.

Antifar posted...

The question to ask is: would someone have been justified in using deadly force to stop Penny from choking Neely to death?

Nope. It's a pretty irrelevant question. The person initiating the threats loses their self defense protection. Otherwise if someone tries to fight back with an attacker, and is killed by the attacker, the attacker can just claim self defense.

This doesn't mean you get to kill the aggressor, at least in this situation, which is why he's being charged with manslaughter. It does however allow you to restrain.

He should be exonerated and apologized to. The victim wasnt "saying mean words".

the correct move here is to subdue him and call the cops thats it this guy went vigilante judge jury and executioner def deserved to be charged

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

lol

pikakaeru posted...

He should be exonerated and apologized to. The victim wasnt "saying mean words".

You can restrain someone without chocking them to death. What the marine did is a maneuver that the NYPD is banned from even using. Because it kills

Zikten posted...

You can restrain someone without chocking them to death. What the marine did is a maneuver that the NYPD is banned from even using. Because it kills

maybe, but he was probably not intending to kill the guy and was just afraid for everyone else in the cab

pikakaeru posted...

maybe, but he was probably not intending to kill the guy and was just afraid for everyone else in the cab

He had no reason to be afraid. And he should not have used a banned chokehold.

Zikten posted...

He had no reason to be afraid.

wrong. guy said he would "kill a motherfucker" and "I don't care if I go to jail for life"
I would be afraid for my life if I was there.

pikakaeru posted...

lol

Tagged.

Zikten posted...

He had no reason to be afraid. And he should not have used a banned chokehold.

And you determined that how? You live in Alaska my dude, and have said you have minimal life experience. The other people actually there certainly took his threats seriously.

It's banned for the police because they have a higher threshold and ability to restrain. That doesn't apply to regular people.

Also, if Penny was really out to kill someone, he could have ended him in under a minute. If you watch the video, Neely is still struggling the whole time, and it's when Penny and the other guy go harder in holding him, that Neely finally stops struggling.

The manslaughter comes from the extra 40 seconds Penny held on. That is where the other guy is explaining what's happening, and then they realize it's been too long and they check that he's limp and immediately get off and put him in recovery.

Zikten posted...

He had no reason to be afraid.

Horribly unempathetic.

pikakaeru posted...

wrong. guy said he would "kill a motherfucker" and "I don't care if I go to jail for life"
I would be afraid for my life if I was there.

So does this mean that cops can start shooting people for words? If a politician says something threatening or violent, can people choke them out for it?

People say horrible and threatening shit literally every day without even being touched, let alone killed.

It really doesn't even matter if the dude was a threat or wasn't a threat. That's not carte blanche to improperly hold someone until they die. There's nothing wrong with temporarily using a hold like that to neutralize a threat, but then it's the restrainer's responsibility to fix the restraint once the threat is neutralized.

When the best defense of this dude is "he was too fucking stupid to realize choking a man for 3 to 5 minutes" you should realize he's a piece of shit that belongs in prison

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I was clearly referring to determining the threat.

DarthAragorn posted...

When the best defense of this dude is "he was too fucking stupid to realize choking a man for 3 to 5 minutes" you should realize he's a piece of shit that belongs in prison

Why don't you stop being dishonest with your "just mean words" nonsense and at least watch the fucking video. Neely is struggling and about to get out the entire fucking time. They all move in for an extra hard push to keep him down. He finally stops struggling with that move, but they kept holding him 40 seconds too long, which is why it's manslaughter.

hockeybub89 posted...

So does this mean that cops can start shooting people for words? If a politician says something threatening or violent, can people choke them out for it?

People say horrible and threatening shit literally every day without even being touched, let alone killed.

If you can't retreat and someone is screaming they're going to kill you, whether a politician or not, then yes, people will be in the right to restrain that person.

New Yorkers need to continue protesting to demand the other guys who helped, get arrested too

Zikten posted...

New Yorkers need to continue protesting to demand the other guys who helped, get arrested too

Lmao, Bragg is not gonna commit career suicide. Is this is what people from Alaska actually think?

Man some people really just want to live in a world where just existing warrants killing someone.