Freddie Gray

[NCRAVEN]

The only knives that are illegal in MD are switchblades and gravity blades. When I am back east, I always carry my karambit since the state still has some backwards concealed carry laws.

So I am also assuming he had one of those two knives in his possession. If he didn't, they're going to have a hard time explaining why he was arrested in the first place.

How do you get that on the plane?

[JAB1985]

:word

He reportedly was flailing about in the back of the paddy wagon. He may have done it to himself.

I cant imagine a person doing that to themselves willingly. if he was having convulsions of some sort I could. thats something that they need to figure out, if they can.

[HoustonRaven]

How do you get that on the plane?

I put it in my checked bag.

[HoustonRaven]

I cant imagine a person doing that to themselves willingly. if he was having convulsions of some sort I could. thats something that they need to figure out, if they can.

I don't think he did it to himself on purpose. It's rather common for prisoners to flail about after an arrest. I"ve had more than one person kick out the widow of a cruiser, one breaking his own leg in the process.

Watch a few episodes of Cops and you'll see it happens rather often.

[HoustonRaven]

thats what I dont get. I didnt know the term for it, but that flick of your wrist is just as easy and fast, and almost every knife ive ever used you can do that with. as far as being dangerous, arent they all the same? wouldnt blade size be more determining of that?

If the walking dead has taught me anything its that a Katana is highly deadly... based on their law stating that "if not distinctly mentioned as illegal, all other blades are legal to open or conceal carry." wouldnt that mean you could conceal carry one of those? Just seems like a really dumb law.

MD's knife laws are not so much dumb as they are as old and archaic. Blade length is more about conceal-lability (if that's even a word) than lethality. My karambit has a 3" blade but is hella sharp. In many ways, it will kill you quicker than say a Bowie Knife.

As to what you can carry, yes, as long as it's not a switchblade or a gravity knife, you can carry it openly or conceal it.

[blah3]

yeah... they found the only thing they could arrest him for, after the fact. it was found in his pocket. so the whole chasing him and arresting him is still questionable in the first place imo. I dont see probable cause. I really dont like the idea of not being able to run in certain areas without fear that the police will chase you. thatll start opening up some race profiling issues as well, imo.

I think we are focusing on the wrong things here. The guy ran from cops. That justifies the chase. Now many may not think so, but as another poster pointed out, what if the cops didn't? It's called policing. If they didn't police the area, they would be called out for not caring about high crime areas.
He was arrested for having a switch blade. Which is illegal. Now you may or may not agree with the law, but it is the law.
There is also no indication of race being a factor in the chase and arrest.

Now, the thing to focus on is how the man was injured, apparently in the van. Seems to me the likely two options are 'rough ride' or the man flailed around angrily and hurt himself..

[JAB1985]

I don't think he did it to himself on purpose. It's rather common for prisoners to flail about after an arrest. I"ve had more than one person kick out the widow of a cruiser, one breaking his own leg in the process.

Watch a few episodes of Cops and you'll see it happens rather often.

Ive seen that and dont doubt that, but enough to sever your own spine? that sounds involuntary or an outside action to me. If were talking about a head trauma, bruises or even a broken limb id say, yeah thats rather plausible to be self inflicted. severed spine just seems a bit much to me.

[HoustonRaven]

Ive seen that and dont doubt that, but enough to sever your own spine? that sounds involuntary or an outside action to me. If were talking about a head trauma, bruises or even a broken limb id say, yeah thats rather plausible to be self inflicted. severed spine just seems a bit much to me.

It wasn't completely severed. So he basically had a broken neck. I think it's plausible that if a man in handcuffs in the back of a police van (which is, in essence, a steal cage on wheels) could break any bone in his body, neck included, if they were flailing about.

[wickedsolo]

I think we are focusing on the wrong things here. The guy ran from cops. That justifies the chase.

Maybe, but the police need to exercise some form of objectivity and not conclude that every person (minority or not) that runs from police is guilty of something. I mean, I'd imagine most black people in rough areas probably would be inclined to run from the police simply because it has been engrained in them that the cops are bad and out to get them. That doesn't mean they're inherently guilty of anything.

Now many may not think so, but as another poster pointed out, what if the cops didn't? It's called policing. If they didn't police the area, they would be called out for not caring about high crime areas.
He was arrested for having a switch blade. Which is illegal. Now you may or may not agree with the law, but it is the law.
There is also no indication of race being a factor in the chase and arrest.

Now, the thing to focus on is how the man was injured, apparently in the van. Seems to me the likely two options are 'rough ride' or the man flailed around angrily and hurt himself..

I don't think race was an issue at all, but you know damn well the media is going to spin it that way and a lot of people are going to look at it that way. Perception, unfortunately, is reality in this circumstance. I mean, look at all of the people that still wildly believe that a white cop executed a surrendering Mike Brown in Ferguson.

What I don't get is why they chased after him in the first place. Him running from the cops in that neighborhood doesn't seem like enough to really go after someone unless there was something else that hasn't been divulged yet. To me, it makes a lot more sense that someone called in that Freddie Gray assaulted someone with a switch blade or threatened someone with a switch blade. Or, considering he was due in court they were actively looking for him. Or, someone reported a crime and he fit the bill of the possible culprit. Those things plus him running would be a legitimate reason to chase him down and detain him. Outside of that, it just seems odd. I mean, on average what do you think the probability is of a black guy - any black guy - running from police on a daily basis?

[wickedsolo]

It wasn't completely severed. So he basically had a broken neck. I think it's plausible that if a man in handcuffs in the back of a police van (which is, in essence, a steal cage on wheels) could break any bone in his body, neck included, if they were flailing about.

He could have landed on his head at an angle that broke it.

Completely possible.

[blah3]

Maybe, but the police need to exercise some form of objectivity and not conclude that every person (minority or not) that runs from police is guilty of something. I mean, I'd imagine most black people in rough areas probably would be inclined to run from the police simply because it has been engrained in them that the cops are bad and out to get them. That doesn't mean they're inherently guilty of anything.



I don't think race was an issue at all, but you know damn well the media is going to spin it that way and a lot of people are going to look at it that way. Perception, unfortunately, is reality in this circumstance. I mean, look at all of the people that still wildly believe that a white cop executed a surrendering Mike Brown in Ferguson.

What I don't get is why they chased after him in the first place. Him running from the cops in that neighborhood doesn't seem like enough to really go after someone unless there was something else that hasn't been divulged yet. To me, it makes a lot more sense that someone called in that Freddie Gray assaulted someone with a switch blade or threatened someone with a switch blade. Or, considering he was due in court they were actively looking for him. Or, someone reported a crime and he fit the bill of the possible culprit. Those things plus him running would be a legitimate reason to chase him down and detain him. Outside of that, it just seems odd. I mean, on average what do you think the probability is of a black guy - any black guy - running from police on a daily basis?

OK, I have to say here that this attitude assists in the perpetuation that cops are out to get blacks. I'm sure you are not purposefully doing it, but it's there. Your looking for fault in the cops for doing their job. Now, if you look at the facts, this guy probably dealt drugs. So the cops were absolutely correct in their determination that someone fleeing from cops is highly suspicious.

The focus on the chase and arrest is not helpful. They were both perfectly legitimate.

[JAB1985]

I think we are focusing on the wrong things here. The guy ran from cops. That justifies the chase. Now many may not think so, but as another poster pointed out, what if the cops didn't? It's called policing. If they didn't police the area, they would be called out for not caring about high crime areas.
He was arrested for having a switch blade. Which is illegal. Now you may or may not agree with the law, but it is the law.
There is also no indication of race being a factor in the chase and arrest.

Now, the thing to focus on is how the man was injured, apparently in the van. Seems to me the likely two options are 'rough ride' or the man flailed around angrily and hurt himself..

while agree these are the laws and thats what to focus on as far as legality, i see no problem with discussing the originating issue of why he was arrested in the first place.

running alone shouldnt be enough to simply chase them down and arrest them, imo. thats not probable cause, imo, and theyre calling it "probable suspicion" themselves so they know it isnt. people run for a lot of reasons, and it doesnt have to be "from the police" to be construed as such by the police. from what is being initially reported they had no reason other than that he was running and didnt call to him or provoke him in any way prior to him running, so how do they know it was from them? thats just opening a can of worms, imo.

Frankly if im a young man, particularly a minority, living in a high crime area, the site of police doesnt just put me at ease lately. I may want to run home. that alone is enough to get arrested these days and i have issue with that. subjecting a civilian to risk of injury for running in general, is acceptable in todays society? What that law is doing is outlawing "running" of any kind in high crime areas. we just outlawed a form of self travel. thats ridiculous to me. im surprised thats not being looked at more negatively frankly.

keep in mind i think there is a distinction here between just running and running away from police. if they didnt make contact with him prior, i view that as just running, contact for questioning or matches a description of somebody that commited a crime, thats fine by me.