Which use of the LVNR caused "1 month of protest and billions of dollars lost"?
The cops involved wanted him to pass out but killed him instead.
In law enforcement, the cop is both fighter and referee. And the decision to get paramedics and when to get them also belongs to the cop.
Imagine a Jiu-Jitsu competition where you were fighting one or multiple referees, where they were armed with both lethal and non-lethal weapons. Now, imagine all those referees belonged to a union that maintains a code of silence in case they break the rules. Imagine that once you lose the match, they can continue beating you down and never call paramedics. That would be a closer comparison.
Blood chokes can kill if sustained, and they are not safe to perform on random people. No other police force in the world requires such an agressive use of chokeholds.
Even if you solved the chokehold problem you would be still left with: excessive force, blatant inefficiency, racism, arrest quotas, rapists, stupid legislation, lack of accountability, inadequate training, plus a complete lack of proportionality and common sense... A complete shitshow. Plus a fucking passive aggresive portion of the citizenry that uses 911 to harass minorities.
And to your point about referee: the cop isn't a referee. They're just another fighter. And if they lose, there's no ref to stop the person from seriously hurting or killing them. Combine this with the fact that most cops are just average people with little to no hand to hand combat experience, aside from a few confidence booster sessions at the police academy.
I think cops deserve a lot of criticism. But let's make it constructive criticism. If we're going to take something out of their toolbox, let's at least clearly define realistic tools they can use.
This is a good point that goes over some of the misconceptions that people may have about the level of training and proficiency of police.
>I think cops deserve a lot of criticism. But let's make it constructive criticism.
Or at least logically consistent criticism
Maybe, but then the point is that the referee is their friend. If I go and punch a police officer, I'm going to the jail. If the police officer comes and punches me out of nothing, good luck having a fair investigation and trial. The police department will cover their actions, avoid releasing the information they have. Maybe the officer face cannot be seen on the available footage because they have a full helmet and the police department refuses to say their name, so the judge cannot (or does not want) judge them guilty on the ground we cannot be sure who they are. I don't have all these protections, but they do. This means that have effectively become the referee as well.
I'm totally in favour of giving the police the exclusive usage of force when this is required, but they should as well stand the responsibility of its misuse. Nowadays they get the former but not the latter, and this is terribly unfair.
I see lots of people saying cops shouldn't be allowed to use chokes, but they never provide a reasonable alternative. I'd rather see cops using chokeholds than shooting unarmed people.