A Dangerous Misconception of Force
How the trial of Derek Chauvin perpetuates the unnecessary use of force
Derek Chauvin’s defense attorney did what he’s supposed to do in trying to defend his client. In a trial like this one, the well-worn strategy is to shift the blame from the actions of the murderer, Chauvin, to the behavior and the past of the deceased, Floyd. Thankfully, that didn’t work.
But as so often happens in a high-profile case, the merits of the prosecution and defense spill out into the public domain and discussion ensues. The battle is for control of the narrative. And many continue to opine, as they always have, on something they know nothing about.
Conspiracy theorist Andrew McCarthy of the ‘nominally intellectual’ National Review is a prime example. McCarthy, who’s likely never been in a restraint, suggests he knows what he’s talking about when he says that Floyd “forcibly resisted arrest.”
His evidence for this claim? Because four officers couldn’t force Floyd into a squad car.
Before we take apart McCarthy’s flawed logic on his spin of the events we have to ask; Why is he so invested in siding with the police? Why does McCarthy try to split hairs over Floyd’s last words as he does here?
