Why were the police trying to disperse a crowd? The 1st amendment gives the crowd the right to be there. No sign of any looting.

Had a member of the public had done that to a policeman they would be in jail quicker than you can say flash mob. And probably beaten to a pulp.

I've had several encounters with police. It ended in several fines or handcuffs and passing the night in jail until a responsible adult pick me up next morning. Luckily no records. That was me as a drunk twenty something, my worst problem was a bit of shoulder pain after being shoved in the police car.

There's also the duty of care. Let's assume cracking his skull was an inevitable accident. If you accidentally ran over a person with your car, what happens if you leave?

PS. the one that stops to help the old man is a guy in green, that's why people respects the military.

How about this guy going after a little girl hanging flyers to support the protesters. I'm sure we will find out who he is soon enough.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/cyclist-as...c_strip_sq_hed

There was no intent to hurt him.
Of course there was a crowd. That's why the police were there, as well as what looks like the National Guard, they were just out of camera shot.
It's all on the buffalonews website.

That's my point above. Accidents happen: I ran over a child with my car. There was no intent to harm. What are my duties?

Well aI prefer my news from the BBC

The Buffalo video shows a 75-year-old man approach police officers enforcing a curfew. They then move forward, pushing him back and causing him to fall over and hit his head.
As he lies on the ground, blood is seen pouring from his ear.
The man was taken away in an ambulance and was later found to have suffered a severe head injury.
An initial statement from Buffalo Police Department said the man had "tripped" and fallen during a "skirmish involving protesters", compounding outrage at the incident on social media.
Police spokesman Jeff Rinaldo later attributed the statement to officers not directly involved in the incident, adding that when the video had emerged the two policemen who pushed the demonstrator had been suspended without pay.
On the same evening, a delivery driver in New York City was arrested 27 minutes after the city's curfew had started, despite being a key worker exempt from the curfew.

And in the Williamsburg area of the city, police were filmed charging demonstrators, throwing at least one person to the ground.
Other videos showed a man lying on the ground bleeding from the head, and being arrested.

At first glance it looked horrific, watching back a few times one sees that there was nothing in the push and it's an unfortunate accident. How bad it is depends whether one is judging by outcome or intention.

You're seriously not able to understand that the cop(s) could have just walked by that 75-year old man and didn't have to push him to the ground?

And you're seriously not able to understand the problem with none of those cops stopping to help that 75-year old man as he was lying on the ground, bleeding from his head and unresponsive, because of pushing him?

If not, then you are basically condoning fascism.

Are you at least able to understand THAT?

...and if the child was walking on the freeway in heavy traffic?

If I saw a group of heavily armed police marching towards me in the USA in the current uproar, I‘d walk away and go quietly home...

I'm not condoning the actions of the officers, but it is general policy when moving as a group to not let an outsider into the group freely for safety and security. They use the group as a bastion and pull people through for arrests.
I think that's why when one of them stopped to check on the man, another (possibly senior) grabs his arm to move him forward and then gets on the radio. I would have thought there'd be paramedics following the police group in case of injuries.

That's quite a leap to make from justifying a small push to condoning fascism. Basically the problem with current western discourse in a nutshell!

Police brutality takes place the world over, even in Switzerland. The cops are clearly attending to the man at the end of the video.

What you perceive as a small push was clearly enough to cause a 75-year old man to fall backward and hit the ground hard enough to cause his head to bleed and for him to be rendered unresponsive. He was, by the way, eventually taken away to a hospital, where he was diagnosed with a severe head injury.

I think you need to watch the video again. No, the cops are not helping him. They are more concerned with trying to arrest another protestor in front of them, who appears to be trying to rush in to help the old man. It was two men in brown military uniforms (NOT cops) who finally stop to try to help the old man.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/05/u...er-unrest.html

Also, no it is not "quite a leap." What do you THINK fascism looks like?

Because two of them were brand new on the job, one on his third day I believe. The murderer was supposed to be the senior officer tutoring them and showing them how to do their jobs... yeah, I know. I must say I somehow do feel for the rookies - they witness their boss killing a suspect in a stress situation that was new for them. Not ch an excuse to not act for nine minutes, but clearly shell shocked.

I believe that you can’t have a functioning democracy without a police force that polices at the will of the people and you don’t have that in the US today. But it also means the police men and women should not have to fear for their lives every time they go on the beat and you don’t have that either.

I expect that this problem can only be solved if the entire issue of gun control is addressed in addition to police reform. Unarmed policing works in Ireland and the UK because neither side expects to encounter lethal situations on a daily basis.

__________________
"There is no passion to be found playing small - in settling for a life that is less than the one you are capable of living." - Nelson Mandela

There's a duty to help even if a investigation establishes zero liability for the accident.

That's what the guy in military uniform do. Help an injured person.

I agree with everything you wrote. But clearly the problem is not simply that police are fearing for their lives. The cop that killed Floyd was not fearing for his life at the time, as he was kneeling on his neck and Floyd was already hand-cuffed. The cop who pushed that 75-year old protestor was not fearing for his life at the time. I think the problem is cops not being able to control their own behavior and aggression. And if you're so paranoid that you're not able to do your job without shooting or killing innocent people who don't have a gun, etc., then you shouldn't be a police officer in the first place.

Well I prefer to scour the web and get a few different view points and more context.

https://www.nytimes.com...opinion/police-riots.htmL

Ja aber...

According to this Minneapolis Star Tribue article, while they were indeed rookie officers, the three men were not exactly completely inexperienced at policing:

https://www.startribune.com/judge-75...ath/571020052/

Gray and Kueng's defense attorney, Tom Plunkett, asked the court for lower bail, saying their clients had been police officers for just four days when Floyd was killed. Police records indicate that while the men were rookies, they had more experience than a handful of days on the force. According to their records, they joined the department in February 2019 and became full officers in December. Minneapolis officers must serve a year on probation and spend time in field training with a more senior officer before they are fully qualified.