Defunding Police

The Talmud says you do. Our judicial system does not meet even the minimal standards demanded by the Torah for Noachide courts.

We’re obligated to observe the “law of the land”, regardless of whether it’s consistent with Talmudic law.

The police executed him without trial, without due process.

He died due to his failure to cooperate with the police, who were required by the situation to use force. Whether they did anything unlawful will be determined by the on-going legal process.

Oh Charlie, -“Had Geroge Floyd been a Jew, WE would be the ones rioting.”
“While US Jews don’t usually riot,…”

Hypocrisy at it’s Finest!
You were talking about American Jews.

Dear Som,
Stupidity or not, it is the reality in american slums. Among the low class, it is common to plead guilty for crimes that one did not commit, because working with the prosecution is not an option.

Dear Dovid,

“who were required by the situation to use force”

The only way you could think that, is because you were never in such a setting. There was zero reason for force. This kind of ‘failure to cooperate’ is routine. I have seen Yidden cooperating less the George Floyd did, over a parking ticket.

Dear Health,
I am not trying to give any impression of him. I am trying to say it does not matter. If you can please tell all the readers on YWN what your idea of a ‘low class nice guy on drugs’ is. (Being that you already stated elsewhere that you would give them all a death sentence. I am still hoping you will walk that one back.) They do stupid and violent things. Which is why there are laws against drug use.

Dear Health,
No manipulation here. Rather, a two line biography may be helpful. Rav Yosef Babad wrote a comprehensive manuscript on the laws of the Noahides. He quotes it often in the Minchas Chinuch. It was never published, and is assumed to be lost.

I could try to look it up.

It is a safe assumption that a human witness must be a bystander, not a participant.

Do you think anyone could just appoint themselves a judge? (In real life. Not a coffee room judge.)

Direct theft, as in taking by grabbing without permission is (included in) gezel (for a goy). Why would counterfeit money be forbidden, without the added isssur of oinaah? (Etc.)

“We’re obligated to observe the “law of the land”, regardless of whether it’s consistent with Talmudic law.”

Actually we are often obligated to give up our lives rather than commit a transgression.

“what stupidity he pleaded guilty”

Uh, no he didn’t. He was not given a trial.

“the Judge Cop gave him the Correct Torah Punishment!”

Ah, so if I see you shoplifting I can shoot you. No trial. Got it.

“Why would counterfeit money be forbidden, without the added isssur of oinaah? ”

The Rema wrote that non-Jews are obligated in pretty much everything in Chosen Mishpat.

“Why are you defending a Russah, like Floyd?!?”

Who is defending him? YOU are defending murderous police. They summarily executed him with no trial. Now while it is true that a Non-Jewish court can execute someone for petty theft, it is only after a trial before a judge with an eyewitness testifying. That didn’t happen. You are defending a halachic violation as well as a violation of secular law.

“Why would counterfeit money be forbidden”

Interesting question. First, I noted the opinion of Rema. But on the other hand, money did not exist at the time of matan Torah, so all references to it have to be later. Paper money did not exist in the western world until modern times so we don’t even have rishonim on that issue. However, as Chazal were pretty aggressive in their support for a workable economic system (banning the use of unminted slugs, banning the use of Jewish coins) so it is hard to imagine that they would have permitted anyone to print fake paper money.

Oh Charlie -“YOU are defending murderous police. They summarily executed him with no trial.
You are defending a halachic violation”

It seems that you Don’t understand my posts.
There was a Witness that he stole a pack of cigarettes.
You don’t NEED an Official Courtroom Trial.
The cop came around and judged up the case.
He found him Guilty and gave him the Correct Punishment.

Dear Health,
I only have an old print with me. Too tedious. Same with online. IY”H next time I have a new print handy.

I do not see a reason to get into the believing the witness versus clarifying through witnesses, question. By mortals, a witness is by definition a bystander.

Similarly, a judge would have to hold office. Judgeship is also relevant as matter of prestige, like a king. One has to actually be actively recognized as a judge. It cannot be an ad hoc tribunal. If you could just hold spurious court, what prevents the defendant from presiding over the ‘judge’? If you would say that, yes, the defendant can simultaneously judge the ‘judge’, that is lawlessness. Which makes the whole idea of having a courts more redundant than this paragraph.

But even in your fantasy, at what point did the cop judge the case? While he was getting out of his car? Restraining him? The next day? Today? Did he talk to the clerk at any point?

The clerk told him it was not good, after he left the store. At the time of the transfer it was given intentionally.

This thread has not been about defending Floyd. Is Chauvin a Tzaddik?

“You don’t NEED an Official Courtroom Trial.”

You are making a mockery of the Noachide laws. One of them is to set up a formal legal system. This was an extrajudicial execution. In other words, murder. The officer responsible is now facing homicide charges. He won’t get the death penalty, though, which is good, because as pointed out US courts don’t follow Noachide law. (Minnesota fortunately abolished its death penalty in 1911.) Every execution in the US where there was no eyewitness testimony is homicide and the Governors who sign the death warrants will be called to account.

Essentially, you are supporting murder.

nOmesorah -“By mortals, a witness is by definition a bystander.
Similarly, a judge would have to hold office. Judgeship is also relevant as matter of prestige, like a king. One has to actually be actively recognized as a judge”

Please DON’T Show e/o in the CR your Am Haratzos!
I’m Not going to teach you Torah, but we’re talking about a Ben Noach, Not a Jew.
There are Different Rules!

“But even in your fantasy, at what point did the cop judge the case?”
When he arrived at the scene & was told why the Perp was arrested.

“The point here was, that the cigarettes were given willingly, That would take gezel by itself out of the equation”
LOL. Did you learn in a Yeshiva past High School?
He only sold him cigs, Not gave him them!
He actually went over to the Perp in his car and told him – he can’t accept his payment.
This is GEZEL in No way AROUND – Period!
Enough with Krumkeit.

Dear Health,

“By mortals, a witness is by definition a bystander.
Similarly, a judge would have to hold office.”

A ben noach is a mortal.

Dear Health,

I still maintain that the term Gezel, generally only refers to taking possession by force. Duping someone out of their money, is only termed gezel by association. The clerk likely handed him the cigarettes with the intention of Floyd keeping them forever. [I am aware of the other issurim involved. The byword is not gezel.]

Dear Health,
There are a number of circumstances that would nullify the din of rodef. Even if all the conditions were fulfilled, a soon as they got him out of the car he would no longer be a threat. When Mr. Chauvin showed up, Mr. Floyd was no more of a rodef then you or me.

Dear Health,
Curious question. Is there something to your random capitalization of words? Just wondering if I should be paying close attention.

While one is obligated to make sure a drunk does net get behind the wheel, once he is removed from the vehicle there is no way to consider him a rodef. At the point that he was resisting arrest, he was not even endangering anyone. [Rodef is typically one who is committed to murder. A public menace is depends on how much a direct act is taking place.]

Dear Health,

The question of rodef begins when the drunkard is about to drive. When the cop was on Floyd’s back and gasping for breath, even had he been a full rodef before (He was not one bit a rodef to begin with.) he regained his status as a life worth protecting. Stopping a rodef, is not a license to kill.

PS The minchas chinuch mentioned above can be found at 337 4. Please take a look!

Dear Health,

When the drunk is actually starting to drive [while impaired] and there may be people around (Or if there are people with him in the vehicle.) he is a rodef. Not before that.

Breaking into a house is not [yet] a rodef. He is given a lifeless disposition because of two factors. 1) He is in the process of theft. 2) He may become a rodef.

Dear Doing,
As far anybody here knows, Floyd never shot anyone.

The joke three weeks ago was that random people being pulled off the streets into unmarked cars was vital to keeping America safe.

Dear Health,

Why would the thief be a rodef as soon as he breaks in? Maybe the house is empty. [As well as a hundred other variables.]

How do you know he was about to drive the car? Maybe he was going to sleep it off. (Among other possibilities.)

I propose the cop should have confirmed that he was the guy who bought the cigarettes. [Maybe he did.] Then ask him where he got the money from. [I am not sure how the best way to ask this question. But something along these lines. Then again, it could be the cop did this too.] The he could have asked him if he needs a ride. [Maybe he did. Maybe something happened here. It is not clear to me.] And then he could have left him alone! [Only one of the millions of Americans that were intoxicated at that moment.]

Dear Health,

I am not a bible thumper. This is not the parshah of the din of rodef. See the latter half of eight perek of sanhedrin.

You can not assume things in life and death matters. [This may be a major earth shattering chiddush to you.] You have to examine the factors carefully.

In many Police departments they do only half of their job. Eventually we should give them better training, or find private alternatives.

Dear Health,

The din of machteres only applies to a ganev. Because he is not in any way in the midst of attempting to kill anyone, it is inapplicable the regular concept of rodef. It would not apply if someone would be breaking and entering without any intention of theft. For example, someone breaking into a public building to get shelter from a storm (However we know that he is not trying to steal anything.) will not have one din of a rodef. Or if someone takes a shortcut through your property, there is no din of machteres.

If you want, you can keep thumping your bible. Better to open it and examine it under the lens of our sages.

Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff has an essay that discusses this issue on his web site rabbikaganoff dot com: “The Torah’s Instructions to Non-Jews—The Laws of Bnei Noach”. He identifies the source as Shu’t #10. I don’t have that sefer at home and haven’t been inside a beit midrash in months 🙁 so if you have it and can confirm, please do so.

Rabbi Kaganoff identifies acharonim on both sides of this issue. He interestingly points out that non-Jews would need to go to beit din rather than secular courts to resolve property disputes if the halachah is according to Rema. Is there any beit din today that accepts disputes between non-Jews? And in some places, arbitration by religious courts is not enforceable.

Also, at the time Rema would have written that, Jews had been expelled from England, France, Spain, and Portugal and had never lived in Scotland, Denmark/Norway, Sweden/Finland, or Russia. 🙁 There was still a Jewish community in China at that point, but not in Korea or Japan yet. So much of the world would be over all these issurim.

If CV’S there becomes a Left wing Gov. (all 3 branches – if they pack SCOTUS), what will Cops do?
They can’t fight Crime, because there is No Punishment.
Of I know, the’ll give out tickets!
It will be worse than France, with Open Borders to let in All Terrorists!