[Hannity] Sen. Rand Paul: Eric Garner 'didn't need to die'

[Ubiquitous]

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: And meanwhile, my next guest, Kentucky Senator Rand
Paul, speaking out about the Eric Garner case and says that he thinks
politicians and taxes are to blame for the entire situation. The
senator joins us.

Senator, good to see you again. I'm making the same point. Six dollars
a pack, city/state taxes -- that has created a black market. And they
literally have cops -- because of the revenue involved with fines and
arrests, they have cops whose full-time job is to go into stores and
check that the New York tax stamp is on every pack of cigarettes.

This is insanity to me. Never should have happened. This man never
should have been involved with the cops ever over this issue!

SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY.: Well, and it may not be the whole explanation,
but it's at least part of it because the thing is, is about six months
ago, a directive came down from City Hall through the police
commissioner saying that, we want you to aggressively go after people
selling individual cigarettes that may or may not be taxed.

And I think, my goodness, do we not have enough violence going on in
our community that really needs to be policed that we're going to go
harass people for selling cigarettes?

HANNITY: Senator, it's even worse. You can smoke a joint in the streets
of New York City and all you're going to get is a summons. I'm not even
kidding! That is how this mayor treats that issue.

PAUL: But I don't want to make light of this. I've seen the video,
unfortunately, several times, and it is sad. It's horrific to see him
gasping for breath and saying "I can't breathe, I can't breathe."

And there was a case like this about 30 years ago. There was the
Michael Stewart (ph) case, where in New York City, he was spraying
graffiti on the subway walls. And it's illegal. We don't want it to
happen. But he was held in a chokehold by 11 white police officers,
again, who were indicted but that were not convicted.

The question here is something wrong really also with our tactics. You
know, I understand police have a tough job, and if someone's armed and
you're unsure and it's dark and all this, but this was in the daylight.
They outnumbered him five to one. I think there was a better way than
holding him in a chokehold.

HANNITY: What do you -- I know that -- I am sure, and I really want the
evidence released because -- we have to go back, nine of the 31 arrests
of Eric Garner dealt with untaxed cigarettes. It's absurd. The whole --
the notion that this is even a factor in this man's life is
unbelievable to me.

But I think for people that really want to understand the grand jury
decision -- I bet it was very sanitized, very technical. What are the
officers taught in terms of appropriate behavior, inappropriate
behavior, a legal chokehold, a chokehold versus a headlock, a carotid
artery chokehold, an air choke? It got very technical in there. And a
headlock is not a chokehold, as everyone defines it. And I would argue
that that's probably how they came to their decision.

PAUL: Here's the other thing, Sean, that not many people have been
mentioning. Legal standards are difficult standards sometimes to
prosecute people. But there's another standard for employment. And I
think one announcement that would be good, and it's sad in this
officer's case, but at the same time, he used bad discretion. He didn't
use discretion and he made a very unwise decision. He should not be
given the power to be able to use that kind of force.

So I don't think you can have an officer that makes this bad of a
decision work as a policeman.

And I know it sounds sad, but I mean, Eric Garner died, and he didn't
need to die.

HANNITY: But do you really believe that the officer's intent was -- I
mean, there was resisting on Eric Garner's part. And so...

PAUL: Yes, no, I don't think it has to be the intent.

HANNITY: What -- do you...

PAUL: I don't think it has to be the intent. And that's why when you
talk about conviction or indictment versus continued employment,
there's a much different standard. The standard...

HANNITY: Well, how is he...

PAUL: ... for being a police officer...

HANNITY: ... supposed to take him down, then?

PAUL: ... is a lot different.

HANNITY: How was he supposed to get him to agree to be handcuffed, if
he's not going to agree?

PAUL: Right. Well, I think that using deadly force for people who
aren't armed really is not what we should use.

HANNITY: But again, if you look at the coroner's report, yes, it
contributed, but he also had high blood pressure. He had asthma. He had
heart disease, all contributing factors to his situation, no?

PAUL: Right. But you have to have discretion. So for example, if you
see an 85-year-old woman jaywalking, it's against the law, do you put
her in a chokehold?

HANNITY: No. No.

PAUL: You see a guy -- this is a big guy, but you see him selling
cigarettes...

HANNITY: But if he resists, what do you do?

PAUL: ... is that something the community -- is that something the
community really wants...

HANNITY: All right...

PAUL: ... to even be involved with, is what I would say.

HANNITY: All right. Thank you, Senator. Appreciate it.

PAUL: Thanks, Sean.



--
So to recap:
Iraq is imploding
Ebola is spreading
Russia is expanding
The US is being invaded
Vets are dying
IRS is lying
And Obama is giving seminars on perpetuating the Fergusen myth.