George Floyd had a criminal history and was resisting arrest

The argument

It cannot be refuted that there is a deep and systemic issue of racial discrimination in America. George Floyd’s murder was unjust, but it should not be held up as an example of injustice against black innocence. George Floyd had a history of prison sentences and was under the influence of illegal drugs at the time of his arrest. George Floyd should not be viewed as a martyr for the black community in America as others suffered unjust fates and were upstanding citizens. Look to cases such as those of Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna Taylor. Arbery was jogging when he, unarmed, was pursued by three white men in a racially motivated attack. If the discussion is around black innocence, then Arbery’s case is a better example than Floyd's death. Breonna Taylor, a medical worker, was also unjustly killed, and in her case, it was at the hands of three police officers who were not indicted for her killing. When making a case for the jeopardy of black innocence in America, George Floyd is hardly the best example. However, the deaths of people, such as Arbery and Taylor, illustrate the injustice suffered by African Americans in the United States. All these deaths were tragic, but some make a more convincing case of injustice than others.

Premises

Counter-arguments

While George Floyd may not be the martyr he is indirectly portrayed as in various media outlets, to say that his murder is not symptomatic of wider issues is nonsensical. The police officers who arrested him were wrong for the methods they employed and were charged as such. Moreover, this instance of police brutality is not an anomaly. There are cases of police brutality right across America, and George Floyd’s murder was the tipping point. Although Floyd is was not a model citizen, some have suffered at the hands of the police who were not criminals. Yes, people make mistakes in various walks of life and various fields of work, but when your mistakes result in the death of innocent people, there should be a higher standard and tougher consequences.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The premise imposes a condition the principle at issue does not contain. The claim made about Floyd's death is that lethal force was used against a person who was restrained and posed no threat — a claim about the conduct of the officers, on which a prior record has no bearing. Requiring an unblemished victim makes protection from unlawful force conditional on character, which is not how the law treats it: a criminal history is not a defence to the manner of a killing. [Rejecting P2] The comparison undercuts itself. That Arbery and Taylor are also cited as unjust killings supports the pattern the argument means to deny, since a pattern is established by the number and similarity of cases rather than by the biography of any one victim. The officers' conduct was found unlawful in court, where the intoxication and the record were raised and did not alter the finding. Which case makes the most effective symbol is a separate question from whether this one is representative.