What is up with that. Why are people being so crazy?! I actually cannot imagine how bad it must be...
You'd be up in arms too if a member of your community was shot while pleading for their life with their arms up in the air
What happened?
Yes, please provide links for people like me who do not watch TV.
WashingtonPost.com
https://twitter.com/pzfeed/status/499266835389227009
https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/499944627621736448
Quote from: Piotr on August 16, 2014, 02:49:04 AM
Yes, please provide links for people like me who do not watch TV.
It wouldn't have been on tv, this incident has been going on for the past 2 weeks or something, they blacklisted the media
http://akittensblog.tumblr.com/post/94767912910/goldenfishradicals-prayers-to-all-of-the-people
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM
You'd be up in arms too if a member of your community was shot while pleading for their life with their arms up in the air
He was robbing a store and started to assault the cop, according to info I heard on the radio, and talk amongst the people(I live in Missouri).
Also, rioting and looting is not the answer to one death. Annnnnddddddd.... (Sir, I detect negative Karma on the sonar! Very well, steady as she goes) all of you in the states know that if a white man was killed, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 16, 2014, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM
You'd be up in arms too if a member of your community was shot while pleading for their life with their arms up in the air
He was robbing a store and started to assault the cop, according to info I heard on the radio, and talk amongst the people(I live in Missouri).
Also, rioting and looting is not the answer to one death. Annnnnddddddd.... (Sir, I detect negative Karma on the sonar! Very well, steady as she goes) all of you in the states know that if a white man was killed, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
From what I've read, the suspected robbery was an earlier event and has no bearing on what happened
Hear is the one article I read on what happened and the extreme use of military equipment:
http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/spotters-guide-military-grade-gear-now-being-used-police?dom=PSC&loc=slider&lnk=2&con=a-spotters-guide-to-militarygrade-gear-now-being-used-by-police
It is difficult to find anything on the officer's side of the story. But there was one eye witness... So I am pretty sure the media will hop onto whatever he says and the officer will lose the case. That is my thought. I just want to know what happened for him to be killed...
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 16, 2014, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM
You'd be up in arms too if a member of your community was shot while pleading for their life with their arms up in the air
He was robbing a store and started to assault the cop, according to info I heard on the radio, and talk amongst the people(I live in Missouri).
Also, rioting and looting is not the answer to one death. Annnnnddddddd.... (Sir, I detect negative Karma on the sonar! Very well, steady as she goes) all of you in the states know that if a white man was killed, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
You're buying into the media character assassination. The police chief of ferguson even stated that the officer who shot Brown stopped him and his friend for being black and walking down the street. The officer had no knowledge brown had stolen a pack of swisher sweets.
You also don't kill someone over $4 of blunts.
Witnesses even saw him on knees pleading to the officer "Please don't shoot me"
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 16, 2014, 12:05:50 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 16, 2014, 10:06:41 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 16, 2014, 01:10:42 AM
You'd be up in arms too if a member of your community was shot while pleading for their life with their arms up in the air
He was robbing a store and started to assault the cop, according to info I heard on the radio, and talk amongst the people(I live in Missouri).
Also, rioting and looting is not the answer to one death. Annnnnddddddd.... (Sir, I detect negative Karma on the sonar! Very well, steady as she goes) all of you in the states know that if a white man was killed, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
You're buying into the media character assassination. The police chief of ferguson even stated that the officer who shot Brown stopped him and his friend for being black and walking down the street. The officer had no knowledge brown had stolen a pack of swisher sweets.
You also don't kill someone over $4 of blunts.
Witnesses even saw him on knees pleading to the officer "Please don't shoot me"
Objection, hearsay. EDIT: Also I'm counter suing for slander and libel;I never said that I bought in to anything
You can't honestly think that someone would kill a man for walking down the street in the 21st century.
"He did it because he was black"- The media, people in a blind rage.
You also don't riot and loot because one man of no significant power made a mistake.
This is from the Matt Walsh Blog if anyone will take the time to read it.
The facts of the Ferguson, Missouri case are still unclear, which, of course, hasn't stopped anyone from jumping to definitive conclusions on the matter. All we know is that two men allegedly attacked a police officer, and at least one of them ended up dead. The police chief says they assaulted the officer while he was getting out of his car, and that a struggle over the officer's firearm ensued. Some eye witnesses claim that Mike Brown, the man killed in the altercation, had his hands up and was surrendering when the officer callously gunned him down.
These eye witnesses could be painting an accurate portrait of the incident, or they could be mistaken, or they could be lying. Or, as is almost always the case, there is a bit of all of these factors at work. I don't know. I'd prefer to let the dust settle and all of the facts come to light before I make any proclamations about the exact nature of the event. This is a radical and unprecedented approach, I realize, but I've always been a trailblazer. I like to call my strategy "don't be a reckless, ignorant, hysterical instigator who immediately diagnoses a situation based on whatever overarching political narrative you subscribe to, and then reaffirms those assumptions by quickly ingesting an assortment of Tweets and half-cocked headlines from notoriously ideological news outlets," or the DBRIHIWIDSBWOPNYSTRTAQIATHCHFNINO method, for short.
Still, there are a few general issues that have sprung forth from the looting and mayhem, and I'd like to address them each individually:
1) Hating all cops because some of them are abusive isn't any more justifiable than hating all black people because some of them protested an officer involved shooting by burning down their own neighborhood.
I'm as critical as anyone when police officers take advantage of their power. I think some cops are arrogant jerks and I think law enforcement, in general, is becoming overly militarized. I'm also a huge proponent of civil liberties and a passionate defender of the 4th amendment.
That said, a just and civilized society needs laws, and laws need to be enforced, and police officers are entrusted with that noble and necessary task. If a thorough investigation reveals this particular officer to be guilty of murder, by all means arrest and prosecute him. But whether he is or isn't, only a ridiculous fool would use this incident, or an incident like it, to disparage all police officers everywhere.
Enter Mark Lamont Hill, who took to Twitter to share this insight:
"A Black man in America is killed every 28 hours by police or vigilantes. THAT, not rioting, is domestic terrorism..."
His numbers might be accurate, but what sort of lunatic or liar would interpret them this way? Every time a black man is killed by a cop he is the victim of terrorism? So cops either shouldn't try to stop black men from committing crimes, or they should, but if they meet lethal resistance they should run away or surrender and die?
Such an enormous dose of idiocy in that statement, but it's a notion echoed by many people across the country. The news about Mike Brown's death prompted a tidal wave of "f**k the police" sentiments from black and white liberals alike.
Meanwhile, let any one of these cop hating cowards find themselves in a precarious spot, and watch how quickly they dial 911.
Criticize bad cops all you want, but police do important work under immense stress and pressure. Why is it that we are supposed to "understand" and empathize with looters and rioters, but we can't give even the slightest bit of slack to men and women who put themselves in harm's way to keep peace and order in our society?
Why are we quick to listen to the plight of the carjacker and the drug dealer, so willing to put their behavior in "context," yet we fail miserably to comprehend the fact that cops — particularly cops in high crime areas — are dealing with domestic abusers, addicts, thieves, murderers, pimps, and the various other dregs of humanity on a daily basis? This might take a toll on your psyche after awhile; perhaps make you jaded, cynical, even bitter. I know it would to me, and I know the police who manage to be decent in spite of it all deserve an immense amount of respect.
It's childish and absurd to hate all police. Yes, cops might have a contentious rapport with people in the inner city, but that's because they are law enforcers, and inner cities have more than their fair share of law breakers. Why do we pin this strained relationship squarely on the police and never spread the blame to people who choose to commit crimes?
We can hold cops responsible for their mistakes without descending into this sort of juvenile, anarchist madness. A healthy and rational society respects both the law and those entrusted with upholding it.
I wonder: do the people who seem to oppose the very existence of police officers have a plan B option? We get rid of cops... and then what? Have you guys thought this through at all?
I didn't think so.
2) Only one thing causes looting: the greed and selfishness of the people doing the looting.
I've seen a lot of people today insist that we ought not concentrate on the folks stealing, vandalizing, and setting fires over in Ferguson. We should instead discuss what "caused" it.
Ok, let's do that. They are human beings with free will who chose to commit evil because it suits their own ends. That's what caused it. Period. No need for further analysis.
Stealing from innocent citizens and setting fires to cars and gas stations — these are not political statements. These are acts of savagery.
Some people have actually tried to compare the Ferguson riots to the Boston Tea Party.
Hmmm. Let's see. On one hand, we have the Sons of Liberty dumping tea into the Boston Harbor as a specific protest against the Tea Act, while on the other you have a violent mob grabbing handfuls of cheap wine and cigarettes from the local QuickTrip as a protest against something that was not at all related to anything they're doing.
Sorry, I'm just not seeing the resemblance.
Until the investigation is complete, we still don't know if the shooting was justified. But we don't need any investigation to know that this certainly wasn't:
3) The best solutions to any community's problems can be found within.
I know it's frustrating when annoying right wingers like myself always rain on the cop-hating, death-to-whitey parade to point out how black kids are, by and large, under attack from other black kids, and the black community is in a tragic state of self-destruction.
But we wouldn't need to do that if the Mike Brown and Trayvon Martin kinds of incidents weren't immediately seized upon to prove a universal narrative of black victimhood.
You want to simply discuss Mike Brown? Fine. Wait until the facts are in and the smoke has cleared (literally) and we can talk about Mike Brown. But liberals aren't interested in making this a narrow and specific conversation. They want to make Mike Brown into another casualty of White America's war on black teens.
It's in response to that kind of nonsense that one must introduce a few other items for consideration. If this is to become a debate about the plight of black Americans (and I'm not the one who turned it into that) then the debate will be utterly useless if it doesn't begin and end with the sad reality that 70 percent of black kids are born to unwed mothers.
Over 60 percent of black children grow up in homes without fathers.
Black people are killed by other black people much more frequently than by cops.
Black babies are murdered in the womb at such a pace that now, in cities like New York, a black child has a better chance at being aborted than born.
Everyone knows these statistics. They come as no surprise to anyone. Yet, still, we always hear about how the black community is being held down and oppressed, as if black men don't willfully choose to abandon their children, and black parents haven't decided themselves to exterminate an entire generation of their own.
The real problems are ignored, the people who mention them shunned, and instead we wait for an officer to kill a black teenager so we can pretend that such incidents are the primary reason why the black community struggles in this nation.
And, even worse, pathetic white sycophants play along, too afraid to speak up and say, "hey, if black fathers simply stayed home and raised their own children, a lot of these issues would go away."
But their silence is rooted in indifference, not kindness. They don't care about black Americans, they care about proving a point.
The pattern will continue and nothing will get better, until we learn to be honest about things.
Hopefully that day comes soon, but I'm not holding my breath.
*****
NOTE: This post originally called Ferguson one of the most crime ridden areas in the country. According to a number of readers, my sources were wrong, or I interpreted them inaccurately. In any case, what I read pegged Ferguson in the top 6 percent for crime rate per capita. Apparently, this was incorrect, or at least misleading. Duly noted.
It's good to see a voice of reason here. I was going to refrain from saying anything until all the facts are out, but you summed up the issue nicely.
Sorry if I was not as informed as I should've been. From what I knew at the time I intended to discuss the rioting. So I was just ignorant of all the facts.
I totally agree that the facts are not all out yet which was why I said it was hard to find the police's side. Which btw is still unkown to me. Also I believe all that's been said is all that's needed to be said.
Autopsy report
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=1
Guns are not tasers they are tools of death.
A trained officer shouldn't have to shoot someone 6 times
You shouldn't be in charge of holding a gun on duty if you're a coward when it comes time to use it
One trained shot to the kneecap is enough to disable most people
There's still nothing that supports killing someone over Jay walking
From the autopsy, it shows he was shot six times. Three of the shots were from the back and one from above. There either were multiple cops shooting him, or a bullet fairy felt like giving some out. Taysby they train cops to not use excessive force, which is what unloading a clip is. If an officer can't control himself under pressure he's in the wrong line of work.
Info is from the second autopsy that was finished and report put out early today, not the first biased one btw.
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 18, 2014, 12:59:33 PM
There's still nothing that supports killing someone over Jay walking
This^
Jaywalking is as against the law as stealing is, nobody enforces it. I see people do it all the time. It's one of those situations where you enforce it to the fullest or not at all
Quote from: #millsux! on August 18, 2014, 01:40:47 PM
Quote from: Infektor on August 18, 2014, 01:08:55 PM
From the autopsy, it shows he was shot six times. Three of the shots were from the back and one from above. There either were multiple cops shooting him, or a bullet fairy felt like giving some out. Taysby they train cops to not use excessive force, which is what unloading a clip is. If an officer can't control himself under pressure he's in the wrong line of work.
Info is from the second autopsy that was finished and report put out early today, not the first biased one btw.
Mind giving me a link? I'm lazy. ;)
If you want to pull that discussion, sounds reasonable. It just comes down to the final decision of if he was coming toward the officer the whole time or not. And the dude being in the wrong line of work is a completely different argument than racism. I'd be a lot more likely to believe that he's in the wrong line of work.
Sorry on the go today so I'm using my touch can't get links till later, easily googled on reputable sites all over the net. Never said anything about racism, he shouldn't be a cop if he shoots an unarmed man, regardless of the big man possible charging him ( which hasn't been verified even by other officers there).
The officer that shot him( or possibly more) didnt know about him having stolen from a store, so the excessive force was unwarranted, and even if they did know about it shooting an unarmed civilian is a huge issue they should have been trained on. The cop or cops will be fired an may have their homes destroyed by protesters if the evidence is true, which as long as the police dept doesn't keep trying to cover it up will prove to be very real facts.
Sadly our police is becoming far to militarized in a society where they are attempting to disarm us. Issue is much deeper than this man being shot, but is a important part of showing the corruption of many depts in the us.
edit: so i got a chnce, here tays:http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/17/michael-brown-was-shot-times-ferguson-officer-preliminary-autopsy-shows/izi6zze4Z2QebrpaWtG2nI/story.html
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html
Quote from: #millsux! on August 18, 2014, 01:37:17 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 18, 2014, 12:59:33 PM
There's still nothing that supports killing someone over Jay walking
He didn't shoot him from j walking.
He talked to him about it, saw the solen goods, he attacked the cop, the cop responded to the attack.
Where is your source? I've been providing sources, those who differ in opinion have said everything to assassinate the character of the deceased, replace the blame and point the finger else where.
I look at the issue: an unarmed teenager is now dead & it's been nearly a week and all the official details aren't out yet.
You talk from a perspective of being a cop taysby and you are only a teen who doesn't realize someone like yourself was killed over nothing.
Do you value human life so little that you believe because "the law" said it was ok it is justified?
Come back with some non faux news sources, come back with a police report and autopsy from their department.
Here's a nice summary of what's going on there:
http://chicagoist.com/2014/08/18/the_latest_from_ferguson_national_g.php#.
Police are attacking the press and denying the first amendment. That's pretty bad.
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 18, 2014, 02:46:15 PM
Police are attacking the press and denying the first amendment. That's pretty bad.
The govt in general has restricted our rights as in the case of Schenck v US and Korematsu v US. Our rights aren't absolute they ebb and flow, as is now with the PATRIOT act. There could be the possibility of there being a lawsuit against the police, that could go to the Supreme Court and it could further the ebb and flow of our rights. So they can take away first amendment rights due to these court cases.
Quote from: #millsux! on August 18, 2014, 03:00:54 PM
Quote from: Infektor on August 18, 2014, 02:09:03 PM
Quote from: #millsux! on August 18, 2014, 01:40:47 PM
Quote from: Infektor on August 18, 2014, 01:08:55 PM
From the autopsy, it shows he was shot six times. Three of the shots were from the back and one from above. There either were multiple cops shooting him, or a bullet fairy felt like giving some out. Taysby they train cops to not use excessive force, which is what unloading a clip is. If an officer can't control himself under pressure he's in the wrong line of work.
Info is from the second autopsy that was finished and report put out early today, not the first biased one btw.
Mind giving me a link? I'm lazy. ;)
If you want to pull that discussion, sounds reasonable. It just comes down to the final decision of if he was coming toward the officer the whole time or not. And the dude being in the wrong line of work is a completely different argument than racism. I'd be a lot more likely to believe that he's in the wrong line of work.
Sorry on the go today so I'm using my touch can't get links till later, easily googled on reputable sites all over the net. Never said anything about racism, he shouldn't be a cop if he shoots an unarmed man, regardless of the big man possible charging him ( which hasn't been verified even by other officers there).
The officer that shot him( or possibly more) didnt know about him having stolen from a store, so the excessive force was unwarranted, and even if they did know about it shooting an unarmed civilian is a huge issue they should have been trained on. The cop or cops will be fired an may have their homes destroyed by protesters if the evidence is true, which as long as the police dept doesn't keep trying to cover it up will prove to be very real facts.
Sadly our police is becoming far to militarized in a society where they are attempting to disarm us. Issue is much deeper than this man being shot, but is a important part of showing the corruption of many depts in the us.
edit: so i got a chnce, here tays:http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/08/17/michael-brown-was-shot-times-ferguson-officer-preliminary-autopsy-shows/izi6zze4Z2QebrpaWtG2nI/story.html
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html
Didn't mean to say you were pulling the racist argument. Most people are, hence why I said that.
If a huge guy is running toward someone looking like they are trying to kill him, it's self defense.
More investigation will need to be done because of the conflicting autopsy reports.
I don't see how you justify shooting a UNARMED teen six times is "self defense". Do you not understand that cops are trained and held to a higher standard of safety for civilian life than others? He should have tased, maced, batoned, anything other than just opening fire. That's not self defense, that's abuse of power.
Why is it so far fetched that a cop would abuse their power?
So if innocent until proven guilty:
Why did the cop choose to shoot an innocent person? Don't use the robbery as an excuse as the cop in question had no idea about the robbery
Is it ok to leave a dead body on the street for five hours?
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 18, 2014, 08:31:17 PM
Is it ok to leave a dead body on the street for five hours?
Is it ok to destroy other people's properties, loot, burgle, and steal? No ones saying what the cop did was right, but when things go down the drain, so does rationale. If a bear is coming at you, you don't just shoot it once and say "ok, this bear's coming at me, but I shot it so its all good." No. You unload what you feel is right. You're acting out of self defense. You also mentioned that people are innocent until proven guilty. Ergo, the cop is innocent and shouldn't be condemned.
I say voluntary manslaughter, I don't believe he intended to kill mr. Brown when he stopped him for suspected robbery, I believe we'll find Mr.brown attacked him and the cop pulled his firearm shooting the victim, but emotion may have taken over causing him to pull the trigger 5 more times (remember, not emptying his weapon, his gun probably holds 12-15 rounds). But we will have to wait to see. I think the cops going to have a hard time getting out of jail time, but then again, It wouldn't surprise me if it was self defense, 6'4" and 292 lbs, that's a BIG F'n dude! It is going to take 6 rounds to stop that man, we're not talking about an average size person here.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/08/18/john_oliver_on_ferguson_missouri_and_police_militarization_video.html
More sources of info...
Quote from: Wingnut on August 18, 2014, 09:39:44 PM
I say voluntary manslaughter, I don't believe he intended to kill mr. Brown when he stopped him for suspected robbery, I believe we'll find Mr.brown attacked him and the cop pulled his firearm shooting the victim, but emotion may have taken over causing him to pull the trigger 5 more times (remember, not emptying his weapon, his gun probably holds 12-15 rounds). But we will have to wait to see. I think the cops going to have a hard time getting out of jail time, but then again, It wouldn't surprise me if it was self defense, 6'4" and 292 lbs, that's a BIG F'n dude! It is going to take 6 rounds to stop that man, we're not talking about an average size person here.
It would have to be manslaughter if they did charge,because it was definitely negligence on the cop's part and it doesn't fit the criteria for murder. Even then it would be difficult for the plaintiff because they would be pulling at strings because there was no real( or strong way to prove that) Men's Rea, he would have protection through strict liability, self defense/defense of another, Excited utterance, and Declaration against interest on the plaintiff's representative. Plus there's little real evidence, mostly just visual. It would be hard to press a case against the officer unless the plaintiff's party was able to make it super emotional to try and sway the jury's opinion.
Sorry for all the law terms. Political science, law, and history are my favorite subjects!
Ok I'll chime in on this. I really don't know. I hear on one side the teenager had his hands up and begging not to shoot. If that is true then the police officer should get charged for murder.
Next I hear the police officer and the other man (he is 18 so considered an adult) were in an altercation. The police officer told him to move he didn't listen and they started wrestling. One thing led to another and then he shot him several times. The final shot was to the head while he was falling forward. If this was the case he was defending himself. If the person would have listened to the police officer he would still be alive.
Again I don't know the true story. I feel bad for all people/families involved. But as much as this hurts me I have to agree with the artist formally known as taysby let the investigation (by an outside source) be performed before we pass judgement.
Chimimg in and saying, from what I've heard, I'm gonna bet manslaughter or murder in the second degree. Self defense is not applicable here- shooting an unarmed man in a fistfight six times with intent to maim(possibly kill) steps out of self defense.
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 12:38:33 AM
Unless the guy is twice as big as you.
Even then, six shots is excessive
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 12:38:33 AM
Unless the guy is twice as big as you.
The guy shouldn't be a cop if he's 3'2 146lbs. ;)
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 01:27:50 AM
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 12:38:33 AM
Unless the guy is twice as big as you.
Even then, six shots is excessive
If a 6'4" 292 lb man is coming at you, it absolutely could take 6 rounds to stop him depending on the firearm, a 9mm may not stop him, a .40's gonna take some serious lead, .45, probably not 6 rounds, but if 3 hit him in the arm (I believe they did), you really can't count those, that is not going to stop a person (mentally it may, but physically it's NOT going to stop a 290lb guy). Just in my experience having grown up around firearms. This information may not be factual as I have not looked for resources to back me up, if there is information otherwise, I am not close minded to it.
Couldn't you just shoot someone in the leg if they were charging at you from a distance? Shouldn't you be trained in firearm accuracy if you're law enforcement ??
Doesn't he have a baton, mace, taser etc???
I usually stay out of these arguments to avoid offending people but I have to say this to u muggy. You make it seem as though someone with firearm training could hit a dime at 100 feet with a pistol. Fact of the matter is, it's far easier said than done.
Let's explain it like this. If people's aim were so impressive, why would a bulletproof vest make any difference, why not just aim for the head?
The reason why is because the head is a smaller target than the chest. Ask any person with firearm training and they will tell you, "aim for the mass." In other words, aim where you have the best chance to hit someone. You don't aim at someone's legs because that's not advisable, smaller target = harder to hit.
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 09:51:58 AM
Doesn't he have a baton, mace, taser etc???
Other officers on the scene are saying that he wasn't at a distance, that Mr.Brown was going for the officers gun, this would put him in close proximity, if he WAS going for his gun, the officer is not going to reach for his tazer leaving the gun wide open to be grabbed. If Mr.brown WAS I fact going for the gun, the officer has every right to believe that the gun is going to be used to cause him harm and has every right to defend himself. Now, I agree with Taysby, we REALLY need to see what comes out during the trial. There are WAY different stories coming from one side (which is a relatively high crime rate society which leads me (opinion only) to think high "victim" society) and then we have the side of the police (which is a militarized police with an offensive trait instead of a defensive trait with a history of cover ups and covering each other in situations that would land you and I in jail (again, opinion and stereotyping the below average police force on duty today, I know that the average officer has good intentions and does his job for the right reasons).
There were no other officers on the initial scene, so we can throw your first statement out
If there was an officer on the scene in addition to Wilson we would have much more info as of now
Has the officer made a statement about it?
A phone interview with the friend of his wife is the closest statement they have
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?c=&page=2
And still eyewitness accounts report brown running away from the officer.
All of these reports claiming Brown charged the officer seem far fetched. Would you charge at a cop with a gun?
How does one think they would get away with killing a police officer???! Why aren't these questions people ask themselves.
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:17:24 AM
There were no other officers on the initial scene, so we can throw your first statement out
If there was an officer on the scene in addition to Wilson we would have much more info as of now
Ok, looking a little more, I'll concede to this. It said that the "police are reporting", I thought I remembered something saying that there were other officers there. But I'll concede that it's basically the one officer vs witnesses. I agree that this may in fact be a situation where an officer lost his cool, I just wish that there was actual evidence instead of statements. Gonna be interesting to see what comes out of this, no matter what the outcome, media has already prepped society to be angry if the officer WAS defending himself. Just wish that people would see this as an opportunity to unify the country on race instead of separating it more (or is that the plan?).
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 12:38:33 AM
Unless the guy is twice as big as you.
Well, it still oversteps the boundaries of self defense.
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:52:02 AM
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
He wasn't saying that he was crazy. Just that he was high. Different people react differently to drugs, so it's in the realm of possibility (I'm not for or against this view) that it contributed to his actions,
I personally say this "evidence" horse sheet and I hope they are not going to actually use this for evidence in the defense. If they base anything on this I am going to say they are grasping straws. Hopefully it's just a specialist saying this is a possibility.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:29:31 AM
A phone interview with the friend of his wife is the closest statement they have
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/18/us/missouri-teen-shooting/index.html?c=&page=2
And still eyewitness accounts report brown running away from the officer.
All of these reports claiming Brown charged the officer seem far fetched. Would you charge at a cop with a gun?
How does one think they would get away with killing a police officer???! Why aren't these questions people ask themselves.
You could get away with it if you managed to grab his gun.
Taysby I hate to say it: but you're a ducking idiot.
You think someone can get away with killing a cop in broad daylight by shooting the officer with his own gun in front of a community.
Just read the scenario instead of having a quick reply of denial. You're awful at this.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:52:02 AM
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
He wasn't saying that he was crazy. Just that he was high. Different people react differently to drugs, so it's in the realm of possibility (I'm not for or against this view) that it contributed to his actions,
D.A.R.E. to keep thinking like Reefer Madness
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 11:31:11 AM
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:52:02 AM
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
He wasn't saying that he was crazy. Just that he was high. Different people react differently to drugs, so it's in the realm of possibility (I'm not for or against this view) that it contributed to his actions,
I personally say this "evidence" horse sheet and I hope they are not going to actually use this for evidence in the defense. If they base anything on this I am going to say they are grasping straws. Hopefully it's just a specialist saying this is a possibility.
He's a former medical examiner who appears to have been apart of the same era as reefer madness. This guy is retired and talking bull out of his mouth.
Toxicology reports MJ in his system??! Guess what: MJ stays active in your system up to 3 months if you smoke it regularly. Pretty sure he smoked it regularly considering the blunts he stole; which have nothing to do with this case at all, this about a cop killing an unarmed teen
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 01:03:02 PM
I believe all that it'll be is something to help strengthen the fact that he did in fact attack the officer. Because right now it's mainly just a he said she said.
Eye Witness vs police statement through his wife's friend on a phone call a week after the incident. Lets be more specific here about he said she said.
And still not ever one source from you
@Taysby
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 11:31:11 AM
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:52:02 AM
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
He wasn't saying that he was crazy. Just that he was high. Different people react differently to drugs, so it's in the realm of possibility (I'm not for or against this view) that it contributed to his actions,
I personally say this "evidence" horse sheet and I hope they are not going to actually use this for evidence in the defense. If they base anything on this I am going to say they are grasping straws. Hopefully it's just a specialist saying this is a possibility.
He's a former medical examiner who appears to have been apart of the same era as reefer madness. This guy is retired and talking bull out of his mouth.
Toxicology reports MJ in his system??! Guess what: MJ stays active in your system up to 3 months if you smoke it regularly. Pretty sure he smoked it regularly considering the blunts he stole; which have nothing to do with this case at all, this about a cop killing an unarmed teen
Completely agree, this is why I hope this is not what they're basing their defense off, cause it sounds pretty far fetched and grasping for straws IMO.
I feel like if this wasn't a bullshit shooting, we would have all the police evidence already. Rather than them clearly state what happened, I feel they are now just strategizing to keep the uproar to a minimum
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 02:29:57 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 01:50:20 PM
And still not ever one source from you
What sources do I need? I'm using logic! Accuracy with handguns isn't that great. Large people pose a threat. Etc.
Not being derogatory; just using metaphors
Look at your own post: "I don't need sources I use logic"
You're still not grasping that an unarmed person was killed by a trained officer of the law. You look at any other way to spin it.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 02:31:32 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 02:10:55 PM
I feel like if this wasn't a bullshit shooting, we would have all the police evidence already. Rather than them clearly state what happened, I feel they are now just strategizing to keep the uproar to a minimum
All of America is watching this case. They don't want to be the idiot police that change their opinion every two days and give out opinions.
And what is the big deal that the info hasn't been released yet? It's not hurting anything.
Pretty sure this means there story isn't straight from the beginning. Hence why it's taking longer to clear up.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 02:28:10 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 11:31:11 AM
Quote from: #millsux! on August 19, 2014, 11:25:07 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 10:52:02 AM
Then you have experts like this guy who think Michael brown had reefer madness....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dr-michael-baden-marijuana-michael-brown
Lets not pull wool over our eyes people..
He wasn't saying that he was crazy. Just that he was high. Different people react differently to drugs, so it's in the realm of possibility (I'm not for or against this view) that it contributed to his actions,
I personally say this "evidence" horse sheet and I hope they are not going to actually use this for evidence in the defense. If they base anything on this I am going to say they are grasping straws. Hopefully it's just a specialist saying this is a possibility.
He's a former medical examiner who appears to have been apart of the same era as reefer madness. This guy is retired and talking bull out of his mouth.
Toxicology reports MJ in his system??! Guess what: MJ stays active in your system up to 3 months if you smoke it regularly. Pretty sure he smoked it regularly considering the blunts he stole; which have nothing to do with this case at all, this about a cop killing an unarmed teen
So it wouldn't be that hard to believe that he was currently high at the time of the shooting, no?
If he was high, he wouldn't have been thinking clearly, thus making him more likely to attack the cop.
By constantly saying "unarmed teen" you make him sound like a 5'9" 140 lb 15 year old. He is a huge older guy. Just because he didn't have a weapon doesn't mean he isn't dangerous.
No by "unarmed teen" I go by the facts of that he was:
A) 18 therefore teenager
B) had no weapon therefore unarmed
You also have never smoked weed and are under so much shelter that you have no perspective of other ways of life, your view is skewed by your parents filtration. Hence your lack of sympathy for human life and real first world problems. Your problems revolve around getting grounded & having your magic cards taken away, other people are constantly talked down to, discouraged and segregated still on the premise of the color of their skin.
For what the civil rights movement accomplished nearly 50 years ago it seems many people have forgotten the importance of unity, and why we question our governing figures & law enforcement.
As I've said in other posts where he debates with people, he's either willfully ignorant and just taking te other side to troll, or he's a 18 year old that thinks he knows how the world works like we all used to. Either way it's eventually a futile attempt to inform a lesser experienced mind.
You should inform yourself with facts before posting an opinion is my point, you have no source other than what your family has told you to think. Lest, you misbehave and have your magic cards taken away.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:04:01 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 12:00:39 AM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 18, 2014, 10:47:30 PM
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/08/18/john_oliver_on_ferguson_missouri_and_police_militarization_video.html
More sources of info...
I just started like 5 minutes in, so i missed some stuff
What is the racial makeup of your force?
dafuq does that have to do with anything? It seems like they are actively trying to turn it into a racial issue.
Most of the people that have problems with police are african american.
No duh sherlock, most of their community is african american
Previous people have done bad things
regardless of if it's true or not, that doesn't mean the officer in question does that
The militarization of police is a completely different argument than racial profiling. Keep on the same topic. (Why dafuq DO they need a tank though?)
Swat raids have gone up 14,000% since 1980
No duh, the first official swat team wasn't even accepted untill 1975ish.
79% of swat deployments are for drug investigations
That is mostly for safety. If someone is trying to hide illegal activity from the cops (especially if they are high) they will probably do stupid stuff like try and shoot the police. They need a professional team with the right equipment to handle it.
Bring it you .loving. animals bring it
Notice they didn't provide what happened before it? He could have been talking to someone to make it a reasonable response. You don't know, they just jump straight to conclusions.
The governor locked them in their homes.
They were violently protesting. He needed to do that to maintain safety and security.
Incredibly patronizing
They couldn't contain their protests. He had to do something.
Take away their toys until they can go a month without killing an unarmed black man.
I could convince any cop to lethally kill me without having any weapon on me.
So much bias in his story it's not even funny.
Please do, I would love to hear a story about a cop killing an unarmed white kid in Utah
Wait too late!
http://mobile.rawstory.com/all/2014-08-15-cops-gun-down-headphones-wearing-utah-man-because-he-wouldnt-comply-with-orders#1
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:04:57 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 02:31:32 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 19, 2014, 02:10:55 PM
I feel like if this wasn't a bullshit shooting, we would have all the police evidence already. Rather than them clearly state what happened, I feel they are now just strategizing to keep the uproar to a minimum
All of America is watching this case. They don't want to be the idiot police that change their opinion every two days and give out opinions.
And what is the big deal that the info hasn't been released yet? It's not hurting anything.
Pretty sure this means there story isn't straight from the beginning. Hence why it's taking longer to clear up.
And... Your point is? The officer said it one way, other people said it another, they don't have any solid proof, so they are waiting until it's all figured out.
Taysby is clearly using meatspin.com rhetoric
Of course police are human, I've never said that every single police force member is a bad person.
Your word "attack" is open to many scenarios
If you have a gun, baton, taser, mace, a car you can sit in with a shotgun and bullet proof glass you have many options to disable an attacker, should you kill them immediately?
A police officer is trained in many ways to neutralize a perp without using deadly force
Yes they did. Police just hushed it up and tried to make it justified
Still on going also
Read taysby
Oh wait you cant
And here I am thinking that we live in 2014 a time where racism should have no place! (Obviously there's still going to be a little racism a sad truth) BUT it's a damn shame that racism still exists! Like seriously can't we all just get along. I know this is so naive of me but still it's a sad truth :(
We should totally be past racism and we are not
It is very sad
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:34:09 PM
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
Case with black person. WTF ARE THE COPS DOING? THEY'RE RACIST!!! SCREW THEM! DEMILITARIZE THE POLICE! THE POLICE ARE CORRUPT! *violent protests*
Case with white person. Let's just put the cops on probation and figure this out like real people.
:P
Oh yes, because the people protesting in the video in this article being fired upon with rubber bullets, smoke grenades/ tear gas, and high powered sound cannons are obviously armed and violent
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
10 days ban.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:25:58 PM
To conan for swearing?
Yes, or at least it is to Conan.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 19, 2014, 05:34:32 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:25:58 PM
To conan for swearing?
Yes, or at least it is to Conan.
He did come in pretty aggressive, it was a heated conversation but Taysby wasn't being aggressive or degrading to anyone in the conversation. 10 day ban called for, that's another discussion, but he did come in pretty harsh.
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Riiight... No stores were ever looted...
I don't think that's what he's saying. No one can refute that stores were looted (by people of different races mind you), but I believe there is footage of police using excessive force on peaceful protesters (peaceful at the time of course).
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Riiight... No stores were ever looted...
Whos to say that the protesters were the one looting? Criminals are likely taking advantage of the chaos and the protesters are being blamed. Either way, we have rights and the police cant attack protesters in the streets, thats excessive force.
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 05:47:29 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Riiight... No stores were ever looted...
I don't think that's what he's saying. No one can refute that stores were looted (by people of different races mind you), but I believe there is footage of police using excessive force on peaceful protesters (peaceful at the time of course).
This. Put yourself in their shoes. You just had a friend unjustly shot and killed by police. When you go to mourn your friend and protest for justice, his killers show up and tear gas you.
Quote from: Piotr on August 19, 2014, 05:14:51 PM
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
10 days ban.
Was it against imtg law?
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
Well someone had to say it. Far out Taysby. THIS is why .politics. should not enter a MtG based forum. Topics involving highly emotion sensitive subject matters should be threaded carefully as emotion clouds logic and judgement. These people in this thread weren't harming anyone or defiling anyone. So what's the point of your arguement! The worst part is not your sheltered, medieval views in this 21st century society, or that you're obviously going against the grain of a supportive thread of an outrageous situation (going it solo too, might I add)
but you cited Wikipedia as your main source!Shhhh, move along.
Quote from: Spikepit on August 19, 2014, 06:19:28 PM
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
Well someone had to say it. Far out Taysby. THIS is why .politics. should not enter a MtG based forum. Topics involving highly emotion sensitive subject matters should be threaded carefully as emotion clouds logic and judgement. These people in this thread weren't harming anyone or defiling anyone. So what's the point of your arguement! The worst part is not your sheltered, medieval views in this 21st century society, or that you're obviously going against the grain of a supportive thread of an outrageous situation (going it solo too, might I add) but you cited Wikipedia as your main source!
Shhhh, move along.
You're a teacher, you should know. Wikipedia is 95 percent accurate. More than Brittanica, no doubt.
Quote from: L Lawliet, Master Sleuth on August 19, 2014, 06:33:43 PM
Quote from: Spikepit on August 19, 2014, 06:19:28 PM
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
Well someone had to say it. Far out Taysby. THIS is why .politics. should not enter a MtG based forum. Topics involving highly emotion sensitive subject matters should be threaded carefully as emotion clouds logic and judgement. These people in this thread weren't harming anyone or defiling anyone. So what's the point of your arguement! The worst part is not your sheltered, medieval views in this 21st century society, or that you're obviously going against the grain of a supportive thread of an outrageous situation (going it solo too, might I add) but you cited Wikipedia as your main source!
Shhhh, move along.
You're a teacher, you should know. Wikipedia is 95 percent accurate. More than Brittanica, no doubt.
True! In fact, last time I checked the Wikipedia page for my school, the school was famously known for schooling all the smurfs and two dragons were on staff. Our old prime minister apparently went to school here whom left early to start the Australian branch of the KKK. [sarcasm]This obviously proves that it's a reputable site that only gives editing access to a select few and only a handful of people can create pages. Obviously the right citation to use in a political discourse.[/sarcasm]
Quote from: Spikepit on August 19, 2014, 07:19:44 PM
Quote from: L Lawliet, Master Sleuth on August 19, 2014, 06:33:43 PM
Quote from: Spikepit on August 19, 2014, 06:19:28 PM
Quote from: ConanEdo on August 19, 2014, 03:30:33 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Something such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination
http://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/cases/reverse.cfm
Taysby, shut the fūck up, you entitled shït
Well someone had to say it. Far out Taysby. THIS is why .politics. should not enter a MtG based forum. Topics involving highly emotion sensitive subject matters should be threaded carefully as emotion clouds logic and judgement. These people in this thread weren't harming anyone or defiling anyone. So what's the point of your arguement! The worst part is not your sheltered, medieval views in this 21st century society, or that you're obviously going against the grain of a supportive thread of an outrageous situation (going it solo too, might I add) but you cited Wikipedia as your main source!
Shhhh, move along.
You're a teacher, you should know. Wikipedia is 95 percent accurate. More than Brittanica, no doubt.
True! In fact, last time I checked the Wikipedia page for my school, the school was famously known for schooling all the smurfs and two dragons were on staff. Our old prime minister apparently went to school here whom left early to start the Australian branch of the KKK. [sarcasm]This obviously proves that it's a reputable site that only gives editing access to a select few and only a handful of people can create pages. Obviously the right citation to use in a political discourse.[/sarcasm]
While it isnt the best source, Wkipedia started tightening up its site in 2006 and is just as accurate as professionally edited Encyclopedias. Here is an article: http://m.livescience.com/32950-how-accurate-is-wikipedia.html
Also, a list of studies done on the accuracy of Wikipedia: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 08:39:59 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 19, 2014, 05:53:12 PM
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 05:47:29 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Riiight... No stores were ever looted...
I don't think that's what he's saying. No one can refute that stores were looted (by people of different races mind you), but I believe there is footage of police using excessive force on peaceful protesters (peaceful at the time of course).
This. Put yourself in their shoes. You just had a friend unjustly shot and killed by police. When you go to mourn your friend and protest for justice, his killers show up and tear gas you.
Keep in mind (I'm not saying this happened for sure, just keep it in mind) if they just show the part where the police are shooting they may have sone something before it.
The police don't just shoot people standing with signs. They only shoot when they get out of hand. Plus, when they were shooting it was bean bags. Just enough to really hurt and get the point across. Nothing to injure them. Same with tear gas. Plus his killer (not plural) has been put on leave.
I have to agree with a lot of this, the police do not normally get aggressive unless it is a reaction to something, ESPECIALLY with as much heat as is on them at the moment. It is VERY easy for the media to make something seem like something that it is not. Also, THE police did not shoot Mr. Brown, a police officer shot him (right, wrong, idk, not the current convo), the police trying to subdue the protestors/rioting did not start this, they just have to deal with it. But I have to disagree that just because they are using year gas and bean bags does not mean it is simply ok to open up all willy nilly like they're carrying squirt guns. They are still lethal and require discipline. I would venture to guess that the crowd is not as "innocent" as they are being made out to be, I'm sure that the police force is also a bit edgy. The problem is that I have no idea what to trust that is being reported, who the hell knows what's really happening.
There's video of people looting stores, you just have to look them up. Protests are protected by the constitution, maybe its the protestors, maybe not, but it sgouldnt be done regardless. Also news, I read an article that said the New York Times reported an autopsy done by a Dr. Michael Baden, former chief medical examiner for New York, contradicting several eyewitness claims that Brown was running from Officer Wilson, as all the shots entered the front of the body. I don't know if the websites reliable, but I've seen some pretty unaccredited websites here already. And just for fun ( I don't know how to hyperlink a website, pls forgib)
Read this everyone and chuckle a good chuckle- funnyjunk.com/People+these+days/funny-pictures/5263462/
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 10:42:47 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 08:39:59 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 19, 2014, 05:53:12 PM
Quote from: Wingnut on August 19, 2014, 05:47:29 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 19, 2014, 05:36:22 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 19, 2014, 05:11:08 PM
They were protesting violently. They were looting buildings. They were letting them do their thing as long as it was peaceful.
They were standing with their hands in the air, this was a peaceful protest and they were fired upon
Riiight... No stores were ever looted...
I don't think that's what he's saying. No one can refute that stores were looted (by people of different races mind you), but I believe there is footage of police using excessive force on peaceful protesters (peaceful at the time of course).
This. Put yourself in their shoes. You just had a friend unjustly shot and killed by police. When you go to mourn your friend and protest for justice, his killers show up and tear gas you.
Keep in mind (I'm not saying this happened for sure, just keep it in mind) if they just show the part where the police are shooting they may have sone something before it.
The police don't just shoot people standing with signs. They only shoot when they get out of hand. Plus, when they were shooting it was bean bags. Just enough to really hurt and get the point across. Nothing to injure them. Same with tear gas. Plus his killer (not plural) has been put on leave.
I have to agree with a lot of this, the police do not normally get aggressive unless it is a reaction to something, ESPECIALLY with as much heat as is on them at the moment. It is VERY easy for the media to make something seem like something that it is not. Also, THE police did not shoot Mr. Brown, a police officer shot him (right, wrong, idk, not the current convo), the police trying to subdue the protestors/rioting did not start this, they just have to deal with it. But I have to disagree that just because they are using year gas and bean bags does not mean it is simply ok to open up all willy nilly like they're carrying squirt guns. They are still lethal and require discipline. I would venture to guess that the crowd is not as "innocent" as they are being made out to be, I'm sure that the police force is also a bit edgy. The problem is that I have no idea what to trust that is being reported, who the hell knows what's really happening.
I was saying from their perspective, I am not calling police in general killers. The "killer/killers" thing is again, from their perspective, the protestors are made at the police of Ferguson and society, in their eyes, it is our racially based stereotypes that killed the kid.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 19, 2014, 10:54:40 PM
I was saying from their perspective, I am not calling police in general killers. The "killer/killers" thing is again, from their perspective, the protestors are made at the police of Ferguson and society, in their eyes, it is our racially based stereotypes that killed the kid.
[/quote]
Fair enough, comment taken out of context. I still like fluffy bunnies though, that's fa show.
Saw this on Tumblr, it really seems like the cops are doing the right thing, right Taysby?
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/31bbfc96660c1ef83290486276e696b6/tumblr_nahddfqiEl1r0jlbgo1_500.jpg)
This entire "incident", like every other "incident", has dwindled down to something that has been going on ever since the beginning of human history.
A white man shoots an African American man, the family of the Aftican American Man gets the town and the media in a uproar. Because that's how the media works, it gets your attention, regardless of what actually happened.
If a white man killed another white man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
If a black man killed another black man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
In this case...
Did the cop kill the black man: Yes, regardless wether it was right or wrong, it has happened.
Ever since the 60's the African American community has demanded equality. Which after an upward battle, was archived and developed throughout the present.
But the second! An issue that involves a member of a white community kills a member of a black community.
The black family plays the race card. Which the rest of the community has worked so hard to avoid. It happens! The media gets a wiff of it and the world goes into a uproar.
Wether the black man has died unjustifiably, he did do an act that did break the law!
Wether the white cop did respond to the black man unjustifiably, it is his job to respond!
This entire issue is an endless loop which will happen to the end of the time, until we can achieve true equality
Where just because of someone's color that a community can uproar...
It's fighting against something we have been able to wipe away.
But is instantly brought back the second all heck breaks lose.
This entire debate isn't something new. The sooner we can all get past it the better.
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
Just a guess, this wasn't directed to me and my opinion?
Were you refering to the guy who posted the pic from twitter?
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
The post (if you had read it) wasn't about one person killing one person. It was about police using excessive force and teargasing a crowd of protestors that contains children. "if your decision is based entirely off emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement," yeah well the fact is, what the police are doing right now is immoral, unconstitutional and idiotic. As for "Twitter being a reliable source," the same information has been on EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET IN AMERICA, so yeah, I think its probably right. Here are some more sources though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html
"Mostly peaceful protesters in the St. Louis suburb, symbolically holding their hands in the air, were met with tear gas and smoke bombs fired so regularly that several reporters on scene noted it was hard to breathe."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/ferguson-police-teargas-rubber-bullets-michael-brown
"A heavily armed, militarised police force fired teargas and rubber bullets to force hundreds of protesters out of the centre of a small Missouri town on Wednesday, as a crackdown on demonstrations over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old intensified."
Are some of the protesters to blame? Yes, there have been many who have been violent toward police. Should the police confront a protest against excessive force with excessive force? NO! That is idiotic, it only adds more fuel to the fire.
QuoteIf you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals.
Dude you're totally right! Civil disobedience is disgusting, just ask Ghandi, the Framers of our Constitution, Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony....
I think we need a good purge 😈
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 12:39:51 AM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
The post (if you had read it) wasn't about one person killing one person. It was about police using excessive force and teargasing a crowd of protestors that contains children. "if your decision is based entirely off emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement," yeah well the fact is, what the police are doing right now is immoral, unconstitutional and idiotic. As for "Twitter being a reliable source," the same information has been on EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET IN AMERICA, so yeah, I think its probably right. Here are some more sources though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html
"Mostly peaceful protesters in the St. Louis suburb, symbolically holding their hands in the air, were met with tear gas and smoke bombs fired so regularly that several reporters on scene noted it was hard to breathe."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/ferguson-police-teargas-rubber-bullets-michael-brown
"A heavily armed, militarised police force fired teargas and rubber bullets to force hundreds of protesters out of the centre of a small Missouri town on Wednesday, as a crackdown on demonstrations over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old intensified."
Are some of the protesters to blame? Yes, there have been many who have been violent toward police. Should the police confront a protest against excessive force with excessive force? NO! That is idiotic, it only adds more fuel to the fire.
QuoteIf you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals.
Dude you're totally right! Civil disobedience is disgusting, just ask Ghandi, the Framers of our Constitution, Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony....
Did you even read what I posted? Have you read civil disobedience? And have you seen pictures is MLKs protests vs. Pictures of Fergesun? Please reread what I wrote.
Quote from: TheRecklessPlaneswalker on August 20, 2014, 12:00:44 AM
This entire "incident", like every other "incident", has dwindled down to something that has been going on ever since the beginning of human history.
A white man shoots an African American man, the family of the Aftican American Man gets the town and the media in a uproar. Because that's how the media works, it gets your attention, regardless of what actually happened.
If a white man killed another white man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
If a black man killed another black man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
In this case...
Did the cop kill the black man: Yes, regardless wether it was right or wrong, it has happened.
Ever since the 60's the African American community has demanded equality. Which after an upward battle, was archived and developed throughout the present.
But the second! An issue that involves a member of a white community kills a member of a black community.
The black family plays the race card. Which the rest of the community has worked so hard to avoid. It happens! The media gets a wiff of it and the world goes into a uproar.
Wether the black man has died unjustifiably, he did do an act that did break the law!
Wether the white cop did respond to the black man unjustifiably, it is his job to respond!
This entire issue is an endless loop which will happen to the end of the time, until we can achieve true equality
Where just because of someone's color that a community can uproar...
It's fighting against something we have been able to wipe away.
But is instantly brought back the second all heck breaks lose.
This entire debate isn't something new. The sooner we can all get past it the better.
This ^^^^^^^^
Every group of people( I'm pretty sure white people at some point) have been in this situation.
Quote from: Mozilla Butcher on August 20, 2014, 12:49:39 PM
Quote from: TheRecklessPlaneswalker on August 20, 2014, 12:00:44 AM
This entire "incident", like every other "incident", has dwindled down to something that has been going on ever since the beginning of human history.
A white man shoots an African American man, the family of the Aftican American Man gets the town and the media in a uproar. Because that's how the media works, it gets your attention, regardless of what actually happened.
If a white man killed another white man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
If a black man killed another black man, we wouldn't hear anything about it
In this case...
Did the cop kill the black man: Yes, regardless wether it was right or wrong, it has happened.
Ever since the 60's the African American community has demanded equality. Which after an upward battle, was archived and developed throughout the present.
But the second! An issue that involves a member of a white community kills a member of a black community.
The black family plays the race card. Which the rest of the community has worked so hard to avoid. It happens! The media gets a wiff of it and the world goes into a uproar.
Wether the black man has died unjustifiably, he did do an act that did break the law!
Wether the white cop did respond to the black man unjustifiably, it is his job to respond!
This entire issue is an endless loop which will happen to the end of the time, until we can achieve true equality
Where just because of someone's color that a community can uproar...
It's fighting against something we have been able to wipe away.
But is instantly brought back the second all heck breaks lose.
This entire debate isn't something new. The sooner we can all get past it the better.
This ^^^^^^^^
Every group of people( I'm pretty sure white people at some point) have been in this situation.
Thanks for acknowledging my opinion.it seems the rest of the debaters skipped over it
Here's your race card
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5673291
There is an outrage when wrongful death happens and assassinating the character of any one dead is not right.
Whether white or black or brown. The issue is police brutality against minorities and to deny that is happening still is ignorant
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 07:15:52 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 12:39:51 AM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
The post (if you had read it) wasn't about one person killing one person. It was about police using excessive force and teargasing a crowd of protestors that contains children. "if your decision is based entirely off emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement," yeah well the fact is, what the police are doing right now is immoral, unconstitutional and idiotic. As for "Twitter being a reliable source," the same information has been on EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET IN AMERICA, so yeah, I think its probably right. Here are some more sources though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html
"Mostly peaceful protesters in the St. Louis suburb, symbolically holding their hands in the air, were met with tear gas and smoke bombs fired so regularly that several reporters on scene noted it was hard to breathe."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/ferguson-police-teargas-rubber-bullets-michael-brown
"A heavily armed, militarised police force fired teargas and rubber bullets to force hundreds of protesters out of the centre of a small Missouri town on Wednesday, as a crackdown on demonstrations over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old intensified."
Are some of the protesters to blame? Yes, there have been many who have been violent toward police. Should the police confront a protest against excessive force with excessive force? NO! That is idiotic, it only adds more fuel to the fire.
QuoteIf you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals.
Dude you're totally right! Civil disobedience is disgusting, just ask Ghandi, the Framers of our Constitution, Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony....
Did you even read what I posted? Have you read civil disobedience? And have you seen pictures is MLKs protests vs. Pictures of Fergesun? Please reread what I wrote.
THIS ISN'T ONE PERSON DOING SOMETHING STUPID, THIS HAPPENS FAR TOO OFTEN AND THAT IS WHY YOUR POST ISN'T WORTH READING, IT'S COMPLETELY WRONG. These protests are about a society in which blacks are treated differently by those who are supposed to protect and defend the law.
http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices
The vast majority of people stopped under the "Stop and Frisk" law are black or latino.
Far too many black children have been killed for no reason (and in many cases the killers get away with it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/\
(http://www.themaneater.com/media/2009/0306/graphics/profile041_jpg_775x525_q85.jpg)
(http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/profiling-6.jpg)
(http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2008/11/aa_lapd_hit.jpg)
So yeah, if this were an isolated event, you would be right, but guess what, the sad reality is that this is an epidemic. Blacks have been treated as unequal forever and you would think that in the twentieth century we would have grown up.
Now let the negs begin!
Edit: shouldn't be relevant, but sadly is: I am white. Just so everyone can put it in perspective.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 01:31:21 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 07:15:52 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 12:39:51 AM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
The post (if you had read it) wasn't about one person killing one person. It was about police using excessive force and teargasing a crowd of protestors that contains children. "if your decision is based entirely off emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement," yeah well the fact is, what the police are doing right now is immoral, unconstitutional and idiotic. As for "Twitter being a reliable source," the same information has been on EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET IN AMERICA, so yeah, I think its probably right. Here are some more sources though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html
"Mostly peaceful protesters in the St. Louis suburb, symbolically holding their hands in the air, were met with tear gas and smoke bombs fired so regularly that several reporters on scene noted it was hard to breathe."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/ferguson-police-teargas-rubber-bullets-michael-brown
"A heavily armed, militarised police force fired teargas and rubber bullets to force hundreds of protesters out of the centre of a small Missouri town on Wednesday, as a crackdown on demonstrations over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old intensified."
Are some of the protesters to blame? Yes, there have been many who have been violent toward police. Should the police confront a protest against excessive force with excessive force? NO! That is idiotic, it only adds more fuel to the fire.
QuoteIf you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals.
Dude you're totally right! Civil disobedience is disgusting, just ask Ghandi, the Framers of our Constitution, Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony....
Did you even read what I posted? Have you read civil disobedience? And have you seen pictures is MLKs protests vs. Pictures of Fergesun? Please reread what I wrote.
THIS ISN'T ONE PERSON DOING SOMETHING STUPID, THIS HAPPENS FAR TOO OFTEN AND THAT IS WHY YOUR POST ISN'T WORTH READING, IT'S COMPLETELY WRONG. These protests are about a society in which blacks are treated differently by those who are supposed to protect and defend the law.
http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices
The vast majority of people stopped under the "Stop and Frisk" law are black or latino.
Far too many black children have been killed for no reason (and in many cases the killers get away with it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/\
(http://www.themaneater.com/media/2009/0306/graphics/profile041_jpg_775x525_q85.jpg)
(http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/profiling-6.jpg)
(http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2008/11/aa_lapd_hit.jpg)
So yeah, if this were an isolated event, you would be right, but guess what, the sad reality is that this is an epidemic. Blacks have been treated as unequal forever and you would think that in the twentieth century we would have grown up.
Now let the negs begin!
Edit: shouldn't be relevant, but sadly is: I am white. Just so everyone can put it in perspective.
Stop providing sources that support your statements!
more footage of an officer threatening someone's life while they document what is happening
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/ferguson-cop-points-gun-journalists-im-fing-kill-you/#Zebm8Kx3afSLJAbK.01
YouTube and various sources may be considered biased but raw unedited footage tells the truth more than any official report
Lets be real here. Mr. Brown was no saint. He was a CRIMINAL. If you ask me, criminals shouldn't be classified as having the same rights as law abiding citizens anyways (but that's a discussion for another day). Sure, what happened to him was a bit excessive, and yes the cop should be punished, but there is no need for this kind of uproar. I'm also under the impression that if he was white, this would not be such a big deal.
But anyways, this .poo. is ridiculous and most of these "protestors" deserve to get hit with tear gas, batons, and thrown behind bars. Just my opinion on the whole thing.
Once again the issue is not about who the person was who is now dead, the issue is about excessive force and discrimination against minorities by Law enforcement.
This is not about a good cop or bad cop killing a good or bad person; this is about a cop killing a person when he didnt have to
And lets be ducking realistic here people: there is far more outrage when a white person dies or a white girl is missing
Stop acting like Caucasians have been discarded and forgotten because we are pointing out some clear issues with those who are meant to protect and serve
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
And lets be ducking realistic here people: there is far more outrage when a white person dies or a white girl is missing
Stop acting like Caucasians have been discarded and forgotten because we are pointing out some clear issues with those who are meant to protect and serve
Are you actually being serious here...? Because I haven't seen this much outrage over a police shooting in all my life. And I know there have been more innocent men then this one shot to death by police, and a portion of them were no doubt white.
I just think this whole thing is ridiculous. They killed a CRIMINAL! Innocent men and women are dying all over the world every day and we want to freak out and cause chaos over the death of some theif who wasn't contributing to society at all? Please...there are worse things going on. I'll leave this alone with that
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:18:22 PM
the issue is about excessive force and discrimination against minorities by Law enforcement.
So true. But until a full investigation is done and we hear from all parties and witnesses we are just jumping to a conclusion.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 05:21:51 PM
Quote from: Rass on August 20, 2014, 05:18:46 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:18:22 PM
the issue is about excessive force and discrimination against minorities by Law enforcement.
So true. But until a full investigation is done and we hear from all parties and witnesses we are just jumping to a conclusion.
Hence why i've been saying for now i'm on the cops side, but that is open to change.
You are doing the same thing.
Quote from: Gocougs509 on August 20, 2014, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
And lets be ducking realistic here people: there is far more outrage when a white person dies or a white girl is missing
Stop acting like Caucasians have been discarded and forgotten because we are pointing out some clear issues with those who are meant to protect and serve
Are you actually being serious here...? Because I haven't seen this much outrage over a police shooting in all my life. And I know there have been more innocent men then this one shot to death by police, and a portion of them were no doubt white.
I just think this whole thing is ridiculous. They killed a CRIMINAL! Innocent men and women are dying all over the world every day and we want to freak out and cause chaos over the death of some theif who wasn't contributing to society at all? Please...there are worse things going on. I'll leave this alone with that
HE STOLE $4 WORTH OF BLUNTS.
No life deserves to be ended for $4
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 05:47:23 PM
Quote from: Gocougs509 on August 20, 2014, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
And lets be ducking realistic here people: there is far more outrage when a white person dies or a white girl is missing
Stop acting like Caucasians have been discarded and forgotten because we are pointing out some clear issues with those who are meant to protect and serve
Are you actually being serious here...? Because I haven't seen this much outrage over a police shooting in all my life. And I know there have been more innocent men then this one shot to death by police, and a portion of them were no doubt white.
I just think this whole thing is ridiculous. They killed a CRIMINAL! Innocent men and women are dying all over the world every day and we want to freak out and cause chaos over the death of some theif who wasn't contributing to society at all? Please...there are worse things going on. I'll leave this alone with that
HE STOLE $4 WORTH OF BLUNTS.
No life deserves to be ended for $4
No one deserves to be robbed ethier.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 01:31:21 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 07:15:52 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 12:39:51 AM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 12:07:43 AM
Because Tumblr and Twitter are reliable sources.
The hate's getting hilarious here, and the hypocrisy is tantalizing. "You're wrong because I think I'm right and my sources say I'm right." You don't say? If you're not willing to listen to both arguments you shouldn't pass judgement. If your decision is based entirely off of emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement. It's not the police force as a whole, it's that one officer. Just because one cop is bad doesn't mean they all are. While some people may be protesting peacefully, there are others that are taking advantage of the opportunity to loot, riot, etc. If you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals. The tear gas and militarization of the police is a by ptoduct of the ciolence that ensued out of anger, without rationale. We could discuss the severity of the two crimes, but it's all opinion based; impossible to determine a truth. Brown and the officer are both currently innocent and will remain that way until 12 people decide fate. Life's not always fair, guys, everyone here needs to remember that. I understand why people were angry, I'd be extremely upset if something happened to my community. But I also understand that people can lie, make mistakes, and be human.
I'm done for now until more facts become apparent.
The post (if you had read it) wasn't about one person killing one person. It was about police using excessive force and teargasing a crowd of protestors that contains children. "if your decision is based entirely off emotion, you shouldn't pass judgement," yeah well the fact is, what the police are doing right now is immoral, unconstitutional and idiotic. As for "Twitter being a reliable source," the same information has been on EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET IN AMERICA, so yeah, I think its probably right. Here are some more sources though:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html
"Mostly peaceful protesters in the St. Louis suburb, symbolically holding their hands in the air, were met with tear gas and smoke bombs fired so regularly that several reporters on scene noted it was hard to breathe."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/14/ferguson-police-teargas-rubber-bullets-michael-brown
"A heavily armed, militarised police force fired teargas and rubber bullets to force hundreds of protesters out of the centre of a small Missouri town on Wednesday, as a crackdown on demonstrations over the killing of an unarmed 18-year-old intensified."
Are some of the protesters to blame? Yes, there have been many who have been violent toward police. Should the police confront a protest against excessive force with excessive force? NO! That is idiotic, it only adds more fuel to the fire.
QuoteIf you think it's right to break laws because you're outraged that one man either made a mistake or is terrible person, are you no better than who commited the crime initially? No, you are equals.
Dude you're totally right! Civil disobedience is disgusting, just ask Ghandi, the Framers of our Constitution, Martin Luther King Jr., Susan B. Anthony....
Did you even read what I posted? Have you read civil disobedience? And have you seen pictures is MLKs protests vs. Pictures of Fergesun? Please reread what I wrote.
THIS ISN'T ONE PERSON DOING SOMETHING STUPID, THIS HAPPENS FAR TOO OFTEN AND THAT IS WHY YOUR POST ISN'T WORTH READING, IT'S COMPLETELY WRONG. These protests are about a society in which blacks are treated differently by those who are supposed to protect and defend the law.
http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices
The vast majority of people stopped under the "Stop and Frisk" law are black or latino.
Far too many black children have been killed for no reason (and in many cases the killers get away with it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/15/justice/florida-loud-music-trial/\
(http://www.themaneater.com/media/2009/0306/graphics/profile041_jpg_775x525_q85.jpg)
(http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/profiling-6.jpg)
(http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2008/11/aa_lapd_hit.jpg)
So yeah, if this were an isolated event, you would be right, but guess what, the sad reality is that this is an epidemic. Blacks have been treated as unequal forever and you would think that in the twentieth century we would have grown up.
Now let the negs begin!
Edit: shouldn't be relevant, but sadly is: I am white. Just so everyone can put it in perspective.
I was talking about the difference between peaceful protests and riots. And how people are jumping to conclusions even though it's still debate until the Grand Jury decides if there is enough information for a case. while you bring up statistics, it's important to remember that correlation does not imply causation. Fergesun is a predominantly black community, But there are protestors of multiple ethnicities; and there should be. I'm sure any community regardless of skin color would be upset if a cop abused his power and an innocent man is killed. This isn't an issue about race, and shouldn't be, but people make it about race, and it allows racism to exist.
On an unrelated note it's the 21st, not 20th century. Zimmerman was also found not guilty, regardless of Treyvon's status of minor.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 05:58:44 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 05:47:23 PM
Quote from: Gocougs509 on August 20, 2014, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 04:31:00 PM
And lets be ducking realistic here people: there is far more outrage when a white person dies or a white girl is missing
Stop acting like Caucasians have been discarded and forgotten because we are pointing out some clear issues with those who are meant to protect and serve
Are you actually being serious here...? Because I haven't seen this much outrage over a police shooting in all my life. And I know there have been more innocent men then this one shot to death by police, and a portion of them were no doubt white.
I just think this whole thing is ridiculous. They killed a CRIMINAL! Innocent men and women are dying all over the world every day and we want to freak out and cause chaos over the death of some theif who wasn't contributing to society at all? Please...there are worse things going on. I'll leave this alone with that
HE STOLE $4 WORTH OF BLUNTS.
No life deserves to be ended for $4
It doesn't, but he's not the most perfect person in society like you are making him sound like.
Also, isn't doing drugs in the state he was in illegal? I'm more than happy to believe otherwise if i'm wrong though.
His main point is, try and figure out the deaths of the people that did nothing, before the people that did something. it's just prioritizing.
Using Cigar wraps are not equal to doing drugs kid.
No where have I stated he was a "perfect person"
You're still justifying that someone's death is OK because they smoked marijuana
Empathy. Get some.
You're such an idiot it's wonderful.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 06:20:11 PM
Marajuana.
Clearly hooked on phonics did not work for you
See? More and more proof hes a troll. Can't even state an opinion without mommy or daddy or Fox News telling him. Or spell for that matter.
Im calling you an idiot because you attempted to correct me with an incorrect spelling
Get off the forums of radical thought before your magic cards are taken away for a week
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
On an unrelated note it's the 21st, not 20th century.
Lol, I have been out of school far too long....
"Correlation doesn't imply causation," actually in most cases it does and especially when all the statistics point to the same thing. Is it just random that all of those facts line up? Extremely unlikely.
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 06:21:52 PM
You're such an idiot it's wonderful.
I may not always agree with him either, but BE NICE. Wasn't this thread created to talk about the topic, not the people arguing/discussing?
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 06:25:36 PM
Im calling you an idiot because you attempted to correct me with an incorrect spelling
Get off the forums of radical thought before your magic cards are taken away for a week
Any time we want Taysby to take a break we can just use the magic word: sex
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 07:36:58 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 06:25:36 PM
Im calling you an idiot because you attempted to correct me with an incorrect spelling
Get off the forums of radical thought before your magic cards are taken away for a week
Any time we want Taysby to take a break we can just use the magic word: sex
Lmfao!!
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 20, 2014, 07:32:05 PM
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 06:21:52 PM
You're such an idiot it's wonderful.
I may not always agree with him either, but BE NICE. Wasn't this thread created to talk about the topic, not the people arguing/discussing?
I refuse to be nice when someone just throws in spin and only chooses to troll. If he wants to be snarky and correct my spelling incorrectly, get ready for a {Lash of the Whip}
So, I haven't been keeping up on this. Last I heard:
Kid was involved in robbery
10 minutes later, cop stops him
Kid pushes cop into his car attempting to grab his gun
A round goes off, kid darts
Cop shoots kid
Am I out of the loop there?
Taysby:
You look like an ass when you correct someone's grammar. You look like an even bigger ass when you "correct" someone's grammar when it was right to begin with. Just stop.
Quote from: Silent1236 on August 20, 2014, 07:55:14 PM
So, I haven't been keeping up on this. Last I heard:
Kid was involved in robbery
10 minutes later, cop stops him
Kid pushes cop into his car attempting to grab his gun
A round goes off, kid darts
Cop shoots kid
Am I out of the loop there?
Taysby:
You look like an ass when you correct someone's grammar. You look like an even bigger ass when you "correct" someone's grammar when it was right to begin with. Just stop.
Cop had no idea he had committed robbery
***Claims have been made that the officer pulled brown towards him in his vehicle***
That's the whole gray area currently
We honestly don't know. There are two autopsies and a third is being done. Here is an article: http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08/18/expert-autopsy-reveals-eyewitness-accounts-that-brown-was-shot-in-back-are-false/
Regardless of the robbery, there's a possibility that the kid assaulted a cop. I'd say the cop was in the right on that if that's what happened. If the cop indeed pulled him in, that's ballsy. It seems a bit ludicrous for a cop to just shoot an innocent kid in cold blood. That's throwing his career and probably the rest of his life on the line. That being said, I know that things like that do happen and police brutality is a very real thing. With the kid's recent activity, I'm more inclined to be on the cop's side. *speculation*He robbed a place, got stopped by a cop and panicked. In that state of mind, his actions may have seemed appropriate.
Tl;dr
With the information presented right now, I'd be on the cop's side over the potential victim. It's a cop's word over a criminal's friend's word right now.
One of the eye witnesses was a social worker, not just his friend Johnson who was supposedly hiding behind a car as the officer shot at Brown
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 08:12:08 PM
One of the eye witnesses was a social worker, not just his friend Johnson who was supposedly hiding behind a car as the officer shot at Brown
How far away was the social worker? The difference between "pulling" and "pushing" would be difficult to see in the middle of a struggle if you're more than a few feet away.
Quote from: Silent1236 on August 20, 2014, 08:09:27 PM
Regardless of the robbery, there's a possibility that the kid assaulted a cop. I'd say the cop was in the right on that if that's what happened. If the cop indeed pulled him in, that's ballsy. It seems a bit ludicrous for a cop to just shoot an innocent kid in cold blood. That's throwing his career and probably the rest of his life on the line. That being said, I know that things like that do happen and police brutality is a very real thing. With the kid's recent activity, I'm more inclined to be on the cop's side. *speculation*He robbed a place, got stopped by a cop and panicked. In that state of mind, his actions may have seemed appropriate.
Tl;dr
With the information presented right now, I'd be on the cop's side over the potential victim. It's a cop's word over a criminal's friend's word right now.
Is nobody getting the whole cops are trained to not kill unarmed civilians? Regardless of anything the cop did over reach his power and shot someone who had no weapon ( gun knife or otherwise). They are TRAINED to use non lethal force UNLESS a weapon is present, which every eye witness even the "cops'" admit he didnt have. So what was the justification of any shots? No one saw him reach for the cops gun, ( the cops friend three days later saying it doesn't count, it's obviously covering for the police).
I don't know what happened that the kid was shot, only about two people do, I am angry about the way the police are handling the protests.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:17:05 PM
I don't know what happened that the kid was shot, only about two people do, I am angry about the way the police are handling the protests.
You should also be angry at how the other people took advantage of this protest.
Quote from: Infektor on August 20, 2014, 08:16:44 PM
Quote from: Silent1236 on August 20, 2014, 08:09:27 PM
Regardless of the robbery, there's a possibility that the kid assaulted a cop. I'd say the cop was in the right on that if that's what happened. If the cop indeed pulled him in, that's ballsy. It seems a bit ludicrous for a cop to just shoot an innocent kid in cold blood. That's throwing his career and probably the rest of his life on the line. That being said, I know that things like that do happen and police brutality is a very real thing. With the kid's recent activity, I'm more inclined to be on the cop's side. *speculation*He robbed a place, got stopped by a cop and panicked. In that state of mind, his actions may have seemed appropriate.
Tl;dr
With the information presented right now, I'd be on the cop's side over the potential victim. It's a cop's word over a criminal's friend's word right now.
Is nobody getting the whole cops are trained to not kill unarmed civilians? Regardless of anything the cop did over reach his power and shot someone who had no weapon ( gun knife or otherwise). They are TRAINED to use non lethal force UNLESS a weapon is present, which every eye witness even the "cops'" admit he didnt have. So what was the justification of any shots? No one saw him reach for the cops gun, ( the cops friend three days later saying it doesn't count, it's obviously covering for the police).
The kid would've had the upper hand if the cop was pushed into the car. He would need to do what he needs to preserve his own life. He had access to a self defense weapon, so he used it. Just because they are trained to use non-lethal means to end a conflict doesn't mean that is the only way to end it. If he was assaulted, his life was being threatened. He did what he felt was necessary to defend himself. On top of that, how was he supposed to know the kid was unarmed? If a weapon is present, that means it would be out, which would mean the cop would've probably already been shot/stabbed.
Very disappointed in people on here. No visible weapon I guess to a cop means I'm in danger if he charges me, even though a taser or mace work just as well without killing someone. I hope we are not from the same generation.
Quote from: Rass on August 20, 2014, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:17:05 PM
I don't know what happened that the kid was shot, only about two people do, I am angry about the way the police are handling the protests.
You should also be angry at how the other people took advantage of this protest.
This is true, and I am also angry that there are looters taking advantage of the situation, but maybe if the police weren't tear gassing children, they could stop them.
Quote from: Infektor on August 20, 2014, 08:33:28 PM
Very disappointed in people on here. No visible weapon I guess to a cop means I'm in danger if he charges me, even though a taser or mace work just as well without killing someone. I hope we are not from the same generation.
If your life is threatened, you do what you deem necessary to preserve your life. That goes for the population as a whole, not just police. Just very different opinions, I suppose.
Also, people can walk right through mace and sometimes a taser and keep on going. It's not always a stopping force.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:33:48 PM
Quote from: Rass on August 20, 2014, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:17:05 PM
I don't know what happened that the kid was shot, only about two people do, I am angry about the way the police are handling the protests.
You should also be angry at how the other people took advantage of this protest.
This is true, and I am also angry that there are looters taking advantage of the situation, but maybe if the police weren't tear gassing children, they could stop them.
Lol. Let's not bring the children into this. If so what time was the first tear gas used? Also if I'm protesting why would I bring children to something that can turn violent? What should they do if it's Turing from a protest into an unruly mob? When they are out numbered
Silent, you miss the point- officers of the law should never kill citizens in duty and this is still overstepping self defense. Officers are trained to give their lives in the line of work.
At least someone gets it.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 09:21:35 PM
So they should die before protecting themselves from criminals? Thus letting them continue their kill streak? (generalizing all cases here, that wasn't directed specifically for this one)
Yes, that is there JOB, that they chose to pick out of all the jobs out there where they aren't held to a higher standard, they chose to be police officers. Who don't kill unarmed civilians.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 09:23:14 PM
Becoming a police officer isn't
"Alright, we need to protect the citizens. But if the criminals try to kill you, you can't defend yourself how you feel you need to. You just have to let them kill you if your mace doesn't work"
If it was, then WHY would they have guns in the first place?
For criminals with weapons, are you really that ignorant? Or just trolling again?
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 09:25:22 PM
So you think that just because someone doesn't have a weapon, they can't pose a severe lethal threat? I could probably easily kill someone from my experience in karate.
Police should only shoot if they fear for their lives. And that is what they do.
Yes if someone doesn't pose a direct immediate threat, as a cop they legally can't just shoot people. Thank god your not a officer or a lawyer you'd fail on both points.
HAHAHAHA what the .love.?! The cop is supposed to let someone just kill them rather than saving themselves? This conversation is a waste of time haha. I sincerely hope no one assaults you ;). Me? I would rather just go on living.
This is one of the few times I'm taking your side on things, Taysby 👍
Oh yes let's be glad you support cops killing people when it's not a direct threat.
Quote from: Infektor on August 20, 2014, 09:32:32 PM
Oh yes let's be glad you support cops killing people when it's not a direct threat.
Assaulting him is not a direct threat?
I just still question the claim of attacking an armed cop
Where is the body cam footage
Source?
Taysby has all the answers and never any links
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 20, 2014, 10:18:49 PM
Taysby has all the answers and never any links
Can we just talk about the topic and not about the people discussing?
Ok again I'm on the fence on this because I have not heard anyone with concrete evidence. So I am going to go against the majority. Stuff I've heard on the radio (not rush or bill orally[yea misspelled on purpose]).
The police officer was punched in the face and has an orbital fracture.
They do not give statements until the investigation is done. (All it takes is one wrong sentence or a miss quote and imagine how worse it could be)
Brown tried to reach for the officers gun.
The officer was shooting at the body and brown fell forward. The bullet hit brown on the top of the head which killed him. The officer was not trying to kill him but wasn't expecting him to fall.
Again this could just be them trying to cover it up. I really don't know. But being on both sides ( I hung out with some people I shouldn't have when I was younger. And now know several police officers ) I want to see what happens and is released with actual evidence.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 07:05:25 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on August 20, 2014, 06:02:52 PM
On an unrelated note it's the 21st, not 20th century.
Lol, I have been out of school far too long....
"Correlation doesn't imply causation," actually in most cases it does and especially when all the statistics point to the same thing. Is it just random that all of those facts line up? Extremely unlikely.
Im not saying that you're wrong,( that data could have a multitude of meanings)but some cases it does and some cases it doesn't. Like how Global Warming has caused an increase in pirates. All of the facts line up, and are related, but don't necessarily mean that global warming causes more pirates. It' a statisticians job to make anything look in your favor, after all.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:33:48 PM
Quote from: Rass on August 20, 2014, 08:18:05 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 20, 2014, 08:17:05 PM
I don't know what happened that the kid was shot, only about two people do, I am angry about the way the police are handling the protests.
You should also be angry at how the other people took advantage of this protest.
This is true, and I am also angry that there are looters taking advantage of the situation, but maybe if the police weren't tear gassing children, they could stop them.
The officers were ordered to throw tear gas after members of the crowd began throwing Molotov cocktails. Source is the Huffington Post.
I think we(all of us on this app and earth) need to take a chill pill. And...
Do a little dance
Make a little love
And get down tonight.
Source: Me
Because this forum is getting a little to violent
People are taking grudges against others
Quote from: TheRecklessPlaneswalker on August 21, 2014, 02:14:34 AM
I think we(all of us on this app and earth) need to take a chill pill. And...
Do a little dance
Make a little love
And get down tonight.
Source: Me
Because this forum is getting a little to violent
People are taking grudges against others
In a way ppl here are segregating themselves a little the majority being most people. The minority being Taysby lol so Taysby how does it feel to be the minority?
(It's late and I'm tired so if this is a dumb post ill delete tomorrow and sorry Taysby I don't mean offense just saying you're the minority-which doesn't make you wrong by any means)
Lol
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 02:52:01 AM
Quote from: TheRecklessPlaneswalker on August 21, 2014, 02:14:34 AM
I think we(all of us on this app and earth) need to take a chill pill. And...
Do a little dance
Make a little love
And get down tonight.
Source: Me
Because this forum is getting a little to violent
People are taking grudges against others
If you're a chick, I'm down. ;)
Taysby, stop being 12 ;)
The police are now attacking the media:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10204749751691465
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/19/1322938/-Ferguson-police-continue-arresting-and-attacking-media
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/19/1322938/-Ferguson-police-continue-arresting-and-attacking-media
http://threepercenternation.com/2014/08/breaking-news-dorian-johnson-has-now-admitted-that-michael-brown-attacked/
Quote from: Dstyle1 on August 21, 2014, 01:45:49 PM
http://threepercenternation.com/2014/08/breaking-news-dorian-johnson-has-now-admitted-that-michael-brown-attacked/
That article went up 2 days ago, I'm sure if it were true, mainstream media would have reported it by now.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 21, 2014, 01:50:00 PM
Quote from: Dstyle1 on August 21, 2014, 01:45:49 PM
http://threepercenternation.com/2014/08/breaking-news-dorian-johnson-has-now-admitted-that-michael-brown-attacked/
That article went up 2 days ago, I'm sure if it were true, mainstream media would have reported it by now.
/nod
I found a timeline of the events (published 5 hours ago so it is up to date):http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/michael-brown-ferguson-missouri-timeline/14051827/
As of right now, we still don't know much.
Quote from: Taysby on August 20, 2014, 09:23:14 PM
Becoming a police officer isn't
"Alright, we need to protect the citizens. But if the criminals try to kill you, you can't defend yourself how you feel you need to. You just have to let them kill you if your mace doesn't work"
If it was, then WHY would they have guns in the first place?
This
boy wasn't gonna kill anyone else, I bet. He stole 4 dollars of smokes.
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
Give me one example of a successful society where the police could not use lethal force.
You have a point here, however, lethal force should only be used as an absolute last resort
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 05:54:18 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 21, 2014, 05:32:51 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
Give me one example of a successful society where the police could not use lethal force.
You have a point here, however, lethal force should only be used as an absolute last resort
Which I agree with.
But what happened here was a case of "shoot first ask questions later"
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
He's 18 and almost 300 lbs. how can he be called a boy?
And I was also generalizing. Not talking about this specific case.
Give me one example of a successful society where the police could not use lethal force.
He's 18. The officer was old and experienced. The boy was young and foolish.
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 08:34:17 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 21, 2014, 06:03:42 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 05:54:18 PM
Quote from: S717 on August 21, 2014, 05:32:51 PM
Quote from: Taysby on August 21, 2014, 04:40:36 PM
Give me one example of a successful society where the police could not use lethal force.
You have a point here, however, lethal force should only be used as an absolute last resort
Which I agree with.
But what happened here was a case of "shoot first ask questions later"
He felt sufficiently threatened. He was reaching for the officers gun.
We still don't know what happened (and may never)
Not for nothing, but there are quite a few cases in ferguson where the police did very "questionable" things.
And still nothing yet, it's the usual tactic: draw out the details so that no conclusion will be seen by the masses.
We will probably have a white kid go crazy and kill 10-30 people, he will be captured alive or kill himself and then we will have 3-4 weeks of focusing on the "Why did he do it?" TIL we get another similar case to this or another awful thing...
This is a prime example of overreaction of the masses. Both parties are in the wrong. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. The incident itself is of no question to me the boy's fault. But the important part is the rioting that took place and the police are at fault for that. They responded with force immediately without considering the consequences. But the riots were not all peaceful protests like they claim it was. That's where both parties are in the wrong not the shooting but the rioting. The cop did his job, I'm not praising him and the death of a young-adult is tragic but the boy was not a saint to be held up as a martyr.
Quote from: ELLERfeller on August 26, 2014, 09:48:23 AM
This is a prime example of overreaction of the masses. Both parties are in the wrong. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. The incident itself is of no question to me the boy's fault. But the important part is the rioting that took place and the police are at fault for that. They responded with force immediately without considering the consequences. But the riots were not all peaceful protests like they claim it was. That's where both parties are in the wrong not the shooting but the rioting. The cop did his job, I'm not praising him and the death of a young-adult is tragic but the boy was not a saint to be held up as a martyr.
A police officer's job is not to kill people.
Quote from: ihasfrozen on August 27, 2014, 12:52:54 PM
Quote from: ELLERfeller on August 26, 2014, 09:48:23 AM
This is a prime example of overreaction of the masses. Both parties are in the wrong. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. The incident itself is of no question to me the boy's fault. But the important part is the rioting that took place and the police are at fault for that. They responded with force immediately without considering the consequences. But the riots were not all peaceful protests like they claim it was. That's where both parties are in the wrong not the shooting but the rioting. The cop did his job, I'm not praising him and the death of a young-adult is tragic but the boy was not a saint to be held up as a martyr.
A police officer's job is not to kill people.
I believe it is to protect and serve to community?
Quote from: Muggywuggy on August 27, 2014, 03:22:39 PM
Quote from: ihasfrozen on August 27, 2014, 12:52:54 PM
Quote from: ELLERfeller on August 26, 2014, 09:48:23 AM
This is a prime example of overreaction of the masses. Both parties are in the wrong. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. The incident itself is of no question to me the boy's fault. But the important part is the rioting that took place and the police are at fault for that. They responded with force immediately without considering the consequences. But the riots were not all peaceful protests like they claim it was. That's where both parties are in the wrong not the shooting but the rioting. The cop did his job, I'm not praising him and the death of a young-adult is tragic but the boy was not a saint to be held up as a martyr.
A police officer's job is not to kill people.
I believe it is to protect and serve to community?
From two kids jaywalking. The use of lethal force in the situation was unnecessary.
We still don't know what happened.......
Although Jon Stewart did a nice job discussing everything last night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUi2A6tUYQk He even took the Fegusson Challenge.
Quote from: Taysby on August 27, 2014, 03:49:30 PM
it wasn't lethal force because the jaywalked...
But jay walking led to lethal force...
Quote from: Taysby on August 27, 2014, 04:31:24 PM
It was another action that led to the lethal force, the jaw walking just caused the cop to walk over and say "hey don't do that plz, there is a cross walk right there."
Also, the argument keeps changing from race, to police brutality, to militarization of the military and back again depending on the response they get. It's never consistent. What is it? is it all of it? it doesn't ever sound like that. It just seems like one at any given point. It seems to me like their only valid response is to change the argument to something else where the aforementioned comment is irrelevant.
Yes, I am sure that the conversation that ended with 6 lethal shots started with, "hey don't do that please."
Quote from: Taysby on August 27, 2014, 04:31:24 PM
It was another action that led to the lethal force, the jaw walking just caused the cop to walk over and say "hey don't do that plz, there is a cross walk right there."
Also, the argument keeps changing from race, to police brutality, to militarization of the military and back again depending on the response they get. It's never consistent. What is it? is it all of it? it doesn't ever sound like that. It just seems like one at any given point. It seems to me like their only valid response is to change the argument to something else where the aforementioned comment is irrelevant.
Sounds like faux has spun your head around
The issue is still about excessive police force, it should not go unanswered. They need regulation and better standards, 6 months in a training program is not enough to allow someone to freely interpret the law and ask as judge in addition to enforcer. Not only allow that person to carry a hand gun holstered at all times.
Give all cops a mandatory camera that rolls constantly each shift. They monitor the rest of us, why not the police?
Seem like nice guys: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
For those who don't follow the link, Ferguson police arrested a man whom they though had an outstanding warrant (same last name, legitimate mistake), but wouldn't release him, put him in an occupied cell and refused to give him a sleeping mat (which were right next to the cell), and then beat the $hit out of him for no reason. The Ferguson police then charged the man with "property damage" because he bleed on the uniforms of the police officers. After Mr. Davis (the black dude) filed for a civil suit to get back his $1,500 bond for property damage, he was charged with assault. In the civil suit, the officers admitted they lied on the report and all of the charges were dropped. The police, "saved the wrong footage" and there are no records for the police because they don't keep them. The police were never charged because, "a federal magistrate ruled that the apparent perjury about the 'property damage' charges was too minor to constitute a violation of due process." Yeah, all on the straight and narrow, nothing fishy here.
Yes cops abusing their position is a problem, black people end up feeling it the most as many black men can be described as "African American male, little to no hair, 5'7-6'2 approx 145-200lbs"
There's a viral post from a man who was detained for no reason other than fitting a broad description was held over night and had his car towed, then they(police) found out they had it all wrong and released him.
They won't pay for his towed car, his public shaming (sat him on curb for at least an hour) and don't really acknowledge that they (the police) really fucked up on some racial profiling
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 27, 2014, 05:12:05 PM
Seem like nice guys: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html
For those who don't follow the link, Ferguson police arrested a man whom they though had an outstanding warrant (same last name, legitimate mistake), but wouldn't release him, put him in an occupied cell and refused to give him a sleeping mat (which were right next to the cell), and then beat the $hit out of him for no reason. The Ferguson police then charged the man with "property damage" because he bleed on the uniforms of the police officers. After Mr. Davis (the black dude) filed for a civil suit to get back his $1,500 bond for property damage, he was charged with assault. In the civil suit, the officers admitted they lied on the report and all of the charges were dropped. The police, "saved the wrong footage" and there are no records for the police because they don't keep them. The police were never charged because, "a federal magistrate ruled that the apparent perjury about the 'property damage' charges was too minor to constitute a violation of due process." Yeah, all on the straight and narrow, nothing fishy here.
Yes this is another story I've heard of from the area, often many St. Louis police move from city to city after doing a shady thing like this instead of being permanently fired from the police force.
Another STL officer hog tied and beat a 12 year old boy.
I will find that link, absolutely digusting
Injustice of all forms makes my blood boil...
Clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/08/25/Witness-Beaton-man-told-restaurant-safe-whites/14575435
Sorry I can't link, I just use the mobile version
But this is just sad. It's the people that do these kinds of things that cause people to stereotype and hate. Violence is never a means to social justice.
Update
New witnesses support initials witnesses case
http://us.cnn.com/2014/09/10/us/ferguson-michael-brown-shooting-witnesses/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook
Autopsy or not
You're still missing the point.
A cop killed an unarmed man....
He's never going to see that, in his eyes cops are allowed to murder unarmed people If their in danger.( even if that danger isn't actually there)
Here Taybsy, see if this puts things into perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_98ojjIZDI
Lol David vs Goliath
He could've just shot one bullet in the towards his leg, not unload a clip
Whatever man, keep your thoughts
People make mistakes...
We should also have more competent people in our law enforcement, not someone who fears for his life every time he encounters a person of color who is physically taller than him
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on September 11, 2014, 06:01:12 PM
We should also have more competent people in our law enforcement, not someone who fears for his life every time he encounters a person of color who is physically taller than him
Right? If every cop acted like this there wouldn't be people of other colors. Cops are trained an held to a higher standard than " oh no a big person!" Kill him! They know not to do things of this nature when it's undeserved ( like in this case). An tays, more and more evidence is coming out that the cop took it way out of control. Still feel like your on the right side?
Quote from: Taysby on September 11, 2014, 05:55:30 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 05:40:10 PM
Here Taybsy, see if this puts things into perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_98ojjIZDI
Keyword comedy...
It's called satire and they more correct than most major news organizations. Just because you are on "Comedy Central" doesn't mean you can't make valid points. The fact is the police officer murdered an unarmed man, and it happens far too often.
It's just wrong how out of hand police violence has gotten
They already dismantled the occupy movement by enforcing laws that arrest people for "trespassing" at night time (occupy trying to reassemble in DC) (basically removing the right to assemble)
How much are you willing to allow your government and law enforcement abuse your fellow citizens? What if it starts coming to your neighborhood for merely a dissenting opinion.
Is it ok to have the country waste it's own money by surveiling it's own people while in the worst economic slump in almost 100 years?
There's a sum to all of these issues and if people just allow the "government" to do as it pleases, soon the people will be a prisoner in their own country. Already passport prices are rising.
Sold proof to you is the cop confessing he killed the guy in a malicious action rather than a defensive one
Or the cop could be lying?
Why would someone lie about a cold blooded killing they witness? Why would several people do this?
Why should we not question corruption in law enforcement?
OJ got away with murder, plenty of evidence that he did it, no solid proof
He even wrote a book that was almost a movie that was released, but the studios decided a bit smarter at the last minute.
Book was titled "If I did it"
I mean, how much evidence do you need for POLICE MISCONDUCT to be proven?
You think anyone is gonna admit they shot a person in malicious action?
You can always pick a sides but as far as the law is concerned, no one is innocent or guilty of anything yet.
You have to remember to keep emotion out of the law; it's not being heartless, it's just being rational.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 07:49:22 PM
You can always pick a sides but as far as the law is concerned, no one is innocent or guilty of anything yet.
You have to remember to keep emotion out of the law; it's not being heartless, it's just being rational.
Yes, and the cold, hard fact is that an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by someone who sworn to uphold the law. The officer should be stripped of his position for this and tried for manslaughter and misconduct at the very least.
Quote from: Taysby on September 11, 2014, 08:10:39 PM
Once again, I could make (almost)any officer fear for their lives with my bare hands. Just because he was unarmed doesn't mean he's harmless.
And the only solution is to kill the person? Either the guy had training on how to handle the situation and ignored it or he didn't have training on how to handle the situation and shouldn't have been a police officer; either way, he failed.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 08:04:43 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 07:49:22 PM
You can always pick a sides but as far as the law is concerned, no one is innocent or guilty of anything yet.
You have to remember to keep emotion out of the law; it's not being heartless, it's just being rational.
Yes, and the cold, hard fact is that an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by someone who sworn to uphold the law. The officer should be stripped of his position for this and tried for manslaughter and misconduct at the very least.
If the officer is found guilty, absolutely. You also don't need a weapon to kill a man.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 08:17:35 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 08:04:43 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 07:49:22 PM
You can always pick a sides but as far as the law is concerned, no one is innocent or guilty of anything yet.
You have to remember to keep emotion out of the law; it's not being heartless, it's just being rational.
Yes, and the cold, hard fact is that an unarmed black teenager was shot and killed by someone who sworn to uphold the law. The officer should be stripped of his position for this and tried for manslaughter and misconduct at the very least.
If the officer is found guilty, absolutely. You also don't need a weapon to kill a man.
He is guilty, he killed someone. Also, I never said you need a weapon to kill a man, but a trained officer should be able to detain someone without putting a bullet through their skull.
And witnesses (multiple) state that they saw brown with his hands up asking for the cop to not shoot
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
Forgot police
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on September 11, 2014, 10:55:11 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
Forgot police
...the same police that have lied and abused their powers in the past, at that.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Unless you witnessed the illegal act in question, you're basing your judgement off of what you've heard. Not what's happened.
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on September 11, 2014, 10:55:11 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
Forgot police
I'm positive that everybody encompasses the police force as well.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 11:02:46 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on September 11, 2014, 10:55:11 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
Forgot police
...the same police that have lied and abused their powers in the past, at that.
There are terrible cops, but there are terrible people as well. People break the rules, regardless of their creed or upbringing.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:11:28 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Unless you witnessed the illegal act in question, you're basing your judgement off of what you've heard. Not what's happened.
"Well I didn't see Hitler kill anyone, I guess he wasn't that bad of a guy after all." Seriously, your arguments are idiotic. Under this idiotic standard, we should just through out the legal system and devolve into chaos. We may never know what happened, but the eye-witness testimony is better than your guesses, and no matter what the witnesses say, we know for a fact that the cop killed an unarmed black man, which is completely unacceptable.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:22:21 PM
There are terrible cops, but there are terrible people as well. People break the rules, regardless of their creed or upbringing.
...and those people shouldn't be cops, we should hold them to a higher standard.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 11:27:01 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:11:28 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Unless you witnessed the illegal act in question, you're basing your judgement off of what you've heard. Not what's happened.
"Well I didn't see Hitler kill anyone, I guess he wasn't that bad of a guy after all." Seriously, your arguments are idiotic. Under this idiotic standard, we should just through out the legal system and devolve into chaos. We may never know what happened, but the eye-witness testimony is better than your guesses, and no matter what the witnesses say, we know for a fact that the cop killed an unarmed black man, which is completely unacceptable.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:22:21 PM
There are terrible cops, but there are terrible people as well. People break the rules, regardless of their creed or upbringing.
...and those people shouldn't be cops, we should hold them to a higher standard.
It's unethical to degrade people in a speech or debate, but...
You have witnessed what Hitler did, in photographs and video. My wording was a mistake. Allow me to re-phrase that if you will, "unless you witnessed the illegal act in question or have seen actual physical evidence, you're basing your judgement off what you've heard."
Morals are subjective. Everybody abuses their power regardless of race, rank, or creed, and this should be known by now. I, for one, hold everyone to an equal standard and will judge based on the content of their character, to quote someone famous.
I'm not trying to sound heartless, I realize and recognize that it's a serious problem, but this case is not special. I'm simply pointing out the lack of any physical evidence in the case right now, not condoning police brutality of any sort. I'll gladly discuss any of these following cases of police brutality, but it would be an entirely new topic.
{www.guardianlv.com/2014/04/police-brutality-and-the-abuse-of-power-the-new-norm-graphic-video/}
Ech, I use the iPod app, so it won't link properly; disregard the pretty blue text.
So how about that video that just popped up? Showing he had his hands up and was walking away when the officer opened fire? Pretty much sums it up now doesn't it? Police abuse power.
The video hasn't been released to the public due to the violence in it. Though all major news channels are reporting it.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:55:06 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 11:27:01 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:11:28 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Unless you witnessed the illegal act in question, you're basing your judgement off of what you've heard. Not what's happened.
"Well I didn't see Hitler kill anyone, I guess he wasn't that bad of a guy after all." Seriously, your arguments are idiotic. Under this idiotic standard, we should just through out the legal system and devolve into chaos. We may never know what happened, but the eye-witness testimony is better than your guesses, and no matter what the witnesses say, we know for a fact that the cop killed an unarmed black man, which is completely unacceptable.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:22:21 PM
There are terrible cops, but there are terrible people as well. People break the rules, regardless of their creed or upbringing.
...and those people shouldn't be cops, we should hold them to a higher standard.
It's unethical to people in a speech or debate, but...
You have witnessed what Hitler did, in photographs and video. My wording was a mistake. Allow me to re-phrase that if you will, "unless you witnessed the illegal act in question or have seen actual physical evidence, you're basing your judgement off what you've heard."
Morals are subjective. Everybody abuses their power regardless of race, rank, or creed, and this should be known by now. I, for one, hold everyone to an equal standard and will judge based on the content of their character, to quote someone famous.
I'm not trying to sound heartless, I realize and recognize that it's a serious problem, but this case is not special. I'm simply pointing out the lack of any physical evidence in the case right now, not condoning police brutality of any sort. I'll gladly discuss any of these following cases of police brutality, but it would be an entirely new topic.
{www.guardianlv.com/2014/04/police-brutality-and-the-abuse-of-power-the-new-norm-graphic-video/}
Ech, I use the iPod app, so it won't link properly; disregard the pretty blue text.
Okay, but we still have a dead civilian, that is the physical evidence that the cop didn't do their job correctly. Also, while I agree that eyewitness testimony isn't 100%, when there are multiple reported cases, it becomes increasingly likely that it is true. Lastly, no matter what actually happened that fateful day, we have recordings of the police committing misconduct in the riots after the shootings, ranging from screaming derogatory terms at a crowd of black protestors to shooting rubber bullets at an Al-Jazeera America news team. Between the physical and circumstantial evidence, I think it is impossible to deny that the police in Ferguson are guilty.
And you're aloud to think that; Although I wouldn't say the whole police force are to blame. And I'll provide the flip side. There's witness testimonials saying that brown charges the officer. But it's hard to rely on witness testimonials alone, due to conflicting reports of what happened. Several were debunked when the autopsy showed that all of the bullets entered from the front. As for physical evidence we have brown, deceased, and the Officer(whose name I can't remember off the top of my head) with a dislocated eye socket. Certainly something happened here. But it's hard to say what happened exactly . While we might be able to prove an Actus Reus, there's going to be a difficult time proving any Mens Rea.
Wasn't that the witness who spoke on a phone interview later that was a friend of officer Wilson's wife?
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:55:06 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 11:27:01 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:11:28 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 11, 2014, 10:53:12 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 10:50:11 PM
"Everybody lies. People lie to me all the time: witnesses, defendants, lawyers, everyone."- My speech teacher, the assistant prosecuting attorney for the state of Missouri.
....
Yeah, let's just ignore the only things we know about the case and let someone literally get away with murder.
Unless you witnessed the illegal act in question, you're basing your judgement off of what you've heard. Not what's happened.
"Well I didn't see Hitler kill anyone, I guess he wasn't that bad of a guy after all." Seriously, your arguments are idiotic. Under this idiotic standard, we should just through out the legal system and devolve into chaos. We may never know what happened, but the eye-witness testimony is better than your guesses, and no matter what the witnesses say, we know for a fact that the cop killed an unarmed black man, which is completely unacceptable.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 11, 2014, 11:22:21 PM
There are terrible cops, but there are terrible people as well. People break the rules, regardless of their creed or upbringing.
...and those people shouldn't be cops, we should hold them to a higher standard.
It's unethical to degrade people in a speech or debate, but...
You have witnessed what Hitler did, in photographs and video. My wording was a mistake. Allow me to re-phrase that if you will, "unless you witnessed the illegal act in question or have seen actual physical evidence, you're basing your judgement off what you've heard."
Morals are subjective. Everybody abuses their power regardless of race, rank, or creed, and this should be known by now. I, for one, hold everyone to an equal standard and will judge based on the content of their character, to quote someone famous.
I'm not trying to sound heartless, I realize and recognize that it's a serious problem, but this case is not special. I'm simply pointing out the lack of any physical evidence in the case right now, not condoning police brutality of any sort. I'll gladly discuss any of these following cases of police brutality, but it would be an entirely new topic.
{www.guardianlv.com/2014/04/police-brutality-and-the-abuse-of-power-the-new-norm-graphic-video/}
Ech, I use the iPod app, so it won't link properly; disregard the pretty blue text.
Get rid of your curly brackets and your pretty blue text should work fine :)
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 12, 2014, 08:36:10 AM
And you're aloud to think that; Although I wouldn't say the whole police force are to blame. And I'll provide the flip side. There's witness testimonials saying that brown charges the officer. But it's hard to rely on witness testimonials alone, due to conflicting reports of what happened. Several were debunked when the autopsy showed that all of the bullets entered from the front. As for physical evidence we have brown, deceased, and the Officer(whose name I can't remember off the top of my head) with a dislocated eye socket. Certainly something happened here. But it's hard to say what happened exactly . While we might be able to prove an Actus Reus, there's going to be a difficult time proving any Mens Rea.
The problem is we are all trying to have a debate on a real moral issue in this country and you are just trying to show off the vocab and ideologies you learned in class.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on September 13, 2014, 12:09:27 AM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on September 12, 2014, 08:36:10 AM
And you're aloud to think that; Although I wouldn't say the whole police force are to blame. And I'll provide the flip side. There's witness testimonials saying that brown charges the officer. But it's hard to rely on witness testimonials alone, due to conflicting reports of what happened. Several were debunked when the autopsy showed that all of the bullets entered from the front. As for physical evidence we have brown, deceased, and the Officer(whose name I can't remember off the top of my head) with a dislocated eye socket. Certainly something happened here. But it's hard to say what happened exactly . While we might be able to prove an Actus Reus, there's going to be a difficult time proving any Mens Rea.
The problem is we are all trying to have a debate on a real moral issue in this country and you are just trying to show off the vocab and ideologies you learned in class.
Do you just not like anyone who has a different opinion than you? I didn't say it wasn't a moral issue... But since you are oblivious to that I'll say it now. I never said it wasn't an issue of morals. And I'll stop with the legal terms that you'll hear in any courtroom and use Leymans terms for you. With a lack of actuall stuff other than a dead body and a dislocated eye socket, and stories that don't match up, it's going to be hard to prove that the officer did anything out of order.
Whatever the truth may be, I feel all LEOs must wear a camera that is controlled by the station and not them.
Live streams of patrols should be watched by a supervisor to help make squad calls and assure the situations are handled properly.
These live streams should be available if requested within 48 hours of an incident.
Unfortunately: we have to ensure the police are being policed
Quote from: Taysby on September 13, 2014, 03:38:09 PM
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on September 13, 2014, 02:47:17 PM
Whatever the truth may be, I feel all LEOs must wear a camera that is controlled by the station and not them.
Live streams of patrols should be watched by a supervisor to help make squad calls and assure the situations are handled properly.
These live streams should be available if requested within 48 hours of an incident.
Unfortunately: we have to ensure the police are being policed
I agree.
Y yo tambien
Jesus a whole 4 pages of looking for an old thread instead of creating a new one...
Our forum engine can cope with additional threads just fine. Deleting threads for no reason is illegal.