Forums » The Lounge » Read Thread

Imagine that, the physical evidence from Ferguson disproved the idle speculations on social media. Totally didn't see that one coming -_-.

Oh well, now to watch the ensuing riots on national television.

It's like the reverse case in To Kill a Mockingbird, with half the composure of Maycomb's citizens.  :P

I wonder how badly the citizens are going to take it. Poor people.

Poor police; must've sucked before having to deal with thieves and drunk drivers.  Now because a certain someone fucked up in their force, they gotta take the brunt for his shit.  >.>

Can someone summarize for me? I have no idea what Ferguson is or what it's about.

Black guy shot by white police officer. Controversy. That's the gist, but there's more to it.

I WANT FUCKING JUSTICE

damn, I wish the trial had went a different way... but damn law... no double jeopardy

Don't you live in Great Britain or something?

Yep and we got it. Michael Brown was an idiot who deserved to be shot. As does anyone who physically assaults a police officer, regardless of race. You can blame social media for spreading false rumors about facts of the case. This was clear self defense.

Well once less dumb person in the world. Go Darwinism!

To be fair, both arguments that the lawyers made were stupid.

*slow clap* 

Black guy stole from a liquor store (only stole cigarillos for some reason), white officer cought up with him, black guy assaulted white officer and white officer shot the black guy several times and killed him. "Witnesses" claimed that the officer stood over the black guy and shot him repeatedly, others claimed he they shot him in the back, more claimed that he shot him while he had his hands up. However, the autopsy reports showed that he was not shot in the back at any point and that he was most likely shot while in a standing, charging position. Almost every "witness" redacted their statements after they were informed of the actual physical evidence from the scene, and many admitted to simply repeating what they had heard from social media or around the neighborhood. The Grand Jury announced tonight that there was not enough evidence for homicide (which means intentional murder, not self defense) and as a result some of the protestors rioted. Although not all of the protestors rioted, enough did to burn multiple vehicles, assault police officers, and loot multiple businesses. The full evidence packet from the scene of the Ferguson shooting was going to be released tonight after the press briefing, but since rioting broke out just minutes after President Obama urged the country for calm they probably haven't received it yet and likely won't broadcast it until after the rioting subsides. 

Ironically, the liquor store that the guy originally stole from was looted during the rioting

Ah...good ol' discrimination - truly a staple of the U.S.

Personally I prefer to follow up on the Mexican riots - they have more: interesting videos, fires, people that were shot, reasons to riot, and generally more dramatic scenes of people fighting, rather than people smashing glass.

Yeah i watched it. I saw that coming.

I saw that coming.

Everyone saw that coming.

I thought it could've went either way, since I could also see the powers that be making an example out of the cop to possibly prevent any riots.

Looks like the empire decided not to bother throwing the peasants a bone this time.

In other news, no major rioting in Detroit. The place already got wrecked and looted completely back in the 60s so the people there have just decided to carry on with the usual every day criminal endeavors.

Kidnapping, extortion, cannibalism, prostitution, self-harm, aggravated assault, assault with a deadly weapon, mayhem, negligent, vehicular, double, suicide-homicide, solicitation, incitement, battery on a police officerwhite knight, arson...

Well, it happens there every day anyways.

There are now other riots in Philadelphia and New York, and probably in other places as well. Those are just the two I know of right now. 

San Fransisco too, last I checked.

It's funny, the shit we'll go through for and put up with from other humans.

There have been times when the jury was wrong just so they could protect a corrupt police officer...in this case I highly doubt that this is one of those situations. It's just another example of, "If someone who isn't dark-skinned does bad to someone who is dark-skinned, it's racist."

Now, I'm all for rebellion and tearing down our flawed system along with the incompetent leaders that for some reason keep getting placed in their positions, but this is just ridiculous. The "protesters" in Ferguson are nothing but dirty thieves and marauders who at this point are only looking out for themselves. I guarantee that a good number of them don't even care about the shooting, but instead are just using the chaos to steal what they want and attack the pigs.

What I really dislike about them is how unorganized they are. You'd think that will all those people, you would be able to lead a more organized riot protest, but somehow they fail to do even that. They need someone who can actually point them in an actual direction, not continue with blind violence.

Anyway, considering that the original reason for the protests have been proven false (evil cop shoots dark-skinned teen dead), the riots and protests have lost their meaning. Now the National Guard is coming in to stomp down anymore protests.

Acquitted without even a trial?

In a world where jaywalking and shoplifting (which was discovered later, by the way) is punishable by death, and gunning down an unarmed kid isn't even worthy of a trial...

Not Acquitted. He wasn't indicated. Basically wasn't even charged with a crime. Honestly the kid was a fucking idot. The police officer stopped him. Facts are blurry here but there was a fight that broke out in the car. The officer tried to fire a shot at close range skinning the teens thumb. He then ran when the policeman gave pursit the idiot stopped turned and decided to charge the police officer. Then after being shot the teen stopped moving and then decided to charge again. All this is to me is a case of a dumbass getting what he deserves.

 

The purpose of an indictment is to inform an accused individual of the charge against him or her so that the personwill be able to prepare a defense. But in this case there were deciding whether or not to indict the officer. They decided, rightly I might add, that there was no reason to waste everyone's time with a court case that will lead to a not guilty verdict. 

I was being sarcastic, but with a hint of honesty.  I believe that all kids are idiots (it's their job!), but they don't deserve to die for it (even if they volunteer for the armed services).  Their brains haven't even fully developed until around age twenty-five, so their judgment is automatically compromised.  I think that until all peace officers are wearing PBC's, and have to undergo routine psychiatric evaluations, that their every action should be scrutinized.

I've had my share of dealings with badge-heavy cops, and I don't accept them as being infallible just because they happen to have a cousin that issued them a badge.  Until there are some definite changes and guidelines that they have to adhere to, there will always be this controversy.

Sure you can get away with some things but you do not charge a cop. That is a basic rule. You especailly don't charge a cop again after you just got shot.

"Sure you can get away with some things but you do not charge a cop. That is a basic rule." — that explains why the D.A. and Grand Jury didn't...

Not charge as in a crime. Charge as in run at.

I am fine with criminally charging cops. You just don't run at one.

Apparently you're not supposed to run at all.  If an officer sees you running, he has to know your entire life story.  And you better have a better story than training for a marathon or escaping some dangerous situation.

Just say you're trying to reach the bathroom then pass gas as loudly as you can. It works wonders.

It's especially effective if you light it.  XD

I guess that works too.

1.) Every criminal case goes to the Grand Jury before the trial to decide whether there's enough evidence to pursue the case. If the Grand Jury decides that there's not enough evidence then the charges are thrown out. It prevents the already overburdened justice system from being bogged down in (more) pointless cases. Because there was practically no evidence that the officer killed him by shooting in the back, on his knees, or in any other form of surrender then they couldn't legally (or ethically) charge him.

2.) The man was 6'4 and 300 pounds. That's not a kid.

He was legally an adult, I guess, but I consider anyone under the age of 25 to still be immature (considering that their brains aren't fully developed) and hence the term kid.  And just because he wasn't indicted, doesn't mean Wilson was acquitted.  Especially now that the federal government is throwing their hat in the ring.

unless I'm mistaken, the federal government is investigating civil rights charges, not homicide. 

But hey, if you're going to argue that every person under the age of 25 gets off free for burglary and assault then feel free. It just means I can't get in trouble for more stuff :P

I don't believe in letting them off the hook (even if they are pre-adolescent) but I don't think that they should die for petty crimes either.

No one should die for petty crimes. Their crimes should equate their punishment. 

I've had my @$$ kicked many times in my life.  Even then, I would not have shot an unarmed man, no matter how much bigger than me he was.  I have gotten my revenge, sweet...sweet revenge, but they wouldn't have been able to enjoy it if they were dead.  ; )

If you feel that your life is threatened by this larger-than-you man, you have the legal right to shoot him, if you so desire. 

I don't understand that reasoning within the confines of this issue.  The officer was the aggressor...and yet he claims self defense.  How idiotic can our society be if they fall for that BS?

If the officer truly believed that his life was under threat, then he had the legal right to shoot whoever he felt threatened by. Even if he may be wrong. Even if his life was not in any way threatened. That is the law. Now the question is, is that law fair? If it's not, what can be done to change it? And what should it be change to? After all, we all need some sort of law to protect our well-being. 

Hmm...Perhaps I should accost the biggest guy I can find.  If he takes offense, just shoot him.  Cops forget that they are just citizens and they have to live within the same guidelines as the rest of us.  Perhaps the public has forgotten this as well.  I think it's time that they learn this, and if there is any justice Wilson will be the poster boy.

Cops can get away with many things that regular citizens cannot. They are the ones enforcing the laws, and people ratherly stop to think that perhaps those who enforce the laws may just break them on occasion. 

ratherly?  xD

If they are allowed to get away with entrapment and murder, then they shouldn't complain when it happens to them or one of their family, now should they?

No. But you are generalizing now. Not all cops are the same. But if you mean those that are taking advantage of being ones, and killing left and right with no good reasons, then, yes, they have no right to complain if the same things happen to them, but no, not their family, as their family has nothing to do with what they've done. At least directly, as their family may indirectly interfere with the person that they are today.   

I disagree with that.  Their family has no more rights than the victim in this case.  Therefore they should be afforded the same consideration as the black teen was given, regardless of their affiliation with the aforementioned, so-called peace officer.

The facts are obviously not too known here, so we can't really judge who was the aggressor and who wasn't. The question here is, did the cop try to shoot the kid before the kid try to attack the cop, or vice versa? We don't know, so we can't judge.  

You mean did the cop try to harass the kid for jaywalking or was it the other way around...

The moment the kid began to run, the cop was safe.  There was no need or responsibility for the cop to give pursuit without backup which would have undoubtedly resulted in a more favorable outcome for both parties.  The cop, however, decided to act macho and gunned the unarmed kid down in the street.  We'll never know what was going through the cops mind, but at least we'll now know what he won't be doing for a living.

Jaywalking might be minor, but it's still breaking the law, regardless. And it's the cop's job to enforce the law, no matter how insignificant it may be. Therefore, the cop was merely doing his job. The true question really lies in whether it was the cop who shot the kid first, or whether it was the kid who attacked the cop first.  

This statement is infuriating. Where would he have had the time to call for back up? The whole affair lasted about 90secs. Your saying that he should have called for back up for a couple of jaywalkers? 

It is not a cops job to let someone get away. Its there job to get the bad guys. As soon as you try to grab a cops gun and/or physically assault a cop, you become the bad guy and its there job to chase you. 

Peace Officer. XD

He should be dubbed The Rest in Peace Officer.

Peace officer is a good enough euphemism, I feel.

He wasn't the aggressor. He told two teenagers to walk on the side walk. Happens all the time in my town. We just say, "We are sorry sir." and thats it. But this kid mouthed off and ignored the cop. So the cop because he has a right to investigate any "suspicious person" decides to do so because you don't disrespect police. The kid then wrestled with the cop and tried to take his gun.

Not seeing how the cop is the agressor. 

I don't see a difference between instigator and aggressor.  And I don't believe there is a distinction under the law.  I'm against profiling, racial or otherwise, and I cannot be swayed from this perspective.
 

I didn't even say black in the above statement. In fact I used my own experiences with jaywalking and a cop pulling up next to us. 

I've been told to get off the street as well, and I'm Caucasian.  Even in places where there wasn't a sidewalk, I did my best to comply.  I've also been pulled over because I was in a sports car, and the city cops only excuse was to ask me if I knew the speed limit on the residential streets.  I was going well under that which was posted, and his response was "Okay, just keep it that way."  I've also been profiled for being out-of-state.  And for being a teenager.  There are probably other types that I'm not even aware of...but add to that — racial profiling — and you can better understand what blacks have to contend with.

Not fully aware of the subject but from what I've got, what happened was that 2 blakc teens were caught stealing, they tried to escape, then the officer shot (6 times) at one of them and killed him. I'd be fine with that.

Some claim that after the first shots were fired that the kid turned around and went on to surrender to the officer and that it was cold-blood murder in which case the man should have been punished I guess.

Oh well, that story and the chimpin out caused by it. 

This though is even more stunning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaACywtSrCI

 

I may have missed something, but from what I gathered from television media, it wasn't known that the teens had shoplifted until after the jaywalking/shooting incident.  It was discovered through the course of investigation.

Wow you have missed the boat that isn't what happened at all.

Then a lot of people missed the boat :P

Yeah, in Greece this didn't get any coverage till the riots started today. I read about it on the web yesterday though at random which is where I got my info from.

I don't really blame you. I doubt it would be that interesting of a case until people starting burning McDonald's :P

Evidence is already being released.

What happened was the two robbed the store (technically only the one who was shot robbed it, other was just there).

Later on they're walking down the street on the road. Couple cops past them but they don't stop them.

One cop stops them and says to get the fuck on the sidewalk.

They say no and keep walking.

Cops goes reverse, stops them.

This is where things start to change. The guy that was with the one who was shot claims the cop grabbed his friend and his friend couldn't get away (which is just stupid, given his friend had almost 80 pounds on him, and the cop was sitting in a car). Others say it was the guy who was shot that starting fighting with the cop that was in the car.

Eventually cop says stop or he'll shot, takes out gun. More struggle, guy is shot 1-2 times.

Cop gets out of car, the guy who was shot runs back a bit, then stops and faces cop.

Guys friend is booking it by now, but is still close enough to see what happens.

Some people say he had his hands up and he was shot. Others say he charged the officer, was shot a bunch of times, then stopped. After he stopped the officer stopped shooting, but then he charged again and the officer shot again.

Worth noting that the people who claimed he had his hands up/was shot in the back ended up changing their story after hearing the evidence, so the people who supported what the officer said happened (that he charged), had the more consistent story.

Thanks for the info. So the officer was in the right here. He should have checked his priveledge before shooting though. 

This account does seem logical, but I've never met a logical cop or teenager, so I can't say for sure.

Because if you haven't met one, then surely they don't exist, lol.
 

xD  I have several cops in my family.  They seem to have more problems, especially with their own teenagers, than the average parent.  I don't know if they exist or not, but that is the quest for the grail.

Edit:  I don't believe in the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus either.

I have family in the police as well. So you should know how often they get attacked for being police and how they're trained to defend themselves :P

What killa said.

Here are some exaggerated tales of the misfortunate event.

Story Version 1:

The black teenager had just come from a shopping area with the items that he and a friend (also black) acquired. As the two teens were heading back towards their homes, they were stopped by a police officer who demanded to know where they were going and where the items came from. The officer assumed that the teen had stolen the items, and told him that he was detained. The teen questioned the officer's actions, but the officer pulled out his pistol and demanded that he comply. The black teen had his hands up to surrender, but the officer fired a first shot which missed. The boy screamed and began to run in terror. The police officer let out a furious growl saying, "Come back here you trash!" Then, the officer fired several more shots at the boy who had his back turned. The boy fell to the ground, where he died.

Story Version 2:

The black teenager had just come from a shopping area with the items that he and a friend (also black) acquired. As the two teens were heading back towards their homes, they were stopped by a police officer who demanded to know where they were going and where the items came from. The officer assumed that the teen had stolen the items, and quickly moved in towards the teen to place handcuffs on him. The teen resisted at first, which was all the officer needed. The officer then attacked him, knocking the boy to the ground. He looked at the black teen with a devilish smile across his face and said, "This is what's going to happen to everyone of your particular skin color!" The officer then fired several shots at the boy as he was still on the ground. Then the officer kicked the boy's corpse, spat on him, urinated on the ground surrounding the corpse, stuck a cross in the ground, burned the cross, and shouted "white power!".

Story Version 3:

The black teenager had just come from a shopping area with the items that he and a friend (also black) stole. As the two teens were heading back towards their gang hideout, they were stopped by a police officer who likely received a call on a theft. The officer assumed that the teen had stolen the items, and told him that he was detained. In response, the larger black teen charged at the police officer, somehow able to overpower him, if only slightly. The officer, now frightened by the savagery of the teen, pulled out his pistol and fired a warning shot. One shot became two, and two shots became three. Eventually, the teen was on the ground, dead.

Long Story Short (IMO)

Kid stole something, cop tried to stop him, kid attacked cop, cop shot kid, Ferguson riots begin. I bet this issue wouldn't be as big if the dead kid wasn't dark-skinned.

"This is what's going to happen to everyone of your particular skin color!" 

lmfao

This is what I don't get.  If the people rioting and looting are a 'small number and from out of town' like everyone is saying, why aren't the peaceful protestors shutting those idiots down?

 

You would think a group of peaceful people would easily locate that one idiot throwing bottles at the police and say, "hey stop dude, that's not cool."

 

Like when you go to a concert and you have those two drunk idiots spilling beer on people and making a ruckus.  Someone usually steps up and realizes how uncalled for the behavior is and does something about it. 

Have you ever been to a rally?

No, haven't been to any rallies.

Nevermind then.

I think it has to do with the mindset of those that came up with never strike a child.  Sometimes they need it — I know I did.

If people were to stand up for what they believe in, there would be no such thing as mob mentality, which puts me in mind of a favorite quote...

"You know how it works Jake, you ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw. I'm sorry you crossed the line." — Gus McCrae

Because it wasn't a small number and people from out of town. Yes, there was a large portion that were peaceful, but reporters who were on-site describe it as hundreds of people causing issues.

You expect peaceful protesters to fight with violent ones? Just lol... You can't reason with people who are mad/are just there to be violent.

They tried. All the news anchors tell the stories of how the people who started charging the officers were initially policed by other protestors, but when you start including the fact that the rioters were harming the other protestors as well it's not hard to see why the peaceful protestors left the scene.

Well more NG troops are on the way.  Guarantee you things will begin to lighten up then. 

Might as well enjoy some old school rap music while the troops restore order...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0-hYc_Lf_j0

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=am9BqZ6eA5c

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0

Nice!

Wish I was in an MP unit.  I'd love to get a taste of that action.

 

Pretty sure they'll start handing out Combat Badges to the troops there.  Many years from now, father's will be telling their children:  "I was there.... at the battle of Ferguson!!"

Remember Fergie

lmao

The States don't get riots often, do they?

We had more of them in the 60s and 70s. Most of ours are either sports or race related nowadays.

Here's a list though

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

Here's to the inevitable Tranny Riots of 2020!

That would be fun to watch.

Americans can't get along with anyone, even themselves.

That's what my little brother in the fraternity does for a living. He doesn't really need to do anything in southern Alabama though :P

Oh swell. In my state, there are several protests happening the next county over. It's so close I could literally drive over if I wanted to.

It was only made an issue because of the incredible racism in Ferguson (not this specific case, just on a day-to-day basis), they used the case to try and show off how racist the cops are there (not only there, of course, but you know).

Most of the rioters are actually from out of town (the actual townspeople wouldn't destroy their own town because, you know, that's stupid as hell). Just a bunch of over hyped kids looking to fuck some shit up.

On a more somber note, anyone here about that 12 year old kid playing with the fake gun who was shot to death?

The paint job on the gun looked too plasticky for a 1911.

I still can't believe they would shoot the kid or even make a call despite there being no shots fired (if the kid was playing around with a fake gun, he would have definitely pulled the trigger multiple times, there would have been very, very audible shots if it were a real weapon).

I still can't believe somebody bothered to call the cops on a 12 year old waving around a gun as if it were a toy (and in this case, it was).  You'd think if he was going at it for real, he'd be firing it off already or trying to hide it.  >.>

Some of the report people were saying that the kid was acting like it was a real gun/ telling the other kids at the playground that it was real.

What I read was that the 911 caller said something like "there's a kid on the playground waving around a gun, and people, are scared.  I think it's a fake gun, it might be a fake gun but I don't know."

And the police said they weren't told by dispatch that the caller said it might be fake- just that someone was waving a gun around on a playground.

Now meanwhile, the kid's gun had the Orange safety thing (that lets you know it's not real) taken off.  (Don't know if he did that to make it look more real, or if it was just like that) 

And when the cops told him to put his hands up, he reached for the gun and pulled it out.

 

 

 

I saw that on TV. They had a female voice saying what you posted, and I'm pretty sure it was taken from the phone records. So yeah, the woman informed them that it may be fake. Well, sucks that the kid died but I don't think the officers should be punished. 

I'm not surprised about the dispatch, honestly. The police dispatchers here at Prattville are pretty awful for the most part. They leave crucial details out of their reports that put civilians and officers alike at risk. Now they apparently dispatchers have caused the death of a twelve year old.

Again, there would have definitely been shots fired if it had been a real gun. No shots were fired. No shots were heard and no shots were reported. 

Officer was a fucking dumbass who didn't think the situation through, dispatch was idiotic as all hell.

I don't get your logic in the first paragraph. The gun shot BBs, why would that change whether he shot it or not?

The kid was being an idiot by scaring people at the park he was at. As tragic as it is that the cop shot him fatally, I think the cop was in the right. It isn't exactly unheard of a 12 year old shooting people at this point, and the cop wasn't going to take chances when the kid reached for his gun :P

The other day a 3 or 4 year old accidentally shot his mom to death while she changed his diaper

I don't know what kind of a dumbass you have to be to let your 3/4 year old kid play with a real, loaded gun while you change his diaper, but honestly, it's just natural selection at that point.

I now calmly ask everyone to lighten up, and post to my thread!

http://chooseyourstory.com/forums/the-lounge/message/14483

"EVERYBODY, lighten the fuck up, now!"

The Grand Jury got their job wrong. I believe that they were thinking in terms of "whether he was guilty", which would be incorrect as opposed to the way the law requires them to think, which is "whether there are grounds for a charge". 

Also, six times? Don't they have a taser? Or some sort of martial arts training?  

Is this one of your attempts to troll, or do you just not understand what happened?

I haven't actually heard very much about it. Conversations with loved ones and the Internet, for the most part. Can you enlighten me? 

Use the magic of scrolling up and reading what was already said.

I'm responding to this as if it is not a troll, but really hope this is.

 

First off.  Have you had any professional training in fire arms?  If not, you really don't have logic behind your 'six times?!' argument.

I've taken a concealed carry course and trained with grenades, M4s, 240Bravos, etc.  Darren Wilson fired all those shots to eliminate a threat.  Law Enforcement is trained to shoot to kill.  This isn't the movies.  You don't shoot someone in the knee cap with one shot and walk away.  Michael Brown wasn't just standing there with his hands up taking bullet after bullet. 

If you listen to the interview with Darren Wilson, you'd know why he went for his gun over 'taser and martial arts training'.
 

Darren Wilson finds tasers "big" and thinks they take up too much belt space. But it's a non-lethal piece of equipment, that avoids the necessity of taking a life. Why wasn't he wearing one? Because it's uncomfortable on the belt?  The problem here is that he didn't opt for a taser.. for no good reason. Also, why not have on in the car? 

 Also, Law Enforcement is trained to shoot to kil. . This isn't a question of why he didn't shoot his knee...

It's why he kept shooting. I'm well aware "this isn't the movies," so there's no need to be a condescending. Threats have to be dealt with extreme prejudice, I understand. But what about when they are no longer threats? 

Let's assume his blow-by-blow is true. He was probably justified in shooting when Brown went for his gun. Hell, he might have even been in the right when he shot him a second time. 

But when Brown ran at him? What the heck? Even if he was "incredibly strong" he was still bleeding. ALSO, he didn't use pepper spray in close quarters, because he didn't want to incapacitate himself. Understandable. But what about when Brown had taken what, three bullets? And they were on the street? Why not pepper spray him then? Or at least make a move to arrest him, instead of killing him. 

At that point, the danger of losing his gun was obviously gone. He wasn't in danger of pepper spraying himself. Why not pepper spray him? Why not deviate from that "rhetoric" that seems so popular? 

They're trained to shoot to kill, but that's a  last resort only when it's strictly necessary. When the danger has past, I've been informed it's *not* condoned for police to execute citizens. 

Of course, this is assuming it's true and he wasn't just covering his own ass. 

"But when Brown ran at him? What the heck? Even if he was "incredibly strong" he was still bleeding. ALSO, he didn't use pepper spray in close quarters, because he didn't want to incapacitate himself. Understandable. But what about when Brown had taken what, three bullets? And they were on the street? Why not pepper spray him then? Or at least make a move to arrest him, instead of killing him. "

Okay, does "shoot to kill" hold no meaning to you. If he already shot the guy three times, like you said, then he was only doing what he was supposed to, by finishing the job. Unless, I'm mistaken, when they resort to lethal force, they are supposed to go all the way.

They are supposed to shoot to kill. But only when necessary. When the clear danger has past, police officers are not supposed to "finish the job". 

Everyone responds to pain differently, whether it's a gunshot wound or stabbing.  Why do you think police often find victims stabbed over 100 times?  Maniacs don't just sit there and stab a corpse repeatedly for the heck of it.  When adrenaline is pumping, and it's a life and death scenario, you'd be surprised how much pain/injury you can take before you drop.  Michael Brown bleeding out after 2 or so gunshots does not equal 'not fit to fight'.

No, but at that point he had sustained significant injuries. Gunshots aren't exactly kisses. Also, when he was charging at him, would there not have been room to use pepper spray? 

 

That's the point right there.  After already taking shots, Michael Brown still had the strength to charge him.  In my example, that was an old man who got shot 20 times and was able to get up on his feet and try to overthrow his attacker.

Twenty? That's pretty incredible, actually. Still doesn't change my point. 

It's unlikely Brown would have been able to physically overcome him. Like I said. Good physical condition, and pepper spray. Even if he hadn't been shot, it's rather hard to continue fighting when your eyes are burning and you can't see. 

Otherwise, why would it exist? He had a non-lethal piece of equipment, and killing him was completely unnecessary at that point. 

I can throw something at the pepper spray crap too.  For Basic Combat training, they throw us in a closed hut with multiple CS gas canisters.  You take your gas mask off and breathe that shit in for a minute or so.  It is not as debilitating as some think.  In a close range situation, losing my sight and coughing isn't gonna keep me from beating the crap out of the person that did it.

What about if you're an injured man with no training who is bleeding, all the while being pounded on by a police officer? 

(What happened to nightsticks?)

This case is and will bring about change.  They are working on a Michael Brown Law that would require all officers to have personal cameras.  I can't say Darren Wilson is 100% innocent, nor can I say he is 100% guilty.

 

The issues I am having is the generalizations being thrown around.  Idiots on the Extreme Wilson side thinks all blacks are crazy, violent animals that will attack you for no reason.  Idiots on the Brown side think all police are corrupt.  

Idiots are universal, my friend. 

As far as "all police are corrupt," I don't really believe that.  But here in my neck of the woods, it sure seems that way to me.  It's a lot better than it once was, but we're not out of the woods yet.  Perhaps future generations will eventually see change, but I doubt that any of us will have that luxury.

Ha, I have a friend who got pulled over at night because his windows appeared to be darker than the legal tint.

When your life is under threat you shoot as many times as it takes to put the target down. Unless you want to die, of course. 

Here's a perfect example, I know this man personally.  His son and I are friends.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/nyregion/03shot.html?_r=0

 

“You’re thinking clearer than you ever thought in your life,” Mr. Vaughan said during a recent interview. “I don’t know if it’s the adrenaline or just the will to live. You want to live more than anything in the world, and you know you have no control. I asked the Lord not to hit me in my heart and head.”

When the gunman stopped to reload, Mr. Vaughan said, he pulled himself to his feet and onto the hood of his minivan. But the man knocked him on his back with a shot to the abdomen, again from about five feet away, and continued shooting.

The final shot, Mr. Vaughan said, entered his groin area and exited through his rectum, leaving him lying in a pool of blood and feces. He never lost consciousness.

“I wouldn’t close my eyes,” he said. “I kept telling myself, ‘If you close your eyes, you’ll go into shock, and you’re dead.’ ”

People survive a lot. But he was pulling himself onto the hood of a minivan, doubtless exhausted and suffering from bloodloss. What would have happened if he had tried to fight the gunman with his bare fists? 

I think you and I both know the answer. He would have gotten his ass kicked. Hands down. 

What if the man were a police officer, with knowledge of martial arts and in excellent physical condition.

We can go back and forth on 'What if' scenarios.  The bottom line is, we will never know exactly what happened.  Unfortunately, Ferguson, MO patrol vehicles have no cameras.  Wilson wasn't wearing a body cam either.  Until we can see all the evidence presented to the jury, it's hard to say if this went the right way or not.  I'm just playing devil's advocate and pushing people to think on this issue.  The media did a great job of convicting the man before solid evidence was ever presented.

Funny you should say that. People tend to get angry when someone is brutally treated by a police officer. Largely for the same reasons I presented to you. 

Also, do you think the fact that he was a police officer and "ought to be respected" didn't play a tiny bit of a role in a jury's decisions? My parents are criminal defense lawyers, and from observing public hearings..

It's quite remarkable what you see. Police officers blatantly lie in court all the time. How many of them do you think get perjured? 

HINT: None. They aren't equal in the eyes of the law, I'm sorry to say. It's really quite unfortunate. 

Why would they be equal? If that was the case they wouldn't even be able to stop criminals, since it's technical illegal to do so unless you're fearful for your life.

Hate the system all you want, but to cry about them not being treated equally is just pointless. They wouldn't be able to do their jobs if they were treated equally.

I have only met one cop with Martial arts training, and we trained in BJJ together for a while.

I just hope this is a huge wake up call.  If I was a cop, I'd have my own personal camera on at all times just to cover my own ass.  The world hates authority and always will.  

Well, until completely anarchy goes into effect, but then, they'll just hate the guys who step in to fill the power vacuum. So, I guess you're not wrong.

That's true. 

@Malkalack

 

Regardless, bro.  I'm sorry. You have my whole heart. You always did. You're the best guy. You always were. If I'm not here you can still talk to me. You can talk to me and I'll talk to you. You'll see.

Don't apologize! XD

I love a good argument, and I don't necessarily think it's  a show of hostilities. :P  

I also wasn't ignoring you guys; I was studying for exams for the past half-hour. 

Finals coming up?

Nah. Just shit that we have before the holidays. Almost over, though! XD 

Yeah, my finals are next week. If I pass my classes, I get my Associate's. Then, I have to try to get into a 4-year.

Good luck fellas.  I hated college.  That's why I went Army instead of Grad school ;0

Yeah, I'm working things out so I'll be able to go to a different college for each degree. :P

Getting multiple degrees!?  I took my Bachelor's in Management and was fine with that! ahha.

I mean, I'm getting my Associate's here. Then, I'll go to a private to get my Bachelor's. After that, I'll go to a public for either an MAcc or an MBA.

This feels like appropriate humor for this situation.

Did no one catch "The Road" reference there?! lol.

Read this awesome comment about the Ferguson case: 

 

On Ferguson: Lesley McSpadden (Brown’s mother), never married his father.
Louis Head, McSpadden’s spokes-person boyfriend, didn’t marry McSpadden.
He is NOT Michael Brown’s stepfather. Michael Brown did not live with them. They did not care enough about him to raise him in their home. Mike Brown lived with his grand parent Pearle Gordon, and she raised him. Lesley and Louis had their friends attack Pearle, they beat her up and stole money from her. Why? She was selling T-shirts memorializing Mike Brown, her grandson, and Lesley McSpadden felt “entitled” to the money. Nice family right

That seems about par for the course.

I like it how I don't see any URL of this color and expect us to believe.  I mean, of course we could look up that info and verify it ourselves, but there's a thing called convenience...

a URL wasn't needed because it is all things you can verify almost instantly.  There's a reason he went by Michael Brown, his mother goes by Lesley McSpadden, his "step father" Louis Head.  Louis is not his step father in the legal sense at all.  Just a bunch of idiots, arguing over t-shirt sales for their dead son.With the case finally closed I see how moronic these few people are. (not generalizing a whole race or group).

 

No wonder the kid ended up where he did...

According to the autopsy results, Brown was shot at close range specifically in his right hand. Of course I guarantee that now people will say that he was trying to defend himself from the cop before he ran and was shot dead.

Um...

...how are autopsies related to disputes with members of families, other than the fact that they're all tied to a guy shot as told by you..?

They aren't, just put it there for the sake of it being there. :/

As much as I'd like this to be true, I'd need to see the source first :P

And this is even more hilarious

http://news.yahoo.com/columbia-law-school-lets--traumatized--students-postpone-finals-after-non-indictments-in-eric-garner--michael-brown-cases-170145848.html

 

Not gonna lie, I'd do the same thing if I was stressed by law school tests. Post-secondary education at it's finest

Yes, it would be much more shocking if it was anything but law school. XD

The thing that pissed me off about this whole event was the fact that the rioters were breaking into stores of hard working people and who had nothing to do with the shooting. Yeah great example of police being in the wrong.

Diggin' the Nightwing profile pic

And yet now they're complaining about the police's non-violent tactics to stop rioters. 

"I broke into an innocent mans store and stole stuff during the riot! Then some rude police man attempted to stop me and I complained that they were abusing their power!" -[Insert Rioter's Name here]

"They shot my pregnant woman in the face with a beanbag round!  We weren't even from Ferguson!" (insert name of other people who had no other reason to be at Ferguson to protest, knowing that heavy resistance was probably expected.)

The thing I hate the most is that there actual is a pandemic of police brutality and abuse of power that is being obfuscated by the actions of shortsighted, idiotic people.

Well corruption and abuse of power has always been there and should be stopped, but rioting with the excuse of racism isn't helping anyone.

That is what I am saying. It's like the boy who cried wolf. The actions of the rioters in Ferguson have actually painted the Ferguson Police Department (which is predominantly white and has acted largely out of bias and prejudice in the past) in a positive light.

You need to show some reliable statistics if you're going to say things like that, haha.

Think about what you just said.

That's part of the point. You have no reason to say what you said aside from reading the occasional news article demonizing the police :)

Edit: Fuck this shit. I'm not even completely awake yet.

The thing I hate the most is that there actual is a pandemic of crime and abuse of police that is being obfuscated by the actions of shortsighted, idiotic people.

Bwahahaha. Moskim.

An officer was killed yesterday in a drive-by during a routine traffic stop. He wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary, people just saw an officer and decided to shoot as they drove by. 

People wonder why Police tend to shoot people trying to kill them, the murder attempts happen pretty often -_-