18-year-old Michael Brown was killed by police over the weekend. It turns out he was unarmed and the preliminary story of what happened is all kinds of fishy.
Based on this LA Times story, Brown and a friend were walking in the middle of the street to Brown's grandmother's house. A patrol car pulled up and told them to get out of the street and some kind of scuffle ensued with Brown in the car. Then, Brown got out, put his hands up and was shot repeatedly?
Try to disregard all the ridiculous looting and vandalism by the opportunistic scum.
The officer who fired the shots was a 6-year vet of the force and is on paid administrative leave.
LA Times Reporting - (
New Window )
And you are a troll....pretty obvious by now. So repost it again....lol
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 11828523 bradshaw44 said:
Quote:
In comment 11827034 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11827029 bradshaw44 said:
Quote:
In comment 11827023 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11826939 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
The horror....It hasnt been proven he hit him the face? And the gun didnt go off inside the car? And they weren't struggling. Except some want you to believe he was pulling a 300lb man into the car.....but whatever.. You have been proven to be a troll. congrats...
This is so fucking stupid. You sit there and keep repeating "OMG YOU CLAIM HE PULLED A 300 LB INTO A CAR LOL TROLL TROLL TROLL"
While it's equally as stupid, if not even more stupid, to assume someone would fight a cop, run away from a cop, then turn around and faced an armed cop, while unarmed, and charge at him.
The truth is, NEITHER of those things probably happened. But in a vacuum, the latter is less plausible than the former.
but oh yeah, Brown shoved a clerk and took $48 worth of cigars. Clearly he was ready to fight cops to the death.
It's like you wish he was a crazed, cracked out "thug" (i.e nigger) hellbent on killing a cop. Well even if he was, him stealing a box of cigars while shoving a cop isn't really proof of that, sorry. It's fucking bullshit.
I love how you so casually dismiss his behavior and then go on to further your argument by describing what he stole AND it's value. And it wasn't just a shove. When the clerk tries to keep Brown from leaving the store, Brown makes an agressive charge or movement toward him. I guess that could alleged kidnapping by the store owner.
And forget all that... You flat out clearly don't give two shits about the clerk who just went through a traumatizing situation.
Ok, does ANY of that have to do with whether or not Brown should be shot dead in the street?
What are you trying to say here? The clerk was traumatized, so Brown deserved to die in the middle of the road?
I'm bringing up the value of the item and the fact that it was a shove because I am trying to dispel the notion that the robbery somehow implies Brown was a crazed maniac on a deathwish trying to murder cops.
If he was a crazed murderer on a deathwish who didn't care about killing cops, he'd have likely stolen something of greater value, and actually injured the clerk.
But regardless of what happened, regardless of how traumatizing the situation was for the clerk (I mean, he didn't even call 911 but regardless, there could have been other reasons) - it doesn't matter, because we have due process in this country, and Brown committing a robbery shouldn't be some kind of roundabout justification for him being shot dead in the street.
Regardless of how much you want to break down the robbery, the fact of the matter is that nobody deserves to be shot dead for something of that magnitude, unless you think we should be doling out the death penalty for unarmed robberies.
And the retort to this is that it shows that Brown was in a certain state of mind that would lead people to believe he was likely to kill a cop. And my response to that is how I ended my last post: it's fucking bullshit. Shoving a clerk and stealing something of comparatively value makes you a criminal, but doesn't equate to someone being down to just start killing cops.
It's simple. You've chosen to defend a criminal and down play his behavior because you hate cops. And further you ignore the innocent store clerks assault to further your cause. You've allowed your hatered to cloud your judgement. I probably have what could be described as an unhealthy dislike of police officers. Yet I'm able to use simple reason in my thought process of any situation.
Again, please tell me, all the chips on the table; if you're a betting man, you're betting on the the belief that after exhibiting such dangerous behavior on that tape, he just happened to stumble across a racist cop that was out to kill a black kid, in the middle of the street, in the middle of a neighborhood of his peers, in the middle of the day???
There are times when you have to step back and really allow yourself to look at things logically and not let bias cloud your judgement.
Give me a break. I'm stating that someone committing an unarmed robbery of a convenience store isn't automatically someone who is likely to fight to the death with cops.
You're doing exactly what you're accusing me of: Trying to make what occurred seem as violent and dangerous as possible to postulate that Brown was someone who was ready to take a cop's life.
There's a huge jump between his crime and cop-killing.
And no, I don't think that he just ran into a racist cop who felt like shooting a black guy. I think there was some sort of incident, probably Brown trying to escape - but it very well could have likely ended up in a myriad of ways other than an unarmed dead teenager.
When an unarmed person is shot by the cops, there better be some solid evidence that a cops life was in immediate danger.
I'm also stating that police do not have enough accountability or controls on their power, and are ineffective when tasked with investigating their own organizations or other police organizations.
Then I don't understand why you're so worked up?
And if you don't see how dangerous that young mans behavior was in that video then I don't think we can get on the same page. That behavior was frightening to say the least. Had that little man shut that door, brown would have fucked him up. That wasn't just "stealing" it was a strong armed robbery. He didn't give a fuck what happened. You can't convince me otherwise. And that behavior supports the belief that he was acting irrationally that day.
If you think that Brown's actions as shown in the video, while deplorable, would make him a threat to kill someone (particularly a cop) later that day, then please don't walk down Easton Ave in New Brunswick and observe the drunk college guys walking around. Because they consistently beat the shit out of eachother and do way more harm to eachother than the shove in that video, especially after stealing from one another or eachother's houses... and based on what you've said about Brown, they are all ticking time bombs that could go off and start killing cops later.
I'm sure I'll get called out for a supposed false equivalency but it's more accurate than you think.
There are a lot more violent crimes committed on a day to day basis than Brown's robbery. and I don't think all of those people are time bombs of lethal danger enough to the extent that the cops can shoot them.
Like I said, if something can be proven to have happened during the interaction with the cop it's one thing, but it's bullshit to say based on that video that Brown was ready to start killing people and fighting cops till he was shot.
The lack of accountability for police and the fact that the vast, vast majority of go uninvestigated, as concluded by a variety of studies in a variety of locations.
Harassing people who record them. The fact that a cop's word is automatically always assumed to be true in the court of law simply because someone is a cop, unless there is video evidence, and the subsequent lack of willingness to implement video evidence to protect both citizens from police abuse and police from false accusations.
The absurd disparity between arrests across races, and in the NYPD in particular, the way stop and frisk targets minorities (according to the statistics).
As discussed at length, the heavy handed military-esque responses to certain situations.
The lack of effectiveness of internal affair investigations.
These are just a few things that jump to mind immediately.
Someone gets choked to death for selling cigarettes in the street, someone else gets shot to death after an altercation after stealing cigarettes... whether or not some of these actions were justified on an individual basis, the pattern is alarming.
Basically, way more accountability and not automatically taking a cop's account as gospel when they technology is available to do so. I'm not saying cops are always wrong, or necessarily lying 100% of the time, or even a majority of the time. I'm just saying they aren't always right or being completely honest 100% of the time.
Quote:
Unlike some people, and contrary to what you might believe, I'm not "rooting" for a particular "side".
i gotta say, in a thread full of hilarious shit posted by people who have no clue what they're saying, this is perhaps the funniest comment of all. you're not rooting for a side??? you expect people to believe that?
Quote:
I want justice to be served, and I'm not sure police investigating police is the best way to get to that point.
I don't know what better options are out there, but I wish there was some other way that was viable.
so, in sum...i don't like it because i don't like cops, but i have no solution, so i'm just going to spend three weeks arguing about it on the internet anyway, despite the fact that i offer nothing of substance.
awesome.
Yeah, contrary to what you may believe, I'm not rooting for a side. What, you think I'm gonna be all bummed out if it a video turns up that shows Brown legitimately tried to take the cops gun and tried to shoot him?
No, not really. It wouldn't change my mind about the concerns I've voiced on a macro level. So seriously, I don't give a fuck and am not "rooting" for anybody. It's an all around shitty situation and I think it's fucking pathetic that people are rooting for one of these two people.
And your second point is fucking stupid. It's not "I don't like cops", it's that there's issues with the integrity of the system in place. It's not my job to come up with solutions, I don't have the expertise or education to do so. That doesn't mean I can't voice my displeasure with how things currently are, so your point is idiotic.
Otherwise, don't complain about the Giants defense unless you can come up with a better scheme.
No, not really. It wouldn't change my mind about the concerns I've voiced on a macro level. So seriously, I don't give a fuck and am not "rooting" for anybody. It's an all around shitty situation and I think it's fucking pathetic that people are rooting for one of these two people."
Unlike you, I will be honest about this rooting thing. Yes I do hope it was a correct shooting in accordance with police protocol, if that is what you mean by "rooting". I always hope that police act in the correct way in such incidents (and yes we know they do not always). If not, let the chips fall where they may,
Not relative to this case at all, but just pointing it out for those who suggested those not instantly condemning the Ferguson officer must be pro cop.
Police Officer Will Not Be Charged For Killing Napster Exec While Texting And Driving - ( New Window )
No, not really. It wouldn't change my mind about the concerns I've voiced on a macro level. So seriously, I don't give a fuck and am not "rooting" for anybody. It's an all around shitty situation and I think it's fucking pathetic that people are rooting for one of these two people."
Unlike you, I will be honest about this rooting thing. Yes I do hope it was a correct shooting in accordance with police protocol, if that is what you mean by "rooting". I always hope that police act in the correct way in such incidents (and yes we know they do not always). If not, let the chips fall where they may,
Well, I guess good for you if you're "rooting" for a side. Officer Wilson can be cleared in this incident, and it doesnt' change the issues at large. This case can go one way or the nothing, but it won't impact the larger trends at work.
So have fun "rooting". It definitely explains your attempts to make Michael Brown to look like a dangerous, cracked out "nigger" (aka "thug") who was ready to start cop killnng. At least youre honest so your intensions are clear, and if you're being honest about "rooting" for one side or another, most reasonable people won't take your assessment of Brown seriously.
After all, you'd legit be happy if more news came out to make him look like a bad guy. It's like your glossing over the fact theres a dead teenager. But yeah, fuck it, i mean he was a "thug" right? It's not like people can turn their lives around at that point after committing $50 robberies that didn't actually physically hurt anyone. He deserved to be shot dead in the street, after all, he was a crazed "thug" (codeword for nigger).
Fuck rehabilitation. Let's just shoot all teenagers who make bad decisions and commit unarmed robberies dead.
Fuck it, those stupid "thugs" deserve it, right?
I'm sure you don't care that Michael Brown died because he's a "thug", right? Fuck due process, fuck the court systems, he deserved to be shot dead in the middle of a street, cause fuck "thugs", they don't deserve due process.
the most deplorable disposition is that it doesn't matter that Brown died cause he was a "thug" (i.e nigger). As if the fact he committed a $50 robbery where he shoved a clerk just shows he's a crazed "thug" about to go on a killing spree.
Jon from PA, I don't think you hate black people, and I don't think youre racist at all. But why don't you come out and say you dislike "niggers" (aka thugs), which are pretty much poor black people in terrible economic areas.
We aren't stupid. We can all see the subtext. "Thug" is the PC way to say nigger. its very obvious and has been for a while.
There's been various articles about how "thug" has replaced nigger, in common conversation. I'm not saying "thug" is racist, but come on, it's obvious.
You can replace "thug" with nigger and see if it has any affect on the sentences as constructed, cause it doesn't.
I want to reiterate that I don't think Jon from PA is racist. Having said that, I do believe, Brown being black AND his "rooting" interest in the cop definitely skew how he views the situation.
People like M in CT can claim I have a "rooting" interest one way or the other, but I don't care one way or the other with regards to this partiular incident. IMO, it doesn't change the larger issues.When someone admits a rooting interest, they've essentially admitted they will take the opportunity to disparage the opposing "team". That's why Jon in PA's attempts to make a dead 18 year old kid look like a lethal danger to humanity make sense in context.
I really don't think so, my friend. I'm don't think anyone is overtly racist, at all. I don't want it come off as if I am calling Jon from PA a racist person.
But I do believe that Michael Brown being black is a factor in determining his "mindset", personality, and danger level.
I don't get how people are saying the video proves he was ready to start fighting/kiilling cops.
Go down Easton Ave in New Brunswick in the fall and you'll see way more violent encounters and people getting their teeth smashed in, kicked in the face, etc. But Brown shoves a clerk in the process of a $50 robbery, and now he's a legit candidate to start killing cops.
That's a huge leap of logic;
All I'm saying is the subtext is very obvious. I'm not a guy that throws around the word "nigger", but I'm not afraid to say it in a context where it isn't an insult and used as a platform for discussion.
There's a great deadspin article about how "thug" is essentially the PC way to say "nigger", (cue the insults re: deadspin, apparently for some reason they aren't a legit site)... and the article makes a lot of sense.
It's sad to me people are saying Brown was a "thug" so it's okay he died. As if the laws and courts don't matter, and cops can just shoot anyone considered a "thug" without any issues. I'm still maintaining that if Officer Wilson's life was in danger, he had every right to subdue Brown. Bot the onus should be on him to prove his life was in danger. after all, he's not the one who was born in 1996 and shot dead a few weeks ago.
Cry me a river, dude. It's quite obvious to everyone who "rational" you are. You've consistently gotten facts about the case wrong, and admitted to having a "rooting interest", which inherently means you are biased. It isn't a huge leap in logic to assme you'd LOVE for any more info to come out that makes Brown look like a worse person.
I'm glad you're "rooting interest" would be served by making a dead teenager look like more of a bad guy.
So yeah, if you can point out where I lost rationality, I'd appreciate it.
Can I describe some one as a hoodlum, ne'er-do-well, etc without it having a different meaning.
Just what is the generic term for a piece of shit reguardless of race now a days.
Inquiring minds want to know.
Come on now. I think anyone that claims that needs to think deeply about how they reached that conclusion because at the root they will ultimately find the problem to all of this.
I keep stating it that in general I do not trust the police but those concerned about police abusing power are attaching their credibility to the wrong horse here.
And l am sorry for the crime of hoping police officers acted in the right way. If that is what you call rooting, I am proud.of rooting
Can I describe some one as a hoodlum, ne'er-do-well, etc without it having a different meaning.
Just what is the generic term for a piece of shit reguardless of race now a days.
Inquiring minds want to know.
haha. Good point. I think I'd go with "douchebag" or "asshole".
Look, you do raise a good point. But "thug" is so obviously nigger nowadatys... Like I said previously, I'm not the only one who has pointed that out previously.
not sure if you saw my response in the other thread, but thanks for your help CTC. I am really grateful, and can truly appreciate that you can cast aside our difference in opinions with regards to this contentious issue and still help me out with other things. I owe you one, friend.
And l am sorry for the crime of hoping police officers acted in the right way. If that is what you call rooting, I am proud.of rooting
I can respect hoping that an officer acted within the parameters of his power, and it'd be better for everyone if that was the case.
But that disposition shouldn't expect to finding ways to try and show Brown was a crazed "thug" ready to start kill cops that day. Can we at least be realistic and honest? Someone who committed the robbery that Brown did isn't really likely to start turning around and charging cops with the intent of fighting cops to the death.
So I guess "root" all you want, but when you have a rooting interest, its only natural to try and disparage the "opposition"... so it's not a surprise nobody takes your opinion seriously.
People can call me anti cop and claim I'm a cop hater, etc, but honestly I just want to see them get it right. Unfortunately, I don't have faith in the internal processes of police departments to objectively investigate.
Maybe thug didn't change....maybe N%##er did?
Just something to think about.
And I am rooting for the cop to he right. Wouldn't want to live in a society where a cop would just kill a kid dead in the middle of the street middle of the day for no reason....which obviously didn't happen.
And Brown was a thug. It is not just just a simple theft. You are being an apologist. It is the menacing behavior...which makes him a thug. Look up the word menacing if you need help.
How did that happen? Not being facetious, really would like to know the history progression on how it evolved to that.
You don't have to help me.
What I want you to do 40 years from now is help, if you can, some 25 year old you don't know and may not agree with make it in life.
It's what it's all about.
For the first time since breaking football, the media, and the internet, Richard Sherman addressed the reaction to his postgame interview, and his critics' use of the word "thug."
"The only reason it bothers me is because it seems like it's the accepted way of calling somebody the N-word nowadays. Because they know."
The day after the Seahawks' win, the word "thug" was uttered 625 times on American television, or more than on any single day in at least three years.
continued ... - ( New Window )
Who decided this? When and where?
I personally don't use the word.
Please explain the origin of the instance of when it changed.
Sounds like some are just as ignorant as me on the subject but take it as Gospel.
If it's so simple, Please explain for us dummies.
No more no less.
For the first time since breaking football, the media, and the internet, Richard Sherman addressed the reaction to his postgame interview, and his critics' use of the word "thug."
"The only reason it bothers me is because it seems like it's the accepted way of calling somebody the N-word nowadays. Because they know."
The day after the Seahawks' win, the word "thug" was uttered 625 times on American television, or more than on any single day in at least three years. continued ... - ( New Window )
I get the undertones, but people have used "thug life" since Tupac to describe a lifestyle, usually to brag about their own. The celebration of violence, of gangs, etc etc is implicit. If someone is over twitter flashing gang signs and handguns and a wad of cash is he not advertising that lifestyle? There are certainly some people that use that word interchangeably with "black" or with other more offensive words, but does one need to walk on eggshells around the fact that someone is very intentionally cultivating an image?
Quote:
Deadspin ...
For the first time since breaking football, the media, and the internet, Richard Sherman addressed the reaction to his postgame interview, and his critics' use of the word "thug."
"The only reason it bothers me is because it seems like it's the accepted way of calling somebody the N-word nowadays. Because they know."
The day after the Seahawks' win, the word "thug" was uttered 625 times on American television, or more than on any single day in at least three years. continued ... - ( New Window )
I get the undertones, but people have used "thug life" since Tupac to describe a lifestyle, usually to brag about their own. The celebration of violence, of gangs, etc etc is implicit. If someone is over twitter flashing gang signs and handguns and a wad of cash is he not advertising that lifestyle? There are certainly some people that use that word interchangeably with "black" or with other more offensive words, but does one need to walk on eggshells around the fact that someone is very intentionally cultivating an image?
That can be said about he mob of any nationality.
There in lies the problem.
We talking African American, Mexican, Italian, Irish, Russian, Asian, etc.
There are a lot of gangs vying to be thugs.
Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
That is a fascinating article..
Link - ( New Window )
"He's one of my best friends but we have to do what's best for the city," Jimenez said. "It doesn't mean he's a bad guy, but he made a mistake after 20 years of solving crimes."- Police Chief Jimenez
Comments including that of which I've posted above to me epitomize the attitude that many of us law-abiding private citizens find offensive. In one statement Jimenez marginalizes the egregiously trampling of a citizen's rights in what quite easily could have been a life-or-death situation because his colleague merely did his job for 20 years.
You mean to tell me that someone threatening to kill an unarmed citizen while aiming an assault rifle at them, all while demonstrating the clarity of mind to conceal his identity, should be *gasp* actually be held accountable for his actions? After having done his job for 20 years?
Imagine if we gave privately employed citizens the same benefit of the doubt after 20 years of experience.
Hoboken cops struggle to contain rowdy recent Academy recruits - ( New Window )
Quote:
The Florissant prosecutor is Ronald Brockmeyer, who also has a criminal defense practice in St. Charles County, and who is also the chief municipal prosecutor for the towns of Vinita Park and Dellwood. He is also the judge – yes, the judge — in both Ferguson and Breckenridge Hills.
In Virginia you see substitute judges in lower court who have criminal defense as part of their practice and I've seen one who also worked as a contracted attorney for Social Services (which isn't prosecutorial but serves a similar function in civil DSS proceedings). It sounds damning but I really don't notice a difference. They're not usually as efficient as the full timers but they do a pretty good job. You also see part-time prosecutors who might do some defense work as part of their practice (though never in the same jurisdiction). Most of them will conflict out at the first sign of a conflict because the stakes are just too high if they get habeused.
Sure, it's right here:
Big Al : 8/30/2014 6:44 pm : link : reply
a crazed thug ready to kill a cop.
You're getting old, buddy.
As Dune noted, it speaks towards the culture that precipitated these events
“totally justifiable.” - ( New Window )
Hee hee.
Just so that everyone knows- I completely made up that quote. The date and time is exactly the same as the comment I replied to.
Just waiting for someone to not notice so I can sit back and enjoy the fireworks (not really. Ok, really).
Quote:
Are you trying to set the loose cannon off with that edited post?
Hee hee.
Just so that everyone knows- I completely made up that quote. The date and time is exactly the same as the comment I replied to.
Just waiting for someone to not notice so I can sit back and enjoy the fireworks (not really. Ok, really).
Bored at work, are we?
What if the thread goes kaputz before you get a chance to read it? That's always the danger of inciting unrest on a thread then taking off for a while.
St Louis Post Dispatch posted 1 hour ago - ( New Window )