It is looking more and more like Darren Wilson acted as many thought and the shooting was justified. Shots were fired inside the vehicle. Browns blood found in vehicle, on the gun and on Wilsons clothing from the shots. Witness testimony also noted struggle and also contradicts others that his arms were not up. Seems Brown was coming or at least staggering forward from about 25 feet.
This is going pretty much exactly as it appeared and noted from the beginning despite the trolling attempts here and elsewhere to make it something else. Brown attacked the police officer, they struggled , shots were fired, he ran. He turned and faced the officer and did not surrender. The officer did what was his duty and in his defense and really the people of Fergusons defense and shot Brown down.
Now we should get some riots and more ridiculousness. As I noted from the beginning, all this has done is make racists look right and those supporting this case look dumb but they won't acknowledge it so racism wins...congrats....Now we should get some riots and looting in support of a thug who would otherwise be in jail.
Wash Post Link - (
New Window )
The latest shooting didn't help matters especially when people made the ridiculous claims that the guy didn't have a gun, but instead was holding a sandwich. Nevermind the fact that he's out on house arrest for prior gun charges, he had gun shot residue on his hands and they found bullet holes in a car behind where the officer was standing.
It also doesn't help when you have elected officials, like Jamilah Nasheed, putting out false information and accusations. I believe it was her that made claims that Myers was shot in the back of the head...when that simply wasnt true. When she was asked about putting out misinformation she said it's appalling that anyone would attack her and that she isn't inciting anything..The officer who shot an unarmed kid is who incited everything...She does not care about the facts of the case unless they support her agenda.
Yeah, let's not hear what really happened. Let's go with rumor and innuendo.
All it really says is that Wilson probably shot him in the car. The rest is your speculation.
Quote:
should go in the toilet, where it belongs
Yeah, let's not hear what really happened. Let's go with rumor and innuendo.
Where does the article tell us exactly what really happened? This is a political post complete with the OP patting himself on the back for noting his opinion frmo the beginning
Link - ( New Window )
Thug assaults police officer - based on witness and forensics
Thug runs and then turns back toward officer - witness testimony
Thug gets shot dead
What am I missing here?
Thug assaults police officer - based on witness and forensics
Thug runs and then turns back toward officer - witness testimony
Thug gets shot dead
What am I missing here?
Just those pesky, "minor" details
It's not that hard. The same news could have been conveyed much differently. Either you're tremendously obtuse or you're doing it on purpose.
Let's wait and see.
Now let's see if I got this in before deletion.
A bunch of idiots trying to see something that isnt there no matter how much evidence is piled up to the contrary all in support of a criminal who was a piece of crap and attacked a police officer?
Well, clearly you're a dipshit. I think I'll move on from this thread.
Do you guys accept yet that Wilson had every right to shoot Brown down? Just curious?
Thug assaults police officer - based on witness and forensics
Thug runs and then turns back toward officer - witness testimony
Thug gets shot dead
What am I missing here?
A brain.
So, yeah. You could have communicated the exact same information without it appearing like you being right was really what was important here.
Maybe instead of celebratory it is hoping that people would open their friggin eyes.
So now people that are not on the side of piece of crap thug who assaulted a police officer after robbing a store is a racist because he called him a thug...lol
You've shown you really don't know anything about "facts" or "cogent arguments". Perhaps you're not a dipshit as I said you were. If you're not, you are doing a bad job of showing it.
thug
THəɡ/
noun
1.
a violent person, especially a criminal.
After seeing that video and fighting with an officer of the law I think that word by definition fits. White, black, red or green.
Get it? You guys are winning the argument for the racists as are the rioters...
Get it? You guys are winning the argument for the racists as are the rioters...
I don't need to make an argument because I'm not trying to say that I know what happened as you are. The reality is that it's possible you're right. It's also possible that Brown was shot completely unnecessarily. The article you link doesn't actually show either, although you apparently believe it does.
I didnt say anyone here was a racist...others said I was...but reading is hard so maybe take another run through and see if you figure it out.
Brown Robbed a store, strong arming the clerk
Very shortly thereafter assaulted a police officer which resulted in shots fired in the vehicle hitting brown.
Brown ran but then turned back toward Wilson about 25 feet away and Wilson shot him.
The GJ witness testimony also noted he did come forward...
Ask yourself this. How fast would it take someone to get to you from 25 feet?
Thats less then a second...Wilson was justified. Its not that complicated really.
Does it bother you that their have been riots and looting and likely will see an escalation of the same when the grand jury find no cause?
Ok, show me some specific quotes where anyone else was labeled a 'thug'.
WHY AREN'T THE WHITE LEADERS CONDEMNING THIS OUTRAGE?! :)
Whites riot over pumpkins in NH and Twitter turns it into epic lesson about Ferguson - ( New Window )
and so is the fact that people still don't understand the difference between racIST and racIAL
Quote:
Is BS. People of all races have been called that based on who they are and what they have done not the color of their skin. And I live nowhere near a rock.
Ok, show me some specific quotes where anyone else was labeled a 'thug'.
What?
Although it was obvious to some that this was a bad idea in this case, these folks and the rioters doubled down and continue to do so....Which really has had the opposite effect for which they intended and instead makes them look like idiots and if anything reinforces the racist viewpoints. The media handling of it has been bad to some extent as well.
This whole thing has been incredibly counter productive and may get a whole lot worse. There is a small window to turn it around but I dount it happens.
Bot for the sake of round numbers
40 yards is 120 feet = 4 seconds
1/4 of 120 feet is 30 feet and 1/4 of 4 seconds is one second
that is 30 feet in a second...most witnesses have the distance at about 25 feet...He is 6 feet tall so would be mroe like 19 feet to cover....
No matter how you slice it, he is about a second away from Wilson.
We met the enemy and he is us.
But try it anyway
Mark out 25 feet and see how fast you touch something 25 feet away...Got a hint for you...you can reach out to something before your feet get there...That is due to something that most people have called arms....And it becomes more and more clear why there are riots...
Anyway, hopefully the truth will come out at some point... whether for or against Wilson and Brown.
Carry on....
Quote:
Is BS. People of all races have been called that based on who they are and what they have done not the color of their skin. And I live nowhere near a rock.
Ok, show me some specific quotes where anyone else was labeled a 'thug'.
Link - ( New Window )
If Brown was not shot dead, He would probably have been charged with attempted murder of a police officer. That is who these folks are rioting for.
It's an election issue. The death of a young man being exploited to rally a few more votes meanwhile the problem persists and shows no signs of abatement. I have no idea what happened that day but drawing lines and taking sides is just not part of any solution. I don't know Ferguson from Springfield but this sounds more like a problem that needs to be solved by Missouri and not the national news media and the social agitators. If they want to change Ferguson, elect new leaders. If they want economic opportunity, elect new leaders. Don't, as president Obama said, let cousin Pookie stay at home on the couch. People in Iraq walked over dead bodies and dodged sniper fire to cast ballots. These folks can get engaged, pick up a newspaper, listen to the news, read about the candidates, formulate a position and make it to the polls.
McVeigh was described as a domestic terrorist. I'd say that ranks below thug.
So I guess we're going point - counterpoint. Nobody wants to wait until all the evidence (at least with respect to the grand jury) is in.
Maybe instead of celebratory it is hoping that people would open their friggin eyes.
So you're fluffing your feathers because you're concerned about riots...on BBI? The 'apologies' from those on Brown's side? WTF are you talking about?
You think you 'won' an argument over anonymous strangers on a football message board. Which, given the sad nature of these events, still makes your behavior here pretty gross.
Stop trying to pretend there's any deeper or greater meaning to this thread than you saying, 'I told you so!!!!!'
If I said 1.2 seconds would that make it better?
Well, there are more than a few things stated by the police that makes little to no sense to me but whatever.... like I said, hopefully the truth will come out sooner or later.
Well, there are more than a few things stated by the police that makes little to no sense to me but whatever.... like I said, hopefully the truth will come out sooner or later.
Many(though not you) are way too quick to reach a conclusion before the facts are all in.
Quote:
Ok.
Well, there are more than a few things stated by the police that makes little to no sense to me but whatever.... like I said, hopefully the truth will come out sooner or later.
Many(though not you) are way too quick to reach a conclusion before the facts are all in.
This is true. Like I said, there are a few things that just don't add up to me but at the same time I'm willing to wait until hopefully ALL of the facts are in because just because things don't add up doesn't mean that they didn't really happen.
Usain Bolt's 10m split at the Beijing Olympics was 1.85 seconds. That's 32.8 feet. The 25 feet - 32.8 feet segment was the fastest part of that split because he is accelerating rapidly.
1.85 seconds for Usain Bolt to run under 33 feet. But you and Michael Brown are running 25 feet in under a second.
Chris Johnson has the fastest 10 yard split at the combine (30 feet). It was 1.4 seconds.
I will bet you anything in the world that you can't cover 25 feet in a second.
Stop making shit up to go along with your already-horrible posts.
In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.
So even if the person with a gun could shoot the person with the sword or knife before they get cut, the question remains whether or not the bullet would stop the person from cutting them.
This was a tactic used in the Philippines when the USA had control of that country. It is said that the Army switched to the .45 since people under attack by people with swords were shooting them but not stopping them.
WTF?????
Isn't that what you meant to say? Or don't you need to wait for conclusive evidence to come out before concluding that he was "obviously justified?"
I guess you are obviously justified in concluding that without any conclusive evidence, if you are an asshole.
Yeah his speed/distance estimate is off, but inside 21 feet the attacker has the advantage over the armed defender. In fact, that is a short distance. In the drill mentioned, people have covered up to 30 ft before the defender could get off shots - doubt a 300lber could. Seeing as how Brown had already attacked the cop in the car, was a very big individual, I would think the cop could rightfully fear for his life.
Of those that raised their hands, how many think the Ferguson cop is guilty?
Of all the odd posts on this thread, specifically expressing disinterest somehow strikes me as the oddest...
Oh yes indeed.
Quote:
If so, absolutely no surprise nuance on the tone is beyond him.
Oh yes indeed.
Just the guy you want making your case!
scumbag acted like a scumbag and ran into the wrong guy - sucks for him - I am more concerned about innocent people getting killed for whatever reason than saint micheal
What's new there? From CNN ...
The officer drew his weapon and fired, hitting Brown, Johnson said. A bloodied Brown took off running, but the officer followed him and fired, according to Johnson.
Quote:
Shots were fired inside the vehicle. Browns blood found in vehicle, on the gun and on Wilsons clothing from the shots.
What's new there? From CNN ...
Quote:
Still in his car, the officer grabbed Brown by his neck, but he tried to pull away as the officer pulled him toward him, Johnson said.
The officer drew his weapon and fired, hitting Brown, Johnson said. A bloodied Brown took off running, but the officer followed him and fired, according to Johnson.
Johnson's version that the officer grabbed Brown by the neck and tried to pull him in the car is a little hard to believe. What person would grab a 300 lb man and try to pull him in the driver seat with him? Makes zero sense.
Quote:
Quote:
Shots were fired inside the vehicle. Browns blood found in vehicle, on the gun and on Wilsons clothing from the shots.
What's new there? From CNN ...
Quote:
Still in his car, the officer grabbed Brown by his neck, but he tried to pull away as the officer pulled him toward him, Johnson said.
The officer drew his weapon and fired, hitting Brown, Johnson said. A bloodied Brown took off running, but the officer followed him and fired, according to Johnson.
Johnson's version that the officer grabbed Brown by the neck and tried to pull him in the car is a little hard to believe. What person would grab a 300 lb man and try to pull him in the driver seat with him? Makes zero sense.
People who see race in everything usually see it because of their own insecurities and impure/prejudiced thoughts.
"Forensic evidence shows Michael Brown’s blood on the gun, on the uniform and inside the car of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, law enforcement officials said, information they believe potentially corroborates the officer’s story that the unarmed 18-year-old tried to take his gun."
How does that (potentially) corroborate Wilson's version and not the version from Johnson from day one? "Brown attacked the police officer"? Where's the evidence?
You are clueless. 3.3 is the MLB record to first. The average time from home to first(90 feet) is 4.3 seconds. Being that the slowest part of that run is the first 15 feet, you are saying that the girls in your softball league are relatively as fast as the average MLB player.
scumbag acted like a scumbag and ran into the wrong guy - sucks for him - I am more concerned about innocent people getting killed for whatever reason than saint micheal
Sounds like you see race in everything to me.
BWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAA.....
Link - ( New Window )
Meanwhile dumbasses like you and the handful of morons here keep trying to hang an innocent police officer in support of a vile piece of trash who would otherwise be spending many many years in prison.
So if you are laughing at yourself for being completely wrong meanwhile riots have occurred and will occur again then congrats....nothing like doubling down on being wrong and you guys keep pushing all your money to the center of the table....
Or people like you and others saying 13 year old girls can't cover 60 feet in 3.5 seconds which is pretty average actually.
You have others ignoring the other links in the thread from the GJ witness.
People say I left out all those pesky details. I ask which ones and no answer.
Claims that the word thug only applies to blacks and is used solely by racists and is a racist term....despite a 3 second Google search to the contrary.
And on and on
So what we have really shown here is that people want Wilson to be culpable and ultimately people want these riots or at least justification for these riots and protesters. ....
So the real question is why?
Regardless, it likely isn't a cold start.
IMO, what happened is that a person is dead, in part due to his own actions and in part due to an officer who overreacted. One man will remain dead, the other forever tarnished and changed and an entire town thrust into infamy.
There's little in there to applaud.
Waits to see when it's safe to kick the guy then runs back into the crowd, lol
Not surprised, it's the only way he posts, pansy ass...
This case has been obvious from the beginning. Just some people refuse to believe the most likely narrative even as the facts come in or use common sense.
My questions stand and I do wonder why. People would rather see riots and an evil cop despite the evidence and common sense.
Link - ( New Window )
I actually succeeded, I didn't say you were wrong, simply trying to bridge the gap between the two sides of the debate. I thought that was obvious?
I really can't get on board with your other points until you see some sense with the running times.
"(times are from a standing start at home – not a swing – if you use a swing it will be about .5 seconds slower)"
Isn't that what you meant to say? Or don't you need to wait for conclusive evidence to come out before concluding that he was "obviously justified?"
I guess you are obviously justified in concluding that without any conclusive evidence, if you are an asshole.
This is what I was pretty much getting at in my earlier posts. The article you posted didn't contain any new info and therefore I'm not sure how it proves anything... except confirms what we already were told. That there was a fight within the car and two shots were fired into the car... but what we don't know is whether there was a struggle within the car because Brown was actually going for the officer's gun (as the officer says)... nor do we know if the officer was justified in shooting Brown dead because his life was in actual danger. I'm also confused a bit as to why this person's testimony means more than the accounts of other witnesses who were there who've said pretty much the opposite of what this witness said.
I explained this before. Sometimes a statement is innocent, sometimes it's not, but the interpreter of that statement that sees it as racist, regardless of the authors personal thoughts or intent, without question, it is usually because of their own insecurities about how they feel about race. they make everything about race because it gives them a false sense they can live with a clear conscience.
it's sort of like Bob in the movie what about Bob. If he pretends he has an illness then he knows he doesn't have it. He yells out swears to know he doesn't have turrets, people do this and BBI is a hotbed for them - they claim racism so it makes them feel righteous and free.
My only advice is you know who you are and how you personally feel, I wouldn't get worked up about other people's interperations of your written word.
But...on the other side of the coin, there are a lot of questionable words like thug that many people do associate with race (regardless of users intent), and if you care about other people's impression and opinion of you, it's better to be safe and not use them. thug can be a veiled racial epithet or not, so why let people guess which you mean when there are alternatives without the stigma.
Why do you keep comparing him to sprinters and athletes? Are there any 300lb thugs on BBI that we can get to do 25 feet sprints and time themselves?
Can I still eat pizza? Or that's not allowed?
Shots were fired inside the vehicle...why?
ANd then you have the GJ witness info I linked as well.
You have to to go great lengths and ignore the most likely, the obvious and common sense and the evidence at this point to support Browns side of this. You want to say you are not 100% sure? Fine but it is becoming pretty clear.
Shots were fired inside the vehicle...why?
ANd then you have the GJ witness info I linked as well.
You have to to go great lengths and ignore the most likely, the obvious and common sense and the evidence at this point to support Browns side of this. You want to say you are not 100% sure? Fine but it is becoming pretty clear.
I never said there wasn't a struggle in the car... only the reason for that struggle. Honestly, yes... I can very easily see an officer trying to grab a 300 lb man through his window as I've seen it happen before (although with a smaller man). So it's not like it's impossible for that to have happened. I personally just have a hard time believing that a high school kid would try to reach for a cops gun through a window. Not saying it can't happen, just that I have a hard time seeing a kid do that. Shot were fired in the car because of the struggle over the gun... what we don't know is why was there a struggle and/or how it started?
You're convinced that Brown was a menace to society based on information that's been known for months now then be my guess. All I'm saying is that we don't know much more now than we did a few weeks or months ago... at least not based on that article.
How do you know Fatzilla there isn't a thug? He could be collecting for local bookies or beating up High School kids for Kung Pao chicken.
The cop only was trying to get him out of the street so the idea that he was going to pull him into the car (ridicululous) to shoot him (why) is not likely in any sort of way.
That's the point...
They you have the GJ witness stating that Browns hands were not up and that he did come forward...
So based on the video tape, and this data it is pretty obvious that Brown was a piece of crap. Really the video tape was enough and that Wilson very most likely acted properly...
Again, why do people want riots so bad and are willing to support a street thug over a police officer despite the evidence to the contrary?
The cop only was trying to get him out of the street so the idea that he was going to pull him into the car (ridicululous) to shoot him (why) is not likely in any sort of way.
Yeah... call me skeptical but I don't think an high school kid who grabbed a few blunts and pushed a store clerk who was trying to stop him out of his way is thinking 'Let me grab this cop's gun!' when getting stopped in the middle of the street when the cop told them to get out of the street and then came back after them. Not saying there's NO WAY that possible... just seems unlikely to me but I'm not 100% convinced either way (as you appear to be). Also, the only thing that's a fact is that there was an assault that happened within the car, we just don't know who started it and how. Not to mention, you're adding a lot of things that I never said... such the cop pulling Brown into his car 'so that he could shoot him'.
We're just going in circles at this point so I'll just end this by saying that, as has been said to you earlier in this thread by me and others, I don't see how either of the articles linked by you proves the officer was justified in the shooting and that you were 'right' (which you seem to want so badly for everyone else to see and acknowledge). Even if it turns out that my beliefs in how the whole thing went down turns out to be true (and I freely admit that I could be 100% wrong), I don't think I'm going to gloat about it because it's still a tragic situation for the young man killed, the cop and the city.
For some reason, this thread screams that you're happy there's a winner, when most people would argue that no one has won. The racial disparities have been noticeably highlighted, as well as the willingness to jump to firm conclusions.
As I said, willingly obtuse.
For some reason, this thread screams that you're happy there's a winner, when most people would argue that no one has won. The racial disparities have been noticeably highlighted, as well as the willingness to jump to firm conclusions.
As I said, willingly obtuse.
Bingo. Well put.
So nice try...
Have fun championing the "win", though. I'm sure that's the best way to go about this...
You have a problem with my tone? I have a problem with the hanging of a cop doing his job in favor of a thug who was a menace. And the evidence completely supports this position.
I doubt many BBI'ers supported the protests, and I don't think anyone has continued to say Brown is some upstanding citizen shot in cold blood.
Heck, I have supported the side that the killing was justified from early on, and my particular distaste was with the Media who caused a rush to judgment, but I find little about this case to cheer.
I find no need to exaggerate the events by stating definitively what happened in that car. I find no need to call Brown names (even though thug to me was always a hockey player when I was young). I find no need to make this seem like there weren't errors made.
It is pretty clear errors were made by both people. Brown, for being disobediant and confronting the officer, and by Wilson who certainly didn't need to kill him in the scuffle.
It is almost like you just want to provoke instead of making a case that facts are starting to show what most probably already believed happened anyway.
So nice try...
haha. Step one. Act like a fuckface. Step two. complain that folks aren't discussing the facts and are instead discussing how you're being a fuckface. Step three. Declare victory.
I'm REALLY hoping step four is deleting this turd of a thread.
Waits to see when it's safe to kick the guy then runs back into the crowd, lol
Not surprised, it's the only way he posts, pansy ass...
Rocky, that ass kicking you got the other night was not enough for you? LOL...You going to run to the mods again after starting shit in here also..Fucking pussy
I am dense? Or are people that continue to hold this position despite the evidence dense?
It was a matter of time before an issue of national prominence ran to the forefront. If it wasn't this as a catalyst, it would have been something.
And the fact that this is seen as some sort of "win" will to do nothing to calm the discord. This shouldn't be any sort of win. This should be a sad day for the significant issues we still face here.
But nah. Gloat.
It was a great post Montana proving exactly what I said about you. It was just a matter of time until you proved me right. Lol
About as real as ManBearPig.
But, I really see no need to bash Brown, since it has pretty much been seen that he wasn't just some innocent kid gunned down with his hands up, or some upstanding citizen killed for walking in the middle of the road.
The fact is, whether or not the reaction to the killing was appropriate, I have to believe that in a perfect scenario, Brown would have been arrested and not dead. That the officer, even if he was attacked would not have resorted to applying deadly force.
So people were wrong or reacted emotionally? I doubt many still feel that strongly today and you are sort of holding them to their initial outbursts.
Just seems really strange to me dude.
Can I still eat pizza? Or that's not allowed?
Only with anchovies.
But like I keep saying here, folks are refusing to see the obvious and willing to drive that train straight into that wall. And there lies the responsibility for this entire mess. And Brown...
You were wrong on multiple facts in that other thread and making some new thread claiming some sort of victory, while ignoring the vast multitude of facts you had wrong in the other one, is ridiculous.
Cops rarely get charged in stuff like this, there is no victory here you horses ass.
I see that guy running at me, even if I had a gun I'd be running the other way. It's the old line, "Don't shoot him; you'll just make him mad."
It was a great post Montana proving exactly what I said about you. It was just a matter of time until you proved me right. Lol
Rocky you don't say anything..You start shit, get your ass handed to you and then you run like a little bitch to the mods..Your an idiot that is universally hated on BBI...LOL, go away you petulant little boy
And those still holding their position despite the evidence are responsible for this mess.
Quote:
Come on. There was a struggle in the car. Unless you believe the officer was really trying to pull a 6'5" 300lb man in through his window by the neck which is absurd on its surface, it is clear he attacked the officer. Not to mention the video of him robbing the store litterally right before this incident.
Shots were fired inside the vehicle...why?
ANd then you have the GJ witness info I linked as well.
You have to to go great lengths and ignore the most likely, the obvious and common sense and the evidence at this point to support Browns side of this. You want to say you are not 100% sure? Fine but it is becoming pretty clear.
I never said there wasn't a struggle in the car... only the reason for that struggle. Honestly, yes... I can very easily see an officer trying to grab a 300 lb man through his window as I've seen it happen before (although with a smaller man). So it's not like it's impossible for that to have happened. I personally just have a hard time believing that a high school kid would try to reach for a cops gun through a window. Not saying it can't happen, just that I have a hard time seeing a kid do that. Shot were fired in the car because of the struggle over the gun... what we don't know is why was there a struggle and/or how it started?
You're convinced that Brown was a menace to society based on information that's been known for months now then be my guess. All I'm saying is that we don't know much more now than we did a few weeks or months ago... at least not based on that article.
There is absolutely no reason what so ever for an officer to grab what he believed at the time to be a robbery suspect by his neck through the drivers window and try to pull him in the car with him. Makes zero sense. Especially when you consider the size of Brown.
Its more believable that someone who just robbed someone would try and get away, or fight police.
We saw on the video from the gas station that Brown was not afraid to become violent.
But like I keep saying here, folks are refusing to see the obvious and willing to drive that train straight into that wall. And there lies the responsibility for this entire mess. And Brown...
Are there better examples for the black community to rally behind? Yes.
But is this bringing out the absolute worst in others as well? Yes.
The, at times, heavy-handed responses have done nothing but fan the flames of what they feel is significant inequities in their lives.
There are failures on each and every side here, including the police.
Quote:
In comment 11933365 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Come on. There was a struggle in the car. Unless you believe the officer was really trying to pull a 6'5" 300lb man in through his window by the neck which is absurd on its surface, it is clear he attacked the officer. Not to mention the video of him robbing the store litterally right before this incident.
Shots were fired inside the vehicle...why?
ANd then you have the GJ witness info I linked as well.
You have to to go great lengths and ignore the most likely, the obvious and common sense and the evidence at this point to support Browns side of this. You want to say you are not 100% sure? Fine but it is becoming pretty clear.
I never said there wasn't a struggle in the car... only the reason for that struggle. Honestly, yes... I can very easily see an officer trying to grab a 300 lb man through his window as I've seen it happen before (although with a smaller man). So it's not like it's impossible for that to have happened. I personally just have a hard time believing that a high school kid would try to reach for a cops gun through a window. Not saying it can't happen, just that I have a hard time seeing a kid do that. Shot were fired in the car because of the struggle over the gun... what we don't know is why was there a struggle and/or how it started?
You're convinced that Brown was a menace to society based on information that's been known for months now then be my guess. All I'm saying is that we don't know much more now than we did a few weeks or months ago... at least not based on that article.
There is absolutely no reason what so ever for an officer to grab what he believed at the time to be a robbery suspect by his neck through the drivers window and try to pull him in the car with him. Makes zero sense. Especially when you consider the size of Brown.
Its more believable that someone who just robbed someone would try and get away, or fight police.
We saw on the video from the gas station that Brown was not afraid to become violent.
It has been stated repeatedly that he had no knowledge of the robbery.
Would that help PA's time assessment?
Montana the sucker punching troll. Lol gotta love it...
Not at all.. Without enough evidence they won't prosecute, does not make it justified Ace..We will see how justified it is when the civil case happens
Would that help PA's time assessment?
Montana the sucker punching troll. Lol gotta love it...
See here we go...Rocky starts shit, gets smacked..starts forming his whine about getting picked on to run to the mods...Classic Rocky M.O..
Loser in life, loser on BBI
Quote:
Are there better examples for the black community to rally behind? Yes.
But is this bringing out the absolute worst in others as well? Yes.
The, at times, heavy-handed responses have done nothing but fan the flames of what they feel is significant inequities in their lives.
There are failures on each and every side here, including the police.
Look at that. Thoughtful. Nuanced. Considering all sides.
Wrong thread?
I better start posting on the topic or people will see me for what I really am.
-------grit eatin Montanagirlie
I better start posting on the topic or people will see me for what I really am.
-------grit eatin Montanagirlie
Rocky, while you were banned and begging to give Eric a ride somewhere to get back on BBI, we had a 15 page plus discussion about this subject..
Don't you need to start begging for some help that never shows at this point..lol
You need to read the link you posted again. There is nothing unequivocally stated in that article that claims this was a 100% justified shooting
On a pizza, BMac
Lesson learned is moderators are not going to save us from this crap.
You're a coward. You proved it. You waited to see who was winning the argument and you pounced, threw a sucker punch and ran away.
It's what you do, if anybody should be banned it's spineless idiots like you.
PA, while the articles seem to lean towards Wilson not being charged, there have been numerous other articles and reports in the past involving this story that were found to be wrong. Making a thread claiming its a done deal with this story is jumping the gun to say the least.
They have yet to even hear the core of the Feds argument with this.
Quote:
In comment 11933391 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11933365 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Come on. There was a struggle in the car. Unless you believe the officer was really trying to pull a 6'5" 300lb man in through his window by the neck which is absurd on its surface, it is clear he attacked the officer. Not to mention the video of him robbing the store litterally right before this incident.
Shots were fired inside the vehicle...why?
ANd then you have the GJ witness info I linked as well.
You have to to go great lengths and ignore the most likely, the obvious and common sense and the evidence at this point to support Browns side of this. You want to say you are not 100% sure? Fine but it is becoming pretty clear.
I never said there wasn't a struggle in the car... only the reason for that struggle. Honestly, yes... I can very easily see an officer trying to grab a 300 lb man through his window as I've seen it happen before (although with a smaller man). So it's not like it's impossible for that to have happened. I personally just have a hard time believing that a high school kid would try to reach for a cops gun through a window. Not saying it can't happen, just that I have a hard time seeing a kid do that. Shot were fired in the car because of the struggle over the gun... what we don't know is why was there a struggle and/or how it started?
You're convinced that Brown was a menace to society based on information that's been known for months now then be my guess. All I'm saying is that we don't know much more now than we did a few weeks or months ago... at least not based on that article.
There is absolutely no reason what so ever for an officer to grab what he believed at the time to be a robbery suspect by his neck through the drivers window and try to pull him in the car with him. Makes zero sense. Especially when you consider the size of Brown.
Its more believable that someone who just robbed someone would try and get away, or fight police.
We saw on the video from the gas station that Brown was not afraid to become violent.
It has been stated repeatedly that he had no knowledge of the robbery.
The friend who gave his account said he was given the description after his initial contact.
Regardless, even without knowing about the robbery, do you think any person in the world would think it's a good idea to pull a300lb man in the drivers seat with him? What would he do then? I can't believe anyone would actually think that was possible.
You're a coward. You proved it. You waited to see who was winning the argument and you pounced, threw a sucker punch and ran away.
It's what you do, if anybody should be banned it's spineless idiots like you.
Your an out of touch idiot..We have been discussing this subject since the day it happened you moron.
Like i said Rocky "your a loser in life, and a loser on BBI"
The good thing is that the way I have you jumping on a string it is only a matter of time before your mental issues really come out..Then once again it's Bye-Bye Rocky, back to your sad little life without BBI
enjoy your riots.
Slap and run
The Montana way
In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.
So even if the person with a gun could shoot the person with the sword or knife before they get cut, the question remains whether or not the bullet would stop the person from cutting them.
This was a tactic used in the Philippines when the USA had control of that country. It is said that the Army switched to the .45 since people under attack by people with swords were shooting them but not stopping them.
I searched up stuff on the Tueller Drill and it's pretty cool. It's knowledge that could help a person out in a life or death situation in the future.
But I think the part I bolded above needs to be repeated.
"In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet."
Recognize
Draw
Fire
Distance of 21 feet
If you watch clips of the Tueller Drill on Youtube you realize one thing that is pretty obvious... "Recognize" and "Draw" is what takes up the significant majority of the time. If you start in "Firing" position, an attacker could be 2 feet in front of you and you could still shoot him before he reaches you.
I don't think "Recognize" or "Draw" played a role in this Michael Brown shooting. The officer had already recognized the threat and unholstered his weapon by that point. Mike Brown was apparently shot dead 20-25ft away from the officer.
So the Tueller Drill just does not seem to apply at all in this situation. The "he's a threat from anywhere inside 25ft" line of reasoning doesn't work here because the officer had already "recognized" and "drawn" his weapon.
HB, here is Wilson's Chief statement. I don't know if he changed it now but this is what he said in August:
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson -- hours after documents came out labeling the 18-year-old Brown as the "primary suspect" in the store theft -- told reporters the "robbery does not relate to the initial contact between the officer and Michael Brown."
Slap and run
The Montana way
No, I have hit you with a haymaker so hard that you dance when i tell you too at this point..
Getting close to running to the Mods yet Rocky??
Also you are assuming that the handgun was going to stop Brown...a 300lb man which we know often doesnt
And that was to be stabbed. Brown would be on top of him and is a much bigger man.
Michael Brown was not a threat to an officer who had drawn his handgun 25ft away.
Post of the day
enjoy your riots.
What do you mean "Enjoy your riots"? Do you see how that statement makes you look? Because someone feels there is an injustice here, they must like riots? Where do you come up with that kind of warped logic?
RECOGNIZE
UNHOLSTER/DRAW
FIRE
THAT'S what the Tueller Drill is measuring. And the answer to that is somewhere around 20-25ft.
But "RECOGNIZE" and "DRAW" is what takes up the significant majority of time in this Drill.
Officer Wilson had already Recognized the threat and Drawn his weapon. Thus, the Tueller Drill does not apply.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
And having said all that, speaking so conclusively on "what actually happened" at this point is ridiculous. And ridiculing folks' mistrust in police is also inflammatory at best.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
Your just not understanding the fact that there are some very disturbing facts about this case and there has been with that Dept for awhile down there. Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question.
You came into this discussion back in August with your decision already made and no willingness to listen to the facts that go against your view. That article you linked does not prove anything yet and you refuse to acknowledge that. They when you realize that is the case you pop up with another remark ("Enjoy the riots") to mask that fact.
What was that guys "Grip Strength" by the way?
And having said all that, speaking so conclusively on "what actually happened" at this point is ridiculous. And ridiculing folks' mistrust in police is also inflammatory at best.
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, on both sides. You assume that the people you're policing distrust you, maybe even want to harm you, and it impacts the way you treat them. Conversely you assume that the police are out to get you, you degrade them or assert your "rights" (not denigrating rights of course, just people's understanding of them) in clumsy, shithouse lawyer fashion and you wonder why your interactions with them are frequent and unpleasant. Certainly the latter category in certain communities is informed by legitimate grievances over the years, maybe involving the very officers at issue (often not), but mutual distrust is still at the heart of these problems.
I keep asking for facts about the shooting. I told you what happened and that was based on deductive reasoning and logic. The fact that the GJ witness and forensics backs it up was expected. You backed the wrong horse and there were riots and will be more riots. And it is on the hands of those that refuse to acknowledge the facts and side with a criminal who just committed robbery and then assaulted a police officer. The theories about how Wilson shot Brown were ridiculous then and even moreso now. Remember first it was in the back running away and so on.....
"I told you what happened and that was based on deductive reasoning and logic."
13 year old girls cover 60 feet in 3.5 seconds. This is just something I know from coaching but backed up here for everyones benefit. College girls are sub 3 seconds of they are good...and that is 60 feet.
Umm..That an unarmed young man was shot to death over an initial questioning about Jay Walking? That meet the "Disturbing" equation?
"I told you what happened and that was based on deductive reasoning and logic."
Ha..
[commotion]
Judge: order in the court! ORDER IN THE COURT!
[commotion continues]
If Michael Brown is not a 13 year old girl, you must acquit!
In your mind at what distance would Michael Brown not be a threat?
You clearly think he was a threat at 20-25ft. So I just want to know at what distance you would have felt he was far enough from the officer that he's not an immediate threat anymore.
If every time you had an assault on an LEO it ended in a shooting you'd have a lot of dead citizens. Thankfully they don't all end like that, there are different levels of force employed, even in situations where deadly force might be justifiable. Which again does not mean it wasn't justified here, it just means that it's not the end of the inquiry.
You're a fucking coward that follows the mob, you couldn't get a seat at the bar next to me let alone be allowed to talk to me.
And the only Mod I ever talked to was the one that emailed me to tell me you contacted them to have me banned.
Largest pussy on BBI and that includes Flounder...
You're a fucking coward that follows the mob, you couldn't get a seat at the bar next to me let alone be allowed to talk to me.
And the only Mod I ever talked to was the one that emailed me to tell me you contacted them to have me banned.
Largest pussy on BBI and that includes Flounder...
LOL...I knew the fact you run to the mods would get you...Your also a low life fucking liar because there is not a mod on this board that told you that..
Name the mod you childish lying piece of shit..As a matter of fact I am going to contact them now to clear this shit up and prove to all what a fucking low life liar you are.
You don;t know what the forensic evidence shows, o r the eyewitness testimony. For you to keep claiming that you do suggests that you are either delusional or highly prejudiced in some fashion. Excessively pro-cops? Racist? It's impossible to tell which, but there certainly is something more than a bit "off" in your single-handed claims that you, among all others, already know what the evidence shows.
Based upon prior evidence, I would guess racist, but it's only a guess.
Figures
Just shoot yourself, what waste of space...
Figures
Just shoot yourself, what waste of space...
Where the proof ace? The Email?
Typical Montana...
You don;t know what the forensic evidence shows, o r the eyewitness testimony. For you to keep claiming that you do suggests that you are either delusional or highly prejudiced in some fashion. Excessively pro-cops? Racist? It's impossible to tell which, but there certainly is something more than a bit "off" in your single-handed claims that you, among all others, already know what the evidence shows.
Based upon prior evidence, I would guess racist, but it's only a guess.
Well if you have a number of shots in rapid succession it's really the first shot of that barrage that's at issue. If you're shooting to stop someone you shoot until you're out of bullets or he is no longer a threat. That's not to say that an initial shot or two at the car would justify shooting him five or ten or twenty seconds later as he's walking away, but if he was a threat when he was shot and wounded the other three or four bullets that were fired immediately thereafter are "bad." That's not how it works.
your damn right I am going to the Mods, I want to see who lied about me contacting them..You can't clear up by showing the email...But you don't have one do you loser?? lol
The sheep can't leave me alone, I think they aspire to be me but alas, they can't...
You don;t know what the forensic evidence shows, o r the eyewitness testimony. For you to keep claiming that you do suggests that you are either delusional or highly prejudiced in some fashion. Excessively pro-cops? Racist? It's impossible to tell which, but there certainly is something more than a bit "off" in your single-handed claims that you, among all others, already know what the evidence shows.
Based upon prior evidence, I would guess racist, but it's only a guess.
Well if you have a number of shots in rapid succession it's really the first shot of that barrage that's at issue. If you're shooting to stop someone you shoot until you're out of bullets or he is no longer a threat. That's not to say that an initial shot or two at the car would justify shooting him five or ten or twenty seconds later as he's walking away, but if he was a threat when he was shot and wounded the other three or four bullets that were fired immediately thereafter are "bad." That's not how it works.
Rather, 'aren't "bad" ' not 'are "bad" '
Grab a copy of the time you said I ran to them.
Don't like that shit, do ya?
POW. BAM.
It's fucking annoying.
I'm goin
Link - ( New Window )
Grab a copy of the time you said I ran to them.
Don't like that shit, do ya?
POW. BAM.
You just posted in a thread 2 days ago asking the mods for help because dep was kicking your ass so bad. It was so bad that Filthy even pointed out how you whined like a bitch to them AFTER you claimed someone else does that..
You really are an idiot
But no can question the Jets-like effort he puts in here. He tries so hard.
lol..yeah a bit over the top...cant stand a fucking liar
You have only had one side present their case so far..And we still have yet to hear why he shot him 6 more times outside the vehicle when he was 25' away
Quote:
And the evidence of the struggle and assault in the car, going for the officers gun is enough coupled with Brown turning and not listening to Wilson and taking a step towards him. You assault a police officer and then come towards him again when being told to stop you deserve to be shot down. Not complicated
If every time you had an assault on an LEO it ended in a shooting you'd have a lot of dead citizens. Thankfully they don't all end like that, there are different levels of force employed, even in situations where deadly force might be justifiable. Which again does not mean it wasn't justified here, it just means that it's not the end of the inquiry.
If Brown went for the officers gun he made it a deadly force situation. Now if he went for it and ran awaythat's one thing...but if he went for it, ran away, then turned around and ran towards the officer that's completely different.
Quote:
Tueller Drill - The drill whereby you practice the idea of the 21 foot rule with soft training weapons and plastic handguns( ideally)
In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.
So even if the person with a gun could shoot the person with the sword or knife before they get cut, the question remains whether or not the bullet would stop the person from cutting them.
This was a tactic used in the Philippines when the USA had control of that country. It is said that the Army switched to the .45 since people under attack by people with swords were shooting them but not stopping them.
I searched up stuff on the Tueller Drill and it's pretty cool. It's knowledge that could help a person out in a life or death situation in the future.
But I think the part I bolded above needs to be repeated.
"In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet."
Recognize
Draw
Fire
Distance of 21 feet
If you watch clips of the Tueller Drill on Youtube you realize one thing that is pretty obvious... "Recognize" and "Draw" is what takes up the significant majority of the time. If you start in "Firing" position, an attacker could be 2 feet in front of you and you could still shoot him before he reaches you.
I don't think "Recognize" or "Draw" played a role in this Michael Brown shooting. The officer had already recognized the threat and unholstered his weapon by that point. Mike Brown was apparently shot dead 20-25ft away from the officer.
So the Tueller Drill just does not seem to apply at all in this situation. The "he's a threat from anywhere inside 25ft" line of reasoning doesn't work here because the officer had already "recognized" and "drawn" his weapon.
Because you are shooting at someone it doesn't mean you are hitting them or that you are hitting them in a place to stop them.
Quote:
And the chief also said Wilson thought Brown could have been the robbery suspect because he noticed the cigars in his hand. He did not initially stop them for that reason though.
HB, here is Wilson's Chief statement. I don't know if he changed it now but this is what he said in August:
Quote:
Ferguson, Missouri (CNN) -- The Ferguson police officer who shot Michael Brown didn't stop him because he was suspected in a convenience-store robbery, but because he was "walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic," the city's police chief said Friday.
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson -- hours after documents came out labeling the 18-year-old Brown as the "primary suspect" in the store theft -- told reporters the "robbery does not relate to the initial contact between the officer and Michael Brown."
The robbery did not relate to the initial contact. I said that, I believe. It did relate after he made contact because he saw the cigars and recognized that they fit the description.
Quote:
Because it has been the folks fanning this fire and those supporting a complete thug who moments before robbed a store, attacked a police officer...over the officer despite the evidence.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
Your just not understanding the fact that there are some very disturbing facts about this case and there has been with that Dept for awhile down there. Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question.
You came into this discussion back in August with your decision already made and no willingness to listen to the facts that go against your view. That article you linked does not prove anything yet and you refuse to acknowledge that. They when you realize that is the case you pop up with another remark ("Enjoy the riots") to mask that fact.
An unprecedented amount of deaths by police? Got any proof of that?
On a pizza, BMac
Who said they weren't?
Quote:
In comment 11933663 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Because it has been the folks fanning this fire and those supporting a complete thug who moments before robbed a store, attacked a police officer...over the officer despite the evidence.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
Your just not understanding the fact that there are some very disturbing facts about this case and there has been with that Dept for awhile down there. Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question.
You came into this discussion back in August with your decision already made and no willingness to listen to the facts that go against your view. That article you linked does not prove anything yet and you refuse to acknowledge that. They when you realize that is the case you pop up with another remark ("Enjoy the riots") to mask that fact.
An unprecedented amount of deaths by police? Got any proof of that?
Avg over 400 a year...And that is considered underrepresented:
The simple UCR database does have plenty of limitations. For one, the data has holes in it: Illinois, for example, changed its reporting guidelines in 2010 to comply with UCR methodology, and data is only available prior to 2010 for the state’s largest cities. And then there are cases like Dallas, which in 2007 quietly redefined what it considers an aggravated assault, lowering its violent crime figures in the database. Such discrepancies are a major problem for UCR reporting of non-fatal crimes.
But the bigger issue is that the basic UCR reports don’t include any information on victims or offenders. That data is provided to the FBI via a separate form, also called the Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). The circumstances of each death are supposed to be recorded here, with classifications like “gangland killings” (code 46), “lovers triangles” (code 40), and “felon killed by police” (code 81).
I dont know what a high number is and data is limited but what you posted was hyperbole at best.
I dont know what a high number is and data is limited but what you posted was hyperbole at best.
You've interpreted every letter printed in the news as a FACT pointing towards what you believe the truth to be. While I came to some of the same conclusions as you, I admit that there's a lot that none of us know.
A little humility might serve you well.
And police reports...
And other witness reports....
Montana just made it up it would seem.
I do love all the personal attacks though. Since you guys have been wrong so long I suppose that is all you have left. Enjoy the riots...cheers...You asked for them
Wow, you are really a loser.
And don't worry more evidence will be coming out soon enough further backing what I have been saying and further making the supporters look even worse....but big congrats to you guys on your riots and looting and I am sure more to follow....
--A clear and convincing articulation of the evidence, which you haven't provided but insist that you have; and
--A just outcome.
If it turns out that your fantasies, delusions and hypotheticals are actually correct, I would want nothing except a way to demonstrate that so as to avoid additional violence.
Only you came into this with an agenda, which you demonstrate obsessively.
So while I presented what the situation is looking more and more like, those on Browns side and have been in other threads before this one continue...
ANd there is still plenty of it here. What you miss is that what you reap is what you sow. And the hatred and arrogance in this matter is sowed and you are reaping the results which have been riots, protests and looting. And will likely get worse because people refuse to accept that a piece of crap in Brown is a piece of crap and that the officer acted in an acceptable manner.
A video of the incident could come out and people would still deny. So the question is why do people want to beleive something evil and misguided went on here?
People on some level want these riots. WHat occurred here has been obvious from the beginning really but that would require logic and reasoning and though instead of emotion or prejudged ideas.
But those that don't want to see, won't which will cause riots and looting....
Anyone just reading and dont believe me...check out Robs comments above..lol
This tells me all I need to know about what type of shitbag you truly are.
Anyone just reading and dont believe me...check out Robs comments above..lol
Owned? This seems to be a problem with you - you either don't (or can't) read and comprehend what people say when they respond to you. This what I wrote:
Interesting, my guess is that
Rob in NYC : 7:14 am : link : reply
Some of those better timed speeds for women home to first are for lefties, timed from contact - on a slap hit, they have that Ichiro-like lean that has them moving toward first at contact (and the distance is slightly shorter as well).
Your problem, again, is a complete lack of reading comprehension. Seems pretty hard to get owned using words like "guess" and "some", and having those points validated by your own link.
In similar fashion, your limited ability to comprehend other people's position has somehow, someway, led you to assert that anyone that disagrees with any part of your position is a "Brown supporter" that wants rioting. You are either lazy or stupid, and I am open to both (or a combination).
And yes, since you are incapable of grasping nuance, you keep off as someone that is simply happy a black man is dead. Probably not a look you want to run with.
I think that is very possible, but I am trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. Not appreciating the use of the word "thug" as code and thinking a link absolves him of the consequences of that word is pretty telling. Personally, when I use the word, I am referring to a murderous band that terrorized India for hundreds of years...want to see a link?
And police reports...
And other witness reports....
Montana just made it up it would seem.
I do love all the personal attacks though. Since you guys have been wrong so long I suppose that is all you have left. Enjoy the riots...cheers...You asked for them
Lol..what was made up? The report from the FBI I posted?
And again with the passive racist shit of "enjoy the riots"
--People that you have persuaded that there is clear and convincing evidence that Wilson was justifies in shooting every single bullet: Zero.
--People that you have persuaded that you are a pathetic, obsessive racist with a clearly delusional agenda: Hundreds.
Now, point two might be miles from accurate. However, that is the only impression you have left on anyone. So, it isn't clear what you are attempting to accomplish at this point. No one agrees with you, no one has been persuaded by you, most people find you obnoxious and offensive, and the longer you keep repeating the same bullshit, the more indelible that conclusion will become.
At this point, changing that impression would be more difficult than getting rid of a tattoo that covers your entire back. It's who you are, as far as BBI is concerned.
So the question remains, what do you think you are accomplishing?
And police reports...
And other witness reports....
Montana just made it up it would seem.
I do love all the personal attacks though. Since you guys have been wrong so long I suppose that is all you have left. Enjoy the riots...cheers...You asked for them
Lol..what was made up? The report from the FBI I posted?
And again with the passive racist shit of "enjoy the riots"
1. Do you think there will be an indictment?
2. If not, do you think it will be because of a conspiracy/cover up, or because it legitimately shouldn't be indicted?
I'm just curious as to where people stand on this now, however many weeks/months later. I myself don't know enough to comment definitively, although the fact that there was blood and a struggle inside the car, as the officer said all along, leads me to believe that there will not be an indictment.
funny not one of you jackasses saying how bad it is that they are likely destroying the police officers and his families lives. He is a true victim yet not one of you said a thing about him. That is perhaps the most telling and damning of all. You guys need to look in the mirror and ask yourselves why...you won't...too busy trying to circle jerk eachother...but you should
And Rob you were just piling on like your initial post about naked shorts. You guys attack and then wonder why you get attacked back. Little girls really
Quote:
Surprised you are still here after you got owned making up crap about girls only hitting from the left side...no way they could get to first that quickly. Then when presented with the data...still ignored it and continued then disappeared when you realized you were obviously 100% wrong....it was pretty funny and yes similar to the naked shorts thread. Blatant denial of facts. In this case it could be any clearer actually but you looked pretty stupid...funny stuff...
Anyone just reading and dont believe me...check out Robs comments above..lol
Owned? This seems to be a problem with you - you either don't (or can't) read and comprehend what people say when they respond to you. This what I wrote:
Interesting, my guess is that
Rob in NYC : 7:14 am : link : reply
Some of those better timed speeds for women home to first are for lefties, timed from contact - on a slap hit, they have that Ichiro-like lean that has them moving toward first at contact (and the distance is slightly shorter as well).
Your problem, again, is a complete lack of reading comprehension. Seems pretty hard to get owned using words like "guess" and "some", and having those points validated by your own link.
In similar fashion, your limited ability to comprehend other people's position has somehow, someway, led you to assert that anyone that disagrees with any part of your position is a "Brown supporter" that wants rioting. You are either lazy or stupid, and I am open to both (or a combination).
And yes, since you are incapable of grasping nuance, you keep off as someone that is simply happy a black man is dead. Probably not a look you want to run with.
Rob is correct. I coach two travel softball teams. For girls who are lefty slap hitters, we move the infield in to the same depth as we do for a play to home plate. We also bring our outfielders up to the grass on a skinned infield so they can quickly get a ball through the infield to second base.
For girls who have mastered slap hitting, even the second baseman has to rush a throw.
Rob tried to find fault in that point by saying they were already moving but that was incorrect. I posted additional links identifying it even further....
Again showing that Brown could cover the 20-25 feet in roughly half the time
At least I know I don't know enough to form a complete conclusion. Unfortunately, some seem to have no problem jumping to a conclusion.
If you are not African American, and you're not from St. Louis, there's really only one reason you'd be extremely interested in this story. It's the same reason many were focused on Trevon Martin, it's the same reason some Northerner's get all worked up over Southern Border immigration.
It started with a majority black city with an all-white government.
It continued with the remarkable stupidity of leaving the body in the street for 4 1/2 hours after the incident.
It continued with the incredibly bad behavior of the Ferguson police in the first days after the incident.
It continued after that because the various levels of government refused to give out any information at all about the officer involved, as if there was no right to know.
Yes, it is awful that the relatives of this POSSIBLY innocent man have come under such pressure. The causes are vastly more complex than you suggest, and your unwillingness to concede that once again lead back to the conclusion that you are a racist.
He said the first sign was the Feds taking over the investigation. The second now, are the controlled leaks of evidence that corroborate the officer's story.
He said this is all being done to "let them down easy", meaning the protestors, and prepare them for the inevitable non-indictment.
You fact-fucking prick.
24 hours later and you still have no life.
He said the first sign was the Feds taking over the investigation. The second now, are the controlled leaks of evidence that corroborate the officer's story.
He said this is all being done to "let them down easy", meaning the protestors, and prepare them for the inevitable non-indictment.
was there an indication whether the non-indictment was the right decision based on evidence and testimony but they're doing this to possibly diffuse civil (or violent) unrest, or because they wanted to just let an police officer kill someone or cover it up.
Why would someone posting on your shit thread mean they "enjoyed long showers in the mens room with your coaches"?
Were there issues with the police department...the 4 hours was bad...Not sure the reasoning there...But like I keep saying, you guys backed the wrong horse here and have been and the race baiters led you all in and you guys don't know when to realize what is actually occurring. And the riots and protest and those to follow are on your hands.
And keep trying to insult me but I was right on this from the beginning and maybe if instead of trying to see something that wasnt there and maybe if you didnt fall for the bait, there wouldnt be these protests and riots and riots to come. The blood is on your hands...not mine.
Am I smug? Perhaps...but I was right and continue to be right and most of you continue down the path ...the very definition of stupid...
I still have the one question: What do you think you are accomplishing here?
But many of you are doubling down on stupid. I think that is where most of your anger is really from. The realization that on some level you were played, your emotions were played and on some level you are responsible as part of the larger community..
This thread is getting to the point where we have to consider dumping it.
(I know we're all bored with the bye week coming up, but let's keep our heads).
Been sort of fascinating and then comes the typical BBI circle jerk attack mode....which is kind of funny...
And the big one is tell me how the officer acted rashly. That was the latest claim...lets hear it.
It was fictionalized in that thy made him out to be much too smart.
And the big one is tell me how the officer acted rashly. That was the latest claim...lets hear it.
And here we are, Mr Quixote.
In fact have you guys really talked about the case at all?
You are scary crazy.
1. Do you think there will be an indictment?
2. If not, do you think it will be because of a conspiracy/cover up, or because it legitimately shouldn't be indicted?
I'm just curious as to where people stand on this now, however many weeks/months later. I myself don't know enough to comment definitively, although the fact that there was blood and a struggle inside the car, as the officer said all along, leads me to believe that there will not be an indictment.
An indictment was going to be a tough one from the beginning given the fact that all Wilson has to say to justify shooting him was that he felt his life was in danger. Without something obvious occurring like a vid of a cop walking up and shooting someone in the back for no reason (and even then its an uphill fight) you rarely see it. I also somewhat understand why the police have to be given leeway to a degree with something like this
There's the root of the problem. PA thinks it's a debate when it's been a declamation of his core beliefs and insecurity. He's the other side of the "reflexive cop hater" coin, he's the "cop apologist." One is exactly the same as the other.
It really doesn't matter whether his declamations are racially based or not. The fact that he's so myopically focused on his "evidence" being the only evidence and that he's been "right" all along paint a picture that should arouse pity rather than scorn.
He's a non-compo, and that's not something that anyone would recognize within themselves without all the defense mechanisms kicking in.
Except when people who have made their mind up are faced with contrary data, their arrogance allows them to ignore it and prattle on.
I am sure I am in the majority on this actually....people jumping on a thread where it is made up of baseless personal attacks is not really attractive to most people.
Dude, you suck balls.
I really don't know. The difference is that, having skills in judgment, I know that I don't know, rather than claiming absolute certainty, which at this point says nothing about the case and everything about you.
As far as social awkwardness is concerned, lets try this: We ask people on this thread whom they think is more socially awkward. I give you $50 for every vote I get. You give me $10 for every vote you get.
Deal?
What about your "background and Success" would make people think otherwise?
I really don't know. The difference is that, having skills in judgment, I know that I don't know, rather than claiming absolute certainty, which at this point says nothing about the case and everything about you.
As far as social awkwardness is concerned, lets try this: We ask people on this thread whom they think is more socially awkward. I give you $50 for every vote I get. You give me $10 for every vote you get.
Deal?
Fuck PA, a successful man like you would win this hands down..if not you got the bank for it big dog
And how about we pool the money and the pivot man keeps it? I am thinking that was probably Montana...lol
But you guys love to continue to throw yourselves up against the wall and do it again. And the nonsense to follow is on your hands. If there was a good fight here, I would be on that side but this was an obvious bad call from the beginning.
Maybe some of you have been so angry about this even from previous threads because you know you have been played by the race baiters and media and others?
That's some amazing leap into insanity, that one.
ceertainly suggested that you think that you are a pretty big f@%king deal.
And how about we pool the money and the pivot man keeps it? I am thinking that was probably Montana...lol
That is like your third reference to homosexuality.... Is that what your background is and what your successful at?
More power to you big guy for coming clean like that
Because if you accept that Brown could get to Wilson in 1.5 seconds. And if he did attack Wilson in the vehicle resulting in shots fired. The one step forward and Wilson was completely justified....which has been my point and backed by the forensics and GJ witness testimony.
So the only way to get around facing the truth and logic of the matter is to deny the 1.5 seconds.
Well that popped someones balloon.
They would laught at your comments...why is that hard to understand?
that is reference 4...let all that repressed shit out
Quote:
In comment 11933688 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 11933663 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Because it has been the folks fanning this fire and those supporting a complete thug who moments before robbed a store, attacked a police officer...over the officer despite the evidence.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
Your just not understanding the fact that there are some very disturbing facts about this case and there has been with that Dept for awhile down there. Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question.
You came into this discussion back in August with your decision already made and no willingness to listen to the facts that go against your view. That article you linked does not prove anything yet and you refuse to acknowledge that. They when you realize that is the case you pop up with another remark ("Enjoy the riots") to mask that fact.
An unprecedented amount of deaths by police? Got any proof of that?
Avg over 400 a year...And that is considered underrepresented:
Quote:
The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, which compiles the SHR, relies on voluntary involvement of state and local police agencies — a fact that may raise some questions about the integrity of the data. But many UCR numbers are considered fairly reliable,1 particularly fatal crimes like murder and manslaughter, according to Richard Rosenfeld, also a professor of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Missouri, who studies crime statistics.
The simple UCR database does have plenty of limitations. For one, the data has holes in it: Illinois, for example, changed its reporting guidelines in 2010 to comply with UCR methodology, and data is only available prior to 2010 for the state’s largest cities. And then there are cases like Dallas, which in 2007 quietly redefined what it considers an aggravated assault, lowering its violent crime figures in the database. Such discrepancies are a major problem for UCR reporting of non-fatal crimes.
But the bigger issue is that the basic UCR reports don’t include any information on victims or offenders. That data is provided to the FBI via a separate form, also called the Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). The circumstances of each death are supposed to be recorded here, with classifications like “gangland killings” (code 46), “lovers triangles” (code 40), and “felon killed by police” (code 81).
I thought you said deaths by police have risen...
That number doesn't tell the entire sorry anyway because it doesn't say which ones were unjustified.
Quote:
In comment 11933857 halfback20 said:
Quote:
In comment 11933688 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 11933663 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Because it has been the folks fanning this fire and those supporting a complete thug who moments before robbed a store, attacked a police officer...over the officer despite the evidence.
Just look at this thread
Disreagrd of the distance and time
Disregard of links to data about times - even arguing about how fast a girl can cover home to first despite links with the data
People want these riots, damn the evidence. They want this police officers head...damn the evidence...
I hold those that continue to take Browns side of the story and fan the fires responsible for this mess. And also for giving the true racists and bigots support to their side. You guys are creating your own monster here. Self fulfilling at this point.
Your just not understanding the fact that there are some very disturbing facts about this case and there has been with that Dept for awhile down there. Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question.
You came into this discussion back in August with your decision already made and no willingness to listen to the facts that go against your view. That article you linked does not prove anything yet and you refuse to acknowledge that. They when you realize that is the case you pop up with another remark ("Enjoy the riots") to mask that fact.
An unprecedented amount of deaths by police? Got any proof of that?
Avg over 400 a year...And that is considered underrepresented:
Quote:
The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, which compiles the SHR, relies on voluntary involvement of state and local police agencies — a fact that may raise some questions about the integrity of the data. But many UCR numbers are considered fairly reliable,1 particularly fatal crimes like murder and manslaughter, according to Richard Rosenfeld, also a professor of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Missouri, who studies crime statistics.
The simple UCR database does have plenty of limitations. For one, the data has holes in it: Illinois, for example, changed its reporting guidelines in 2010 to comply with UCR methodology, and data is only available prior to 2010 for the state’s largest cities. And then there are cases like Dallas, which in 2007 quietly redefined what it considers an aggravated assault, lowering its violent crime figures in the database. Such discrepancies are a major problem for UCR reporting of non-fatal crimes.
But the bigger issue is that the basic UCR reports don’t include any information on victims or offenders. That data is provided to the FBI via a separate form, also called the Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). The circumstances of each death are supposed to be recorded here, with classifications like “gangland killings” (code 46), “lovers triangles” (code 40), and “felon killed by police” (code 81).
I thought you said deaths by police have risen...
That number doesn't tell the entire sorry anyway because it doesn't say which ones were unjustified.
There is a lot of it that are unreported. That 400 per year avg is considered light due to the fact its a volunteer basis for reporting much of the info.
You think 400 a year is the normal rate of just reported justified deaths? You honestly think it was that many 7-15 years ago?
You should show your friends and family this thread. See how impressed they are.
Quote:
a veteran, successful, worked hard, a good parent and father, a good friend who helps his friends, etc.....
You should show your friends and family this thread. See how impressed they are.
I had to laugh at that one...I'M MORE THAN A BIG FUCKING DEAL!!!
As if there aren't people who have done far far far worse at 18 and turned their lives around and been neg positives for society.
This is an absurd comparison on the surface, but I brought up Mark Wahlberg last time. Mark Wahlberg was committing armed robberies and actually blinded a store clerk for life at an age near or younger than Brown.
Is he a "vile piece if shit?"
Whatever fits your narrative.
PA Giants Fan celebrating in this thread was so fucking cringeworthy. No matter what happens, a kids dead and a guys life is ruined.
From both sides. Just to make that clear.
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
And just to add, who knows, maybe he did try to grab the cops gun. If he did, its no surprise he got shut and I'd say it was justified.
I just feel one of those is more likely than the other.
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
Probably yes. I'm sure there are few others.
wat. Nobody goes to jail for a first offense of stealing a box of dutches, even if he did shove the clerk.
Pre-trial intervention...
Jesus why did I even open this thread. I'm only gonna get sucked in and eventually accused of being a race baiter or anti cop or something or the other.
You're really trying to build up this cigar robbery into some proof that Brown was a vile piece of shit sociopath. I think reasonable people can say that this isn't the slam dunk you believe it to be.
Quote:
...who thinks that it actually might be more likely that a cop tried to grab a kid who was walking away/disrespecting/potentially trying to run as opposed to a teenager trying to grab a cop's gun to shoot him dead?
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
Probably yes. I'm sure there are few others.
What's this based on? Just curious. Do you think the video evidence regarding the robbery of the dutches is enough evidence to conclude that Brown would be willing to shoot a cop with his own weapon in the middle of the day in the cop's cop car?
If I recall correctly, he did not have a prior criminal history.
Seems like a pretty big leap in crime to me.
Quote:
...who thinks that it actually might be more likely that a cop tried to grab a kid who was walking away/disrespecting/potentially trying to run as opposed to a teenager trying to grab a cop's gun to shoot him dead?
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
Probably yes. I'm sure there are few others.
I'm one of them.
That said, I'm not completely dismissing the possibility that Brown did do everything the officer said Brown did and therefore acted accordingly...unlike some others. I'm actually amazed that some here argued with PA as long as they did. I realized arguing with him was pointless a looong time ago and chose to just let him believe whatever he wants to believe.
I'll be happy with what ever the grand jury decides.
They will have much more insight than any of us on this board.
Sorry, if this statement is not referring to Officer Wilson, it is one of the most fucking disgusting, vile, despicable bullshit things said in this thread.
Please show me where you decided that Mike Brown dying would have saved someone else's life.
Show me where there is some proof that by having him killed, you saved someone else in the future from being killed.
Because he pushed a clerk and stole an $80 box of cigars?
Man, you really want nothing more than for Mike Brown to be a blood/crip, drug selling, gun toting, ghetto ass "thug" with like 3 children out of wedlock.
Cause I'm sorry, saying that Brown being shot dead means that someone else's life would have been saved down the line is atrocious.
Are you saying that any individual who did what Michael Brown did to that gas station clerk is a threat to kill someone down the line? I hope you're only referring to Officer Wilson. I don't agree with that sentiment in that context either, but at least it makes some sense within the framework of the incident, and isn't filled with bullshit that serves no other purpose than to fit your narrative.
Look, you can start beating your chest and patting yourself on the back for being "right" about this if you want, but it doesn't change the larger issues of race relations and interactions between blacks and the police. Those issues are still incredibly important and incredibly tenuous.
These riots are about Brown on the surface, but the true reason is the relationship between police and minorities.
Also, I saw halfback20 previously make a post where he questioned the merits of citizens being killed by police at an unprecedented rate. I agree that there is no frame of reference to make this assertion, but it boggles my mind that this is a statistic that is purposely not tracked by the government. I think it's an important metric to keep track of. It's neither here nor there, nor is my statement really a disagreement or argument against you halfback20 -- I just think it should be tracked by the government. The populace deserves to know how many people have been killed in interactions with the police, and I think most of the populace would agree that the vast majority of those killed in these interactions were shot justifiably.
He shoved a clerk and stole a box of cigars that is probably around 75$. Now he's ready to start killing cops in the middle of the street with their own guns?
If the officer were standing out side his car, yes I would say he would have tried to grab him. But what the Fuck would he do with a300lb man reaching through his window??
Is he going to pull him in the front seat with him? Makes no sense.
You think 400 a year is the normal rate of just reported justified deaths? You honestly think it was that many 7-15 years ago?
You said, "Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question"
Everything i read says the number hovers around 400 a year. Some statistics I've looked at show that between 2003-2009 the number ranges from around 370 to 500. So yes, 7-15 years ago the numbers were still around 400 and your statement that there have been an unprecedented amount of deahts by police in recent years is a statement you can not support.
Quote:
There is a lot of it that are unreported. That 400 per year avg is considered light due to the fact its a volunteer basis for reporting much of the info.
You think 400 a year is the normal rate of just reported justified deaths? You honestly think it was that many 7-15 years ago?
You said, "Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question"
Everything i read says the number hovers around 400 a year. Some statistics I've looked at show that between 2003-2009 the number ranges from around 370 to 500. So yes, 7-15 years ago the numbers were still around 400 and your statement that there have been an unprecedented amount of deahts by police in recent years is a statement you can not support.
Yeah I'm not sure I buy that there is any sort of systematic underreporting, or that this represents a spike in lethal force used by law enforcement. Presumably reporting has actually gotten better, as most states now have protocols that have a dedicated entity (internal affairs or the like) or an outside entity (state police) investigate such incidents, and because sweeping one under the rug would be pretty difficult. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely, at least in any large numbers? No.
Quote:
There is a lot of it that are unreported. That 400 per year avg is considered light due to the fact its a volunteer basis for reporting much of the info.
You think 400 a year is the normal rate of just reported justified deaths? You honestly think it was that many 7-15 years ago?
You said, "Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question"
Everything i read says the number hovers around 400 a year. Some statistics I've looked at show that between 2003-2009 the number ranges from around 370 to 500. So yes, 7-15 years ago the numbers were still around 400 and your statement that there have been an unprecedented amount of deahts by police in recent years is a statement you can not support.
Did you miss this post?
montanagiant : 5:24 pm : link : reply
I just read one report where they state the rate of 400 per year is commensurate with the past couple decades..So i was wrong.
The theory of underreporting is based on the fact that there are two different agencies tracking this.:
That number – which only includes self-reported information from about 750 law enforcement agencies – hovers around 400 “justifiable homicides” by police officers each year. The DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics also tracks “arrest-related deaths.” But the department stopped releasing those numbers after 2009, because, like the FBI data, they were widely regarded as unreliable.
“What’s there is crappy data,” said David A. Klinger, a former police officer and criminal justice professor at the University of Missouri who studies police use of force.
Several independent trackers, primarily journalists and academics who study criminal justice, insist the accurate number of people shot and killed by police officers each year is consistently upwards of 1,000 each year.
“The FBI’s justifiable homicides and the estimates from (arrest-related deaths) both have significant limitations in terms of coverage and reliability that are primarily due to agency participation and measurement issues,” said Michael Planty, one of the Justice Department’s chief statisticians, in an email.
The most notorious of these was a homeless person who autopsy revealed was shot in the back. Pulled out two pen knives to defend himself from a police dog they had released and a stun grenade that had set off. But was apparently by the video trying to lie down when he was shot, as result in the back. Yards away from the officers he posed little threat.
Riots ensued in albuquerque along with the takeover of the city council chambers….but know what….
few have probably heard of it. It was a police problem in this specific white on white. Their is not any racial issue to any of this just a dept out of control with poor training and attitude. As the dept has a pretty good racial mix and the killing and being killed are often of the same race. To much killing going on all now agree is occurring.
But go figure….not much in the way of national media.
Living out here I find the contrast in coverage pretty surprising. Riots…yes there were riots in Albuquerque just like there, tear gas arrests and all. The group anonymous organized it.
The coverage contrast amazes me. Seems race plays a whole lot better media wise. Few mention Albuquerque even though this happened not six months before. And the wrongness of this and other killings seem more blatantly obvious. All of this homeless guys shooting is taped as the DOJ now requires all officers to carry video recorders. Not all PD however turn them on.
Quote:
Quote:
There is a lot of it that are unreported. That 400 per year avg is considered light due to the fact its a volunteer basis for reporting much of the info.
You think 400 a year is the normal rate of just reported justified deaths? You honestly think it was that many 7-15 years ago?
You said, "Add to that the fact that there has been an unprecedented amount of deaths by the police in recent years and it makes people question"
Everything i read says the number hovers around 400 a year. Some statistics I've looked at show that between 2003-2009 the number ranges from around 370 to 500. So yes, 7-15 years ago the numbers were still around 400 and your statement that there have been an unprecedented amount of deahts by police in recent years is a statement you can not support.
Did you miss this post?
Quote:
Actually you may be correct HB
montanagiant : 5:24 pm : link : reply
I just read one report where they state the rate of 400 per year is commensurate with the past couple decades..So i was wrong.
The theory of underreporting is based on the fact that there are two different agencies tracking this.:
Quote:
Officials with the Justice Department keep no comprehensive database or record of police shootings, instead allowing the nation’s more than 17,000 law enforcement agencies to self-report officer-involved shootings as part of the FBI’s annual data on “justifiable homicides” by law enforcement.
That number – which only includes self-reported information from about 750 law enforcement agencies – hovers around 400 “justifiable homicides” by police officers each year. The DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics also tracks “arrest-related deaths.” But the department stopped releasing those numbers after 2009, because, like the FBI data, they were widely regarded as unreliable.
“What’s there is crappy data,” said David A. Klinger, a former police officer and criminal justice professor at the University of Missouri who studies police use of force.
Several independent trackers, primarily journalists and academics who study criminal justice, insist the accurate number of people shot and killed by police officers each year is consistently upwards of 1,000 each year.
“The FBI’s justifiable homicides and the estimates from (arrest-related deaths) both have significant limitations in terms of coverage and reliability that are primarily due to agency participation and measurement issues,” said Michael Planty, one of the Justice Department’s chief statisticians, in an email.
I did miss it. So much crap to filter through here...my bad.
I would say there is not a nationwide problem
Albuquerque for instance statistically for the number of years in question has a abnormally large number of DBPO, Compared to other cities of comparable size.
Is the nation as a whole seeing large numbers of DBPO….I would say no. Any statistic that infers that may as well be speaking to a societal trend towards lawlessness as much as anything else.If their even is such a trend.
It is really impossible to differentiate the two with gross data.
Specific places certainly. That is when the data is crucial for the DOJ.
If one suspects a inordinate amount of DBPO the only thing that needs to be done is not to check for or assess the validity of any national data base in this regard but to actually check the depts themselves of similar size and scope of operation.
A inordinate amount in total is easily verifiable. Large depts like NYC or LA may be statistically unverifiable by this means as they are singular in size but for all others it is easily found comparable, sans any national data base.
Call me crazy.
Considering that regardless of stats you would suspect the population would be leery of DBPO numbers unless they were way lower than say NYC LA or other big cities. I don't know offhand.
Thanks for throwing in crap that had nothing to do with the conversation or the points you were trying to push.
"Daniel was one victim out of 37 officer-involved shootings in the past four years in Albuquerque. Twenty-three of them have been fatal. That is a lot. Albuquerque is a desert city that grows out toward the Sandia Mountains and is home to about 500,000 people. New York City is the size of about 15 Albuquerques; it saw almost the exact same number of deadly officer-involved shootings, at 25."
the stats as USA today mentions in a recent article are nation wide not so good.
What is quoted above at length in other posts, is based it seems on that article as it references the same material.
REally that just confuses the issue. If you want to show a problem in Ferguson with DBPO you just have to compare Ferguson to other cities DBPO of similar size configuration and population.
No one is mentioning it so my guess is their DBPO is not outstandingly out of whack in Ferguson.
Chicago…I don't know say so as well. Does their dept suck….well yeah in the past human rights wise yeah…it sucked. They tortured people, some were released based on their convictions being as result of torture. Some officers were found guilty, some officers were convicted. Now I don't know.
Google it you will find i, chicago police torture. Wikipedia for one has a article on it.
Nobody has said any different.
Chicago PD tortured as a SOP?
Never heard of that accusation before.
Who was the mayor that allowed this under his watch?
If I lived there would I question DBPO. really it depends. I don't know their stats. If they had way way more than LA or NYC and places of similar population….I would probably start to look into why.
Based on past history this guy doing time and all that two decades ago…..If I lived there I would look closer than if I lived in NYC LA or similar places, that torture went on for quite a few years to my dim recollection, others had to know…I think that is reasonable. You think not….. well then we disagree.
It is aside the point Ferguson….DBPO since none have mentioned it being way out of whack I guess it is about normal….you say not?
And he didn't just steal a box of cigars, hide them in his pocket and walk away. It was assault and menacing....again magical thinking. And calling him a teenager like he was some kid is also just trying to make him sound harmless.
Watch the video.
After that, there isn't any way to have a rational discussion. So, you answered my question about what you were trying to achieve. You achieved it.
Link - ( New Window )
Do you believe that the officer was trying to pull the man in the video into his vehicle through the window? Why and how does that make any sense? Is it even possible? Physics would tell you that it would be impossible to do anyway.
On the specifics let a jury decide. Really that who is tasked and who will. We depend on media and really in things like this they fail us like or not.
A thug was he shot unnecessarily in a fit of rage by the police officer…possibly.
It always amuses me that all sides right and left are always convicting before a conviction. That is not american. It is not guilty until proven innocent it is the other way around.
Should the PO be subject to a grand jury charges and all the rest…appears so I think they are doing that.
My point connecting this to Albuquerque is they are making a big bigger deal of this but the situation in Albuquerque was way way worse. Not racially but DBPO wise. So it was not so much a big deal as race was not the defining issue. But really in Albuquerque the stats show it is or was worse, more questionable deaths,
You say yes…prove it. It should be relatively easy if it is so.
You say yes…prove it. It should be relatively easy if it is so.
I don't say yes, I say that we don't have any idea. Those statistics aren't readily available, if they exist, and because incidents like this are comparably rare the sample size is likely to be way too small to draw meaningful conclusions.
This is a human same as you or me on America who goes to trial and is assumed innocent until proven guilty.
Live with it, or think about changing the constitution.
And really that is what they have juries for. Do we know….no. WE can sort of guess but not more than that.
If the media found a disparity or unusual number of DBPO in Ferguson we would know about it, they would by like flies on s%$# over that.
So don't tell me that cannot be found…the answer is no. There is no unusual number of DBPO in Ferguson.
so no there is no unusual number of DBPO in Ferguson. Facts are facts
To even acknowledge this line of debate is to start a larger argument about the worth, the very personhood, of a black man in America. It's to engage in a cost-benefit analysis, weigh probabilities, and gauge the precise odds that Brown's life was worth nothing against the threat he posed to the life of the man who killed him. It's to deny that there are structural reasons why Brown was shot dead while James Eagan Holmes—who on July 20, 2012, walked into a movie theater and fired rounds into an audience, killing 12 and wounding 70 more—was taken alive.
What amazes me is that we have more peoples in jail in America than any other nation and more by one racial group than any other.
But who is ever calling into question the peoples are innocent until proven guilty.
Perhaps we need a rethink of that…crime is not way way up but more and more people are in jail. But we only question innocent before trial if it favors our point of view or politic.
Oh this guy that guy is guilty……I say give it a break. A PO deserves that break as much as a drug dealer. Both are presumed innocent until proven guilty. But always on both sides we call for guilt upon arrest.
It is flat plain and simple un-American to think it that way. That was not what the constitution represents. Police officer drug dealer or not, whoever
Again as I have noted repeatedly....so many going through great lengths to vilify a police officer and take Browns side or even pretend there is a side there to even take. The officer be damned....and the evidence be damned. The riots and protests and what will likely follow is on those people's hands in my opinion.
Quote:
Arguing whether Brown was a good kid or not is functionally arguing over whether he specifically deserved to die, a way of acknowledging that some black men ought to be executed.
To even acknowledge this line of debate is to start a larger argument about the worth, the very personhood, of a black man in America. It's to engage in a cost-benefit analysis, weigh probabilities, and gauge the precise odds that Brown's life was worth nothing against the threat he posed to the life of the man who killed him. It's to deny that there are structural reasons why Brown was shot dead while James Eagan Holmes—who on July 20, 2012, walked into a movie theater and fired rounds into an audience, killing 12 and wounding 70 more—was taken alive.
A classic example of someone who is apparently smart saying something really stupid. No one who matters thinks Brown "deserved" to die, the issue is whether he was perceived as an imminent threat to the officer and his shooting was therefore justified. To the extent that Brown's past behavior, particularly his recent past, puts us into his mind as he perceived that situation (which would potentially support or contradict the officer's narrative) it is relevant, but to say he is an unsympathetic martyr is nowhere near the same as saying he deserved to die. If Holmes was shot and killed nobody would have wept for him, whether or not he was an imminent threat to the officer who shot him.
So we can conjecture all we want, who knows if the PO is guilty as charged. We certainly don't.
Is there another problem with the police dept in Ferguson sure there is. The racial disparity for one….that just can't happen in todays America. Use of force all the rest probably…..
But those are political problems with political solutions and review.
We are confusing the individual in this case the PO charged with them. In the rioters eyes they are the same. In a legal sense here in America no…he is innocent until proven guilty. Proven guilty his prison term may be political.
But now this PO….he is innocent until proven guilty. This is America and you on the left and right may care to check your constitution. It has not changed. Not this part.
People on the right….a person like a drug dealer sex offender whoever…he also is innocent until proven guilty.
This should be a example of that. i served on a grand jury and know that seems to not be the case. Peoples are considered guilty more than innocent if arrested. That is just the way we are nowadays but it is not right nor constitutional.
People on the left, with one out of five young male AA's having done some time….at what time are you ever going to bring that, the constitution into question on this. I am not blaming the victim but can you not see that calling someone guilty without trial has a large part to do with a AA being summarily always guilty when arrested? It builds the climate which allows stop and frisk and all the rest. A presumption of guilt.
By buying into this fever to show someone guilty before trial it is the same mechanism that enables what I describe above.
So why do it? Why not take the higher constitutional ground. Why presume one guilty and another not. How can progress be made that way if we change as the wind does depending upon our personal favor or likelihood.
There are political problems and grounds for grievance so take it there not to a individual presumed guilty before trial…can't you see this one thing works for the other? We are not rioters in the heat of anger here.
It is always innocent before guilty.
The rest….I will. We are innocent before trial wether the person accused is black white grey native wether the person charged if charged for murdering a innocent in cold blood or shoplifting.
Heinous though be the charge or innocent the charge it is always a presumption of innocence we must hold. PO lawyer doc drug dealer killer what ever.
All innocent till proven. Conjecture sure we can But really we must know it is just conjecture as legally we don't even have all the facts, never ever do we the general public get them.
Trial over we do.
Anyone notice the logical flaw between the subject and the question asked?
But we cannot assume killers murderers simply on accusation and denial of civil rights.
Is their a discrepancy based upon race in the judicial system. Statistically certainly there is. So we should send more to jail to serve to alleviate this discrepancy?
I contend no the best remedy is to send less.
The partial remedy to that is to see to it all are indeed innocent before presumed guilty.
Is not stop and frisk a presumption based on appearance of some form of guilt, this person looks to be guilty of something…sure it is.
Which is why it is now finally determined unconstitutional.
But this is the core of why it took so long…both sides depending upon view consider others guilty as charged without trial.
Here it is the left accusing the right and the right defending, a cop. tomorrow it could be the right accusing and the left defending, Snowden, or in the past a OJS.
Both are off base and wrong. WE can conjecture and throw ideas around but really that is why they have the jury judge and all the rest.
Innocent first then found guilty, it is the American way by law.
The facts, witnesses, what they will say and all that….we just don't know. We probably know about 2/3 rds of the facts. Can we convict people on 2/3rds of the facts?
I say firmly not. We may exercise opinions on the PO's innocence or guilt but we really do not know.
Well let's be honest here, this controversy started out because an unarmed teenager, a gentle giant, was shot from behind with his arms in the air over a jaywalking incident. A good bit of what has happened since has been people who came out for those set of facts and have struggled to find a reason to still be outraged as those "facts" were largely proven to be bullshit. We're down to "was he moving toward him, and if so how fast" with a lot of social commentary along for the ride. Are there some very important topics being raised here? Absolutely. But NFW people come from across the country to protest over "was he moving toward him, and if so how fast?"
I'll tell you what, you get in a fight with a man 100+ lbs larger than you, when he leaves and then starts coming toward you again you tell me at what point he constitutes an immediate threat. It may ultimately prove to be an unjustified shooting, but making blanket statements doesn't really add anything to it.
Like is or not, but the Ferguson police have become a black eye for police officers everywhere, and that is indisputable.
Everyone is assuming that shots were going to stop this 300 lb man. But this is not the movies. Shots to the head did....
Like is or not, but the Ferguson police have become a black eye for police officers everywhere, and that is indisputable.
Well leaving the body out there is one thing, but the bulk of the other things you are referencing seem to have come from other area law enforcement.
RIOTS!!! GO RIOT
RIOT RIOT RIOT
Considered innocent or not…we have not heard a single word of testimony on this by anyone. Would you convict or make determination of guilt without hearing a single word of testimony in a murder or manslaughter trial…
if you would you should really have fit right in in Soviet Russia of years ago.
Once again we can guess and make conjecture all we want. this PO is innocent until proven guilty. WE all are until proven guilty in America innocent regardless of your political leaning that is not changeable by good or bad intent.
It is simply the law in America as part of the constitution.
Wilson's gun was obviously UNHOLSTERED when Michael Brown was 20ft away from him.
There is an enormous difference between the Holstered and Unholstered. The Tueller Drill DOES NOT apply here.
Doesn't mean that the shooting wasn't justified, just that using the Tueller Drill as a supporting argument makes no sense.
I mean expound away, it is fun to do so. But take it seriously….nah. that is a juries responsibility and purview.
We can only remotely guess and conjecture.
Oj was convicted about a million times in the press with a thousand discussions very similar to this. Innocent in trial
Again...1.5 seconds is nothing....
The fact that this is so hard for you to understand points to the very concept I keep hammering on which is that people are willing to ignore logic and reasoning because they want blood so bad.
Again...1.5 seconds is nothing....
The fact that this is so hard for you to understand points to the very concept I keep hammering on which is that people are willing to ignore logic and reasoning because they want blood so bad.
YEAH WE WANT RIOTS!!!!! BEYOTCH
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 10/21/2014 11:44 am : link : reply
So I have a question.
In your mind at what distance would Michael Brown not be a threat?
You clearly think he was a threat at 20-25ft. So I just want to know at what distance you would have felt he was far enough from the officer that he's not an immediate threat anymore.
PA Giant Fan : 10/21/2014 11:52 am : link : reply
Then coming back forward. That distance is whatever the officer feels legitimately safe and able to safely protect himself and ensure he goes home to his family that night. 1.5 seconds is not enough. Maybe enough time to reload and fire...I am not sure
Why do you keep repeating this 1.5 seconds 1.5 seconds 20 feet away 20 feet away stuff when you admitted that the distance is irrelevant to you? You say that it's completely up to the officer.
According to your reasoning, Michael Brown could've been 30 feet away but if he took a step forward then Wilson could've shot him. He could've been 40ft away, but Wilson could've shot him. 50ft away... You keep repeating these numbers and yet you basically admitted that it's not important for you. So I'll give you another chance to be more clear.
You've repeatedly said that 1.5 seconds away makes Brown an immediate threat
How many seconds away from Wilson would Brown have to be for you to consider this an unjustified shooting?
Please have a better answer than "whatever the officer feels like" this time.
I say that 1.5 seconds is important here because it clearly illustrates how dangerous the situation was. Could it be longer absolutely. Once it is established that Brown attacked Wilson in the vehicle and went for his gun..pretty obvious...And shots were fired
Then Mike Brown ran away. Why did he stop running? Did Darren Wilson fire at Mike Brown while he was running away? Is that why Mike Brown stopped? We don't have Mike Brown's side of the story and we don't have any video to objectively tell us what happened.
When Mike Brown stopped and turned around, did he stand still, or did he walk to the office or did he charge a cop from 25 feet away? Did he charge a cop that already discharged his gun at least twice (in the car) while he was 25 feet away? Were his hands up?
There are very serious questions that need to be answered.
On a side note, why does this fairly small town have so much military gear and swat gear and military vehicles and assault rifles but no dash cams? Why were they pointing these assault rifles at unarmed protesters? Why did they cover up their badges during the protests? Why did they pepper spray so many people, including reporters? Does that same something about the mentality of that police force?
The Post-Dispatch also reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed source with knowledge of the matter, that Wilson has told investigators that Brown pressed the barrel of the gun against Wilson’s hip during a struggle inside the officer’s SUV."
Link - ( New Window )
On a side note, why does this fairly small town have so much military gear and swat gear and military vehicles and assault rifles but no dash cams? Why were they pointing these assault rifles at unarmed protesters? Why did they cover up their badges during the protests? Why did they pepper spray so many people, including reporters? Does that same something about the mentality of that police force?
I agree that the mentality of all should be considered. Unfortunately some feel the mentality of those involved is irrelevant if it does help the position you hold.
That is pretty much a gimmie in todays world. Depts either have to do that or be working to do that. Ferguson…seems not so much..
We could go on into that subject and discuss that for days and days and produce a pretty good thing.
But this is not that. While not separate from the shooting it is not the shooting.
The police officer as I mention is not the department in each and every action he does.
We are essentially trying the police officer on the basis of the dept's lackings or problems with the community it represents.
It may be casual but really other than in potential of motive or context, it is not the subject of a potential murder or manslaughter investigation, these type of things.
The specifics are.
Here much discussed are the facts as we know them. The bullets how they were fired and all the rest.And expert witness provided by the media have explained it in their way.
Truth be told if those "expert" witnesses were so expert they would be used by the potential defense or by the AG's office. WE can tell one thing by seeing these "experts" making media comments. Media comments publicly made prohibit them from being used in the actual trial by either side..it is a no no.
So that considered our experts may not be so expert at all.
Secondarily not one word or utterance has been spoken by the actual witnesses in trial. A deposition such things may suffice if you are suing your neighbor for making to much noise late at night, a murder trial requires actual court trial and actual live witness testimony. Depositions may be auxiliary but they may not serve as the primary basis of testimony.
WE have not even heard one word of testimony. The trial has not even been heard.
NO offense to those participating but really it is fun but we can't take it to seriously.
The PO is innocent until found guilty I repeat and we do not know at least by a third all the information that will be presented at the trial.
The issue of the police dept, a interesting one worth of discussion but it is not the subject in the innocence or guilt of the officer charged.
It is largely a separate issue.
He said black police officers were treated far worse than any other officers. It's just not them not wanting to hire black officers, there's probably not a lot of people willing to take that kind of abuse.
The Post-Dispatch also reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed source with knowledge of the matter, that Wilson has told investigators that Brown pressed the barrel of the gun against Wilson’s hip during a struggle inside the officer’s SUV." Link - ( New Window )
Good sources, someone not involved whatsoever with the case apparently knows the intimate details. And then you have the "unnamed source". I'd kill myself if I was that stupid.
Quote:
"Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist not involved in the autopsy, told the newspaper that the finding “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” Melinek also told the newspaper that the autopsy did not support witness accounts that the fatal shot, later, was fired while Brown was running away from the officer or had his hands up.
The Post-Dispatch also reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed source with knowledge of the matter, that Wilson has told investigators that Brown pressed the barrel of the gun against Wilson’s hip during a struggle inside the officer’s SUV." Link - ( New Window )
Good sources, someone not involved whatsoever with the case apparently knows the intimate details. And then you have the "unnamed source". I'd kill myself if I was that stupid.
LOL! I had pretty much typed out a post and put in quotes most of the silliness in that report. But then I said 'Fuck it, I'm sure someone else will see the ridiculousness in that link and point it out.'.
It could be any person accused of anything a drug lord a mass killer.
The left should to my view support that way more than the right. But really left or right it is the American way…get used to it both sides.
But PO here…they want to try the guy in the media and find him guilty.
In the past it was OJ and he was innocent.
I mean really how about some consistency
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
Theory or conjecture but take our views on innocent or guilty seriously….that is a bit over the top.WE don' t know the facts as they will be presented to the jury…not even close.
And he didn't just steal a box of cigars, hide them in his pocket and walk away. It was assault and menacing....again magical thinking. And calling him a teenager like he was some kid is also just trying to make him sound harmless.
Watch the video.
LOL "menacing"!
LOLOL. I've accurately described what happened. He shoved the clerk, took the box, walked away. He didn't throw a punch, btw.
You want him to be a Blood or Crip with a gun SO BADLY but he isn't.
You're sitting there taking about sprint times of a fat 300 lb teenager and you're accusing us of magical thinking.
You think its reasonable to believe that someone who stole a box of cigars -- oh i'm sorry, "menaced" and assaulted a clerk, was all of the sudden ready to start KILLING COPS in the middle of the st IN BROAD DAYLIGHT with the cops OWN GUN in his own COP CAR!
You're an idiot.
Quote:
Was trying to pull a 300 lb 6'5" man into the front seat with him is almost all you need to know about people's view here. If you believe that then there is no use in debating. File it under magical thinking.
And he didn't just steal a box of cigars, hide them in his pocket and walk away. It was assault and menacing....again magical thinking. And calling him a teenager like he was some kid is also just trying to make him sound harmless.
Watch the video.
LOL "menacing"!
LOLOL. I've accurately described what happened. He shoved the clerk, took the box, walked away. He didn't throw a punch, btw.
You want him to be a Blood or Crip with a gun SO BADLY but he isn't.
You're sitting there taking about sprint times of a fat 300 lb teenager and you're accusing us of magical thinking.
You think its reasonable to believe that someone who stole a box of cigars -- oh i'm sorry, "menaced" and assaulted a clerk, was all of the sudden ready to start KILLING COPS in the middle of the st IN BROAD DAYLIGHT with the cops OWN GUN in his own COP CAR!
You're an idiot.
"He shoved the clerk" .This is violence. While you want to make him out to be a boy scout because he isn't a "blood or crip", the answer is that he obviously was conducting his life in a bad way--apparently violent.
You guys tend to suck on all of these issues.
Again as I have noted repeatedly....so many going through great lengths to vilify a police officer and take Browns side or even pretend there is a side there to even take. The officer be damned....and the evidence be damned. The riots and protests and what will likely follow is on those people's hands in my opinion.
No, YOU'RE the one tying to do the opposite of marginalize what he did.
Assault, menacing, thug, blah blah blah
This TEENAGER had no prior criminal record. Let's recap what he did - he walked into a gas station, shoved a clerk (did not punch), took a box of cigars.
And for that, its safe to assume that he was ready to start killing police officers, and its safe to extrapolate that he would kill someone else down the line? Is it safe to extrapolate that he DESERVED to DIE without a trial?
Where am I wrong here?
Side note: why was the Colorado movie theater shooter taken alive? Just curious for your thoughts on that, PA Giants Fan.
Racial inequity and racial tension. Isn't that obvious?
Quote:
In comment 11935076 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Was trying to pull a 300 lb 6'5" man into the front seat with him is almost all you need to know about people's view here. If you believe that then there is no use in debating. File it under magical thinking.
And he didn't just steal a box of cigars, hide them in his pocket and walk away. It was assault and menacing....again magical thinking. And calling him a teenager like he was some kid is also just trying to make him sound harmless.
Watch the video.
LOL "menacing"!
LOLOL. I've accurately described what happened. He shoved the clerk, took the box, walked away. He didn't throw a punch, btw.
You want him to be a Blood or Crip with a gun SO BADLY but he isn't.
You're sitting there taking about sprint times of a fat 300 lb teenager and you're accusing us of magical thinking.
You think its reasonable to believe that someone who stole a box of cigars -- oh i'm sorry, "menaced" and assaulted a clerk, was all of the sudden ready to start KILLING COPS in the middle of the st IN BROAD DAYLIGHT with the cops OWN GUN in his own COP CAR!
You're an idiot.
Sonic, you are as far off as PA Giants Fan is.
"He shoved the clerk" .This is violence. While you want to make him out to be a boy scout because he isn't a "blood or crip", the answer is that he obviously was conducting his life in a bad way--apparently violent.
You guys tend to suck on all of these issues.
I'm not close to as far off as PAGiantsFan.
I am literally stating what happened.
He DID shove the clerk. He did NOT punch the clerk. I am stating what happened. How would you state would happened, in plain english, to paint a picture of what happened?
You can throw out the term "assualt" but its nebulous. I am using a specific term to describe what he physically did.
whether or not he was conducting his life the wrong way is immaterial to whether or not its reasonable to believe he was ready to shoot and kill an officer during the day in the street.
Quote:
Trying to minimize his behavior and soften what he really was to create a false picture of what likely happened is what is happening. If you saw the video howncan ypu claim that all he did was steal some cigars. Same attempts to create a false picture so you can have better footing to hang this cop. That video shows what he was and minutes later gets into an altercation with the police officer....then folks want you to believe that this thug was being pulled into some angry cop which makes no sense just on its face.
Again as I have noted repeatedly....so many going through great lengths to vilify a police officer and take Browns side or even pretend there is a side there to even take. The officer be damned....and the evidence be damned. The riots and protests and what will likely follow is on those people's hands in my opinion.
No, YOU'RE the one tying to do the opposite of marginalize what he did.
Assault, menacing, thug, blah blah blah
This TEENAGER had no prior criminal record. Let's recap what he did - he walked into a gas station, shoved a clerk (did not punch), took a box of cigars.
And for that, its safe to assume that he was ready to start killing police officers, and its safe to extrapolate that he would kill someone else down the line? Is it safe to extrapolate that he DESERVED to DIE without a trial?
Where am I wrong here?
Side note: why was the Colorado movie theater shooter taken alive? Just curious for your thoughts on that, PA Giants Fan.
You have quite the penchant for having huge holes in the sequences to make your point.
He strong-armed goods from a store. He was asked to stop by a cop and then something unfolded. If I'm the cop? I'm thinking this is a potentially violent person. If his present actions are also indicating potential violence from the perp, then his previous actions are no longer in the front of my mind--self preservation is.
Your need to make this cop guilty has turned the perp into an Eagle Scout.
Strong-armed robbery shortly before his death speaks to his violent state of mind.
I can't believe there is a camp of people here unable to grasp this.
And this is not some fat kid. Funny when people keep saying this. It is more apologists for a thug who was 1.5 seconds away from Wilson after assaulting Wilson in the police car. He was going to jail for a long time and he knew it.
Link - ( New Window )
It doesn't validate the rest of certain narratives, but there isn't a need to downplay what Brown did earlier in the store.
It doesn't validate the rest of certain narratives, but there isn't a need to downplay what Brown did earlier in the store.
The need to down play what he did is necessary so people can say that he was "executed" by police for pushing a clerk.
But as a aside in police thought, the most dangerous type of crime, most potential to getting hurt. First is a domestic dispute. Second is shop lifting. Perhaps third a traffic stop.
What happens is meth heads peoples like that get so bad off they can no longer really do sophisticated crime which requires a thinking brain. Their brains become so damaged(paint sniffers particularly) they can no longer function.
So they just think to go into places and take what is there. And if a PO stops them they really have forgotten the PO criminal career criminal thing and are likely to fight and run. the store clerks first but really anyone, their brains are fried at that point.
Really it is irrelevant what we think on this has not a bit to do with what the jury thinks but…some may be interested in why simple shoplifting may be a threat to a PO.
It is up there. Career criminals burglars auto thieves and such, they have working brains and no to give t up generally when confronted by a PO. Shoplifters it may be a juvenile girl with no threat of harm or it may be a brain damaged paint sniffer who will fight you to any extent.
This has NOTHING to do with the Zimmerman case where the dead kid got drawn into an altercation while he was minding his own business.
I am not trying to make Brown into something he wasnt. That has been by you and the apologists. He was just some big sweet gentle giant, a fat kid...
WHen in truth the video shows he was a violent thug, and not some fat kid but a big powerful man who used his size to threaten others.
Then you get the altercation at the vehicle immediately after this crime. You want people to believe that this thug just happened to be attacked by Wilson for jaywalking whereby Wilson tried to pull a 300 lb man into his vehicle through the car window....
Meanwhile the testimony and evidence is pretty obvious that Brown did indeed asault Wilson...wounds on Wilsons face and neck....SHots fired with forensics showing right next to Browns hand...again reinforcing Wilson's note about the gun being pressed against his thigh as they struggled for it....
You and others here have been in denial for a long time
Not at all what I said about Brown, but in your delusional mind, that's what you think my position is.
Your thinking that the perp JUST committing a violent crime is irrelevant to this case makes you amazingly fucking stupid. I can't talk with you dim bulbs any more. Hopefully you all get banned and spare the rest of us your idiocy.
Quote:
This story has similar narratives attached to it like Zimmerman. Immediately call into question whether or not the deceased party was a good person to begin with in order to justify the body.
A grown ass man? I don't know..Want to talk about TV shows some more?
Your thinking that the perp JUST committing a violent crime is irrelevant to this case makes you amazingly fucking stupid. I can't talk with you dim bulbs any more. Hopefully you all get banned and spare the rest of us your idiocy.
And Randy gets the point of why I criticized the John Oliver segment that was discussed in the previous thread. Right at the beginning of that segment Oliver stated the incident in the store was irrelevant. To me he lost all credibility as soon as he said that.
You scoff at the notion that Brown's penchant for robbery would then make him want to all of a sudden try and fight and kill a cop-- to which I agree. But I don't understand why the opposite theory-- that a cop with a clean record just felt like committing a hate crime by murdering an unarmed black teen-- isn't also absurd on its face to you.
You scoff at the notion that Brown's penchant for robbery would then make him want to all of a sudden try and fight and kill a cop-- to which I agree. But I don't understand why the opposite theory-- that a cop with a clean record just felt like committing a hate crime by murdering an unarmed black teen-- isn't also absurd on its face to you.
But it sure would be interesting to hear what PA Giant thought of that situation.
Let's not lose the term "allegedly" here, folks.
It is absolutely uncertain. That's the hole in your contention. You base it on purely subjective information, cherry-picked to conform to your narrative.
Unless you have intimate knowledge of all the testimony, forensics, any other evidence (which you don't), your claims carry as much weight as a helium-filled balloon.
You can claim common sense, which is commonly wrong, deduction (OK, Sherlock), or any other such magical powers. That and a fiver will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
Quote:
he was shot because he struggled with the police office who then felt afraid for his life.
Let's not lose the term "allegedly" here, folks.
This isn't a court of law. And the forensics show that Brown was shot at close range.
Quote:
As is the autopsy and GJ witness testimony....Lots of denial by apologists.... Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
It's an opinion, yes. Based on the facts.
Quote:
In comment 11935918 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
As is the autopsy and GJ witness testimony....Lots of denial by apologists.... Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
It's an opinion, yes. Based on the facts.
Again, neither you nor anyone else on here has even a small percentage of "the facts." That's why the whole certainty of what happened (as proposed by PA) is specious.
It's the basis for my reminder that anything stated, whether about the PO or Brown, is alleged. It cannot be seen otherwise by anyone with any sort of valid reasoning ability.
Do you guys know how to read? Or just enjoy digging bigger holes?
And HH - If that means right, has been right and you are a fool then you would be correct....lol
Quote:
In comment 11935921 BMac said:
Quote:
In comment 11935918 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
As is the autopsy and GJ witness testimony....Lots of denial by apologists.... Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
It's an opinion, yes. Based on the facts.
Again, neither you nor anyone else on here has even a small percentage of "the facts." That's why the whole certainty of what happened (as proposed by PA) is specious.
It's the basis for my reminder that anything stated, whether about the PO or Brown, is alleged. It cannot be seen otherwise by anyone with any sort of valid reasoning ability.
The forensic report is about as factual as you can get. If you want to dispute it, do that. Otherwise you are just blustering.
Quote:
In comment 11935929 buford said:
Quote:
In comment 11935921 BMac said:
Quote:
In comment 11935918 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
As is the autopsy and GJ witness testimony....Lots of denial by apologists.... Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
It's an opinion, yes. Based on the facts.
Again, neither you nor anyone else on here has even a small percentage of "the facts." That's why the whole certainty of what happened (as proposed by PA) is specious.
It's the basis for my reminder that anything stated, whether about the PO or Brown, is alleged. It cannot be seen otherwise by anyone with any sort of valid reasoning ability.
The forensic report is about as factual as you can get. If you want to dispute it, do that. Otherwise you are just blustering.
That report doesn't prove that Brown was going for the gun though... it only proves that he was shot, at one point, at close range. Hence, as BMac said earlier, why the word 'alledegly' should be inserted before the statement that he was going for the officer's gun.
Testimony in a legal sense could be a written deposition under certain circumstances and qualifications which present the facts as the witness saw them.
But in a situation like a murder case a deposition may be taken but then certainly this statement will be followed up with by eyewitness testimony subject to interrogation, or the lawyer asking questions in the courtroom to qualify the answers. So which then is called the testimony of the eyewitnesses…it is that which occurs in the courtroom.
My point being really testimony in this case has yet to be heard as the trial has yet to be performed. And eyewitness testimony before a grand jury is not equal to eyewitness testimony before a court of law trying the case. What I would guess is the reporter's source has access to police reports which include mention of eyewitness statements. Eyewitnesses may also make statements in a legal setting but as this is a legal venue the term testimony does not really apply.
The testimony of eyewitnesses has really yet to be heard. Statements have been made and heard. Possibly sworn depositions have been taken but neither is sworn testimony of the witnesses. If it was…what is then the sworn court testimony? So there is much nuance to this thing in even the terminology.
Specific to the issue of the tape in the store…..the PO defense team will argue for their inclusion in the official record of evidence. The prosecuting attny will argue before the judge for the inadmissibility of the store tapes likely on the grounds that they will unfairly prejudice the jury in some manner. AS in court a record of prior arrests or convictions is never allowable…on that related basis,
It probably will be allowed but really it may not be. A judge will decide that.
And what is admissible before a grand jury may not be considered admissible before a court of law deciding the case. A judge may rule on that.
So we do not know. There is much fun to be had in conjecturing this thing, but really we don't know close to all and even in some basic parts are depending upon media to source things. They may not be up to the task.
JUst thought I'dd add that. Everyone is being reasonable here it is just some are putting this thing in differing contexts.
"Seven or eight African American eyewitnesses have provided testimony consistent with Wilson’s account, but none of them have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety, The Washington Post’s sources said."
Did they not provide testimony?
Was it not consistent with Wilsons account?
Is it not called "testimony" when given to a GJ?
I would guess no absolutely not. There is a form of gag order on the proceedings on this stage of the game.Which means basically only the attorney teams are knowing what GJ testimony is.
So how is this reporter reporting testimony?
I would have to guess the reporter is reading from police reports written statements which do not qualify as legal testimony. They are not subject to the same gag order which undoubtably been issued in regards to the content of this case. The penalty of conflicting with the order is contempt of court. Releasing or telling of police reports…..the judge has no control of what the police reports access field is. They need the reports to be open so they can continue the investigation. So they cannot be closed.
So this is pointing to the claim I am making the media is really not necessarily reporting on things accurately. Some perhaps they are making a honest attempt to say things but this may really mislead peoples on the status of the case.
The specifics of what is really not so important. The use of the term testimony as opposed to statement may be a read on uncertain qualification of content.
Peoples change statements all the time, even though done in a legal setting with legal witnesses. Statements have not the legal standing as sworn testimony in trial.
A hair splitting point yes..but it speaks to the issue is how qualified are we to actually know what is going on in this thing….no a whole lot really.
The G jury is just determining reasonably if a crime is likely to have occurred. To prioceed with the trial. Not trying the case. It has no relationship to a finding of guilt or innocence.
Before a GJ usually all evidence is considered and allowed and no GJ member may challenge that. Reason being a judge before trial decides that not a GJ member. A judge may decide for instance a piece of evidence was obtained illegally and thus in challenge questioning the entire process, and deny it.
Before the GJ that may be perfectly allowable and not challengeable.
So again we don't know. We can guess and it is fun to guess but really it is only in that context. The status of the dept is totally exempt from this process. It is a political process.
Minor point but it may speak to other larger points, I am splitting hairs on purpose to show that.
"but none of them have spoken publicly out of fear for their safety, The Washington Post’s sources said."
All in all I participated in about ten cases. Of the ten most all had multiple charges. Two of the charges in total were dismissed by us. Considering that there were three or four average that is not a whole lot of dismissing going on.
The system is set up with the presumption of guilt not innocence is my opinion. Which factors into us here deciding the PO's fate without knowing at least a third of the information necessary to do so correctly.
This arrest you are guilty thing pervades the system to my opinion.
If it was simply a police report even a sworn deposition a gag order may not have (most likely was not in place) and they may say things or not..no one can tell them what to do in that. A statement legally is not a testimony, they carry different legal weight.
But the reporter said testimony. So in this hair splitting the reporter erred.
How do we know in how many other ways as well?
Quote:
In comment 11935929 buford said:
Quote:
In comment 11935921 BMac said:
Quote:
In comment 11935918 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
As is the autopsy and GJ witness testimony....Lots of denial by apologists.... Link - ( New Window )
No point in continuing. Your agenda means more to you than rational reasoning. Your inability to see that all you hold is an opinion, which is fine, but present it as incontrovertible fact. This is the sticking point, and not one that does you any credit.
It's an opinion, yes. Based on the facts.
Again, neither you nor anyone else on here has even a small percentage of "the facts." That's why the whole certainty of what happened (as proposed by PA) is specious.
It's the basis for my reminder that anything stated, whether about the PO or Brown, is alleged. It cannot be seen otherwise by anyone with any sort of valid reasoning ability.
The forensic report is about as factual as you can get. If you want to dispute it, do that. Otherwise you are just blustering.
The forensics report can be read in a number of ways. The only thing holding you back from realizing that is your predisposition to back the police to the hilt, as demonstrated on more than this thread. Just keep on being who you are; if you showed any capacity to demonstrate nuance at any point, I'd keel over.
I mention stop and frisk but is not a AA more statistically likely to see jail on any offense and more likely by statistic to be found guilty of any offense than other races? Why it is my opinion is related to this. A whole race just looks guilty. Arrested they are automatically found guilty.
We reflect that mentality by determinations of guilt without hearing all the facts right here and now on this thread. It is the opposite a white PO but it is the thinking of the one which allows the other.
The presumption of guilt without trial or before trial.
However I would argue that more important than race is financial class and education.... Especially financial.
Heck a kid got off of crimes just because he was rich. I forget the case but the idea was he didnt know right from wrong because he was wealthy....
I have never heard of a murder trial that allowed a conviction based solely on physical evidence. There is always testimony of some sort or other.
So how can we conclude? We can conjecture and it is fun to do so but we must allow it is only conjecture and not take ourselves to seriously on it.
I have never heard of a murder trial that allowed a conviction based solely on physical evidence. There is always testimony of some sort or other.
So how can we conclude? We can conjecture and it is fun to do so but we must allow it is only conjecture and not take ourselves to seriously on it.
Who is doing that? Last time I checked BBI wasn't the Jury pool.
Civil court similarly to Grand juries has lesser standards.
We can of course talk about it all we want and think what we want of course no one is saying we may not.
What is being said is we cannot possibly know all the facts, as most are sealed from us and we are depending upon a third party to digest what we do have largely for us(the media) so we can hold our opinions and all certainly do but must know the context in this in America is…..innocent before proven guilty.
This PO he is innocent until proven guilty, same as all including OJ was..
We can hold opinions but in this specific we just don't know all the facts and have not heard a word of testimony.
Show me someone who can convict peoples without hearing a word of testimony and I will be seeing someone who is holding a opinion but not necessarily one that is right nor true nor defendable in a court of law.
We just do not convict peoples solely on physical evidence, hardly ever.
Oj that all is now public record. WE do now know all the evidence as it has been released. Before the trial..not a whit, we had no clue and opinions were largely based on held race. Which is fine and we can do that but must know in our heart of hearts we do not serve as judge and jury and cannot know for certain, until we see all the evidence.
The truth of things is not malleable. In this specific in America a person is innocent before proven guilty. We simply do not know all the evidence which includes all the potential testimony of eye witnesses and others.It is not present for us.
Conclude we cannot. After the trial perhaps when all the evidence and testimony is released. But read this stuff here many it seems are concluding guilt or innocence .And many have mentioned that is not proper, not just me.
You say none are….i say you are wrong in that.
All can certainly but we must leave a little room in us or out of us that says it is part only conjecture this particular held belief of guilt or innocence.
You say none are…no you are wrong some are.
Link - ( New Window )
However I would argue that more important than race is financial class and education.... Especially financial.
Heck a kid got off of crimes just because he was rich. I forget the case but the idea was he didnt know right from wrong because he was wealthy....
Ron you occasionally make good points but you tend to be very flippant with things. Nobody 'got off' for being wealthy, a kid raised a defense of "affluenza" and got probation. He should have gotten more but he didn't get off and it isn't clear that his lenience was attributable to that dumbshit defense.
The affluenza case was pretty much getting off...He killed four people for crying out loud.
I already mentioned that grand jury testimony is not equal to trail testimony. If it was prohibited I can only assume it is and remains.
So if someone is defying a court order of a judge to remain silent about the issue and are instead telling some reporter……who says they are telling the truth to us as they are already lying to the judge and defying his order? If it is not gagged it is likely written statements only and likely not legal testimony.
Any way you look at it we do not have the sworn testimony before the court.
So we have the factual evidence only before us.
We can as I mention still hold opinions and all that. All I am saying is we must allow a space in us that allows for this to be not concluded or final in determination. Yes we have opinions and may defend them but I caution we must know they are not really educated ones.
If you agree on your part you do not..then fine I am happy we agree ;)
I think what I say is worth mentioning considering also this presumption of guilt I find personally in our legal system where once it was not.
The forensics report can be read in a number of ways. The only thing holding you back from realizing that is your predisposition to back the police to the hilt, as demonstrated on more than this thread. Just keep on being who you are; if you showed any capacity to demonstrate nuance at any point, I'd keel over.
Except I haven't backed the police to the hilt. I've said all along that if the evidence showed that the cop shot him in the back, he's guilty of murder. Well he didn't. I said if he was found to use excessive force, then he should be charged. It certainly doesn't seem like it.
I really don't care one way or another. But some of you seem to be bending over backwards to say the cop is a murder or he executed Brown. We heard that over and over again. Now when it's looking like the cop will not be charged, you want to wait for the trial. Where were you when the lynch mob was ganging up on the officer? Were was your nuance then?
The affluenza case was pretty much getting off...He killed four people for crying out loud.
Sorry for the mistake (Sorry Ron), and clearly he should have done serious time, but he got off because he was a juvenile first and foremost, not because of that idiotic defense. Class certainly does have a lot to do with outcomes, more in most cases (IMO) than race, but it's mostly the susceptibility to contact with law enforcement (it is much easier to get hit with a possession charge if you're running around in a vehicle that is barely on the road versus a new or late-model one, for instance) and the ability to retain better counsel.
Quote:
The forensics report can be read in a number of ways. The only thing holding you back from realizing that is your predisposition to back the police to the hilt, as demonstrated on more than this thread. Just keep on being who you are; if you showed any capacity to demonstrate nuance at any point, I'd keel over.
Except I haven't backed the police to the hilt. I've said all along that if the evidence showed that the cop shot him in the back, he's guilty of murder. Well he didn't. I said if he was found to use excessive force, then he should be charged. It certainly doesn't seem like it.
I really don't care one way or another. But some of you seem to be bending over backwards to say the cop is a murder or he executed Brown. We heard that over and over again. Now when it's looking like the cop will not be charged, you want to wait for the trial. Where were you when the lynch mob was ganging up on the officer? Were was your nuance then?
Care to quote me on that accusation? Your reasoning is just as shoddy as ever. calling you a 3rd rate intellect is giving you too much credit.
Buford - the stinky Valentine of BBI
Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.
Quote:
In comment 11935127 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Trying to minimize his behavior and soften what he really was to create a false picture of what likely happened is what is happening. If you saw the video howncan ypu claim that all he did was steal some cigars. Same attempts to create a false picture so you can have better footing to hang this cop. That video shows what he was and minutes later gets into an altercation with the police officer....then folks want you to believe that this thug was being pulled into some angry cop which makes no sense just on its face.
Again as I have noted repeatedly....so many going through great lengths to vilify a police officer and take Browns side or even pretend there is a side there to even take. The officer be damned....and the evidence be damned. The riots and protests and what will likely follow is on those people's hands in my opinion.
No, YOU'RE the one tying to do the opposite of marginalize what he did.
Assault, menacing, thug, blah blah blah
This TEENAGER had no prior criminal record. Let's recap what he did - he walked into a gas station, shoved a clerk (did not punch), took a box of cigars.
And for that, its safe to assume that he was ready to start killing police officers, and its safe to extrapolate that he would kill someone else down the line? Is it safe to extrapolate that he DESERVED to DIE without a trial?
Where am I wrong here?
Side note: why was the Colorado movie theater shooter taken alive? Just curious for your thoughts on that, PA Giants Fan.
Quote:
And for that, its safe to assume that he was ready to start killing police officers, and its safe to extrapolate that he would kill someone else down the line? Is it safe to extrapolate that he DESERVED to DIE without a trial?
You have quite the penchant for having huge holes in the sequences to make your point.
He strong-armed goods from a store. He was asked to stop by a cop and then something unfolded. If I'm the cop? I'm thinking this is a potentially violent person. If his present actions are also indicating potential violence from the perp, then his previous actions are no longer in the front of my mind--self preservation is.
Your need to make this cop guilty has turned the perp into an Eagle Scout.
Nah, not at all. He was probably a dumbass kid who grew up in the hood with no brain. Probably didn't give a fuck about anything and didn't think about the consequences of his actions.
But to me, that doesn't equate to cop killer. At all.
Quote:
From what went on in the store, he was not the greatest apple of the bunch, still didn't need to be shot. It wasn't an armed robbery, a properly trained officer would have been able to detain a perp and bring him in to face trial.
He might have needed to be shot which is what we're discussing.
Strong-armed robbery shortly before his death speaks to his violent state of mind.
I can't believe there is a camp of people here unable to grasp this.
It's funny how I keep hearing "strong armed". It sounds so close to "armed", has a nice ring to it.
I still cannot understand how someone who commits an unarmed robbery by PUSHING a clerk and taking something worth 85$ max has such a violent state of mind that he's ready to kill a cop.
You guys ever see Superbad? The liquor store robbery in Superbad was honest to god more violent than Michael Brown's "violent strongarm" of the convenience store.
Yeah, I mean I can totally agree with that, 100%.
Really all I've tried to contend in this thread is that whatever happened in the convenience score is not reasonable enough evidence to conclude that he would just be completely ready to start openly killing cops in such such a conspicuous situation (or any situation).
The only way you can come to that conclusion really is if you have preconceived notions about the type of person he is based on circumstantial factors, or have an agenda to push.
People are accusing me of saying he was an angel, but I'm not really saying that at all. There are, however, people trying to make it out like he was a cracked out you-know-what-I'd-say-it-or-I'm-banned who was just a ticking time bomb that would eventually snap and start killing people.
And that parts ridiculous to me.
This whole thing is so much bigger than this one guy thought. Relations between police and black people are so tenuous. The interaction a minority has with a cop, and in particular a black person, is so vastly different from a white person, and that's where nearly all of this anger is coming from.
So we can sit here and argue with PA Giants Fan about the nitty gritty and details of this particular case, but it's really just the surface of this issue.
I don't know if I'm right but mandatory badge cams would really go a long way towards fixing this kind of stuff. We need an objective, accurate record of what actually happens.
But I think the disconnect starts here. Some people want to look at Michael Brown and see every young black man, with lessons aplenty to extrapolate, while others look at him and see an outlier, a guy who wasn't necessarily a stranger to the criminal justice system, a guy whose death is lamentable (potentially criminal) but still not one whose life lends itself to many of these lessons.
It'll be interesting to see if the feds back off the case in agreement or follow through with civil rights charges.
But I think the disconnect starts here. Some people want to look at Michael Brown and see every young black man, with lessons aplenty to extrapolate, while others look at him and see an outlier, a guy who wasn't necessarily a stranger to the criminal justice system, a guy whose death is lamentable (potentially criminal) but still not one whose life lends itself to many of these lessons.
Some people don't care who Michael Brown is at all. We are concerned about a cop, supposedly of sound mind and judgement, one who had received a commendation from his force, who demonstrated no ability to diffuse a perceived threat from an unarmed man without using lethal force. A man is dead and a community ravaged. Actions that are justified can still be incompetent. Exactly why this outcome was so bad can be examined, but there are thousands of Michael Browns out there, so to place blame on him is very misguided.
And while Brown may have been without a weapon, it does not mean that he wasn't threatening. He was 6'4 292 pounds. Size-wise, that puts him right between Jason Pierre-Paul (6'5, 278) and Ndomakong Suh (6'4, 307). Plus, the convenience store tape shows that Brown was willing to use his size in a threatening manner. Again, it does not justify him being shot in any way, but it does demonstrate that on at least one occasion that day, he used his size in a threatening way. Plus, it may have impacted Brown's state of mind at the time of the encounter with Officer Wilson.
Lets Brown gives up and goes to jail. Charges would be Robbery, Menacing, Assault, Assault on a police officer with intent to kill...., just off the top of my head. Brown was going to jail for a long long time.
Wouyld you give a shit about him then? How about in 10 years when he gets out?
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Lets Brown gives up and goes to jail. Charges would be Robbery, Menacing, Assault, Assault on a police officer with intent to kill...., just off the top of my head. Brown was going to jail for a long long time.
Wouyld you give a shit about him then? How about in 10 years when he gets out?
While we're judging strangers on scant evidence, what do you think a profiler would make of the way you've spent the last two days on this thread? How do you think you'd come across? Have you accomplished....anything....yet?
What about your wife, kids, friends, co-workers? You show them this yet? So they can see all the ass you imagine yourself kicking?
It's clearly not the lives of Brown nor Wilson you seriously need to be focusing on.
The position against Wilson has been ridiculous from the beginning. Just common sense and logic. I didnt just assume that some rogue cop gunned down some innocent sweet kid in the middle of the street in the middle of the day in plain sight because he didnt like black people.
That was the journey so many of you have been on and continue to take. It is far more telling how so many cling to a hope of finding fault with the cop instead of facing the clear evidence to the contrary.
Something stinks but it is not my understanding of happened or support for a cop who obviously acted in self defense and ultimately in defense of the people he is sworn to protect.
Listen, I don't like cops in general. Never have. I think they over reach, the position attracts the wrong people, generally do not solve much crime and prevent crime moreso by the idea of them then anything but all of that is a discussion for another day. I see them as often tax collectors and protectors of those with money. But you have to take each case on it's face which so many of you are unable to do. The question you should be asking yourselves is why?
SO by taking the side of a black man, it gives you the moral high ground to say you are against racism and others that oppose you must be racist. It's fake and BS.
I don't give a crap what the color of someone's skin color is. I just them by their actions and Browns actions got him killed in a justifiable shooting. He was a thug who showed on friggin videotape a complete disregard for others, and clearly an appetite for violence....
It is so many of you that are only seeing skin color from the beginning. Claims that Wilson was trying to a 300lb powerful man into his cruiser through the friggin window?
How far do you have to take your imagination to dream that shit up? Again, it is those not wanting to face the reality of what really happened.
You sitting and seething alone over previous arguments with complete strangers on here.
You reading the recent report and running breathlessly back to BBI convinced you will have justice...for you. And your opinion.
And when your intended victory lap I told you so!!!! didn't result in you feeling validated, you have persisted. Again, for two days now.
And the only other thread of your I remember is about the injustice done, to you by the ACA.
You seem to have significant persecution complex. And despite your family, friends and co-workers who all love you dearly, you seem to need (really, need) to exorcise the injustices you perceive done to you endlessly among strangers.
What do this say about you?
Quote:
the crux of it is that this was a robbery rather than a theft. It certainly doesn't mean he deserved to die, but it does mean that Brown would have had a reason to be anxious or antsy regarding the police.
Yeah, I mean I can totally agree with that, 100%.
Really all I've tried to contend in this thread is that whatever happened in the convenience score is not reasonable enough evidence to conclude that he would just be completely ready to start openly killing cops in such such a conspicuous situation (or any situation).
The only way you can come to that conclusion really is if you have preconceived notions about the type of person he is based on circumstantial factors, or have an agenda to push.
People are accusing me of saying he was an angel, but I'm not really saying that at all. There are, however, people trying to make it out like he was a cracked out you-know-what-I'd-say-it-or-I'm-banned who was just a ticking time bomb that would eventually snap and start killing people.
And that parts ridiculous to me.
1
People here love to attack people. There is a true circle jerk phenomena. I love pointing out the hypocrisy and ridiculousness when it occurs and the attacks begin without cause.
Take a good look at what I just noted as to why the support of Brown began here and continues despite the obvious mounting evidence and common sense....common sense was all that was really needed from the beginning...
But it is actually racism and placating that is at the core here but not from me....let them eat cake...lol
He hasn't convinced anyone of the rightness of his arguments. He HAS managed to come across as a sad, pathetic, self-important fool. He has assured that BBI readers, as a group, will never take anything he says seriously, ever. All that energy--numerous hours worth--for a 100% negative outcome.
And after all of that, he thinks he somehow "won" something. That's quite a track record for a single thread. It's hard to think of another in the modern history of BBI that achieves all of this.
I thought the naked shorts thread already did that.
Again I dont have to prove anything really. That is being handled by forensics, autopsy, witnesses and common sense.
You can lay all the attacks on me as you wish but the real truth at the core is it is most of you with the racial issues. The desire to placate and find cause to join the side of the just to justify your own deep seeded feelings.
This case was never that complicated but so many felt a need to support one side versus the other despite evidence and logic...The question has been why...
But the answer is coming out here a bit I think. Ultimately it is the way for many to excorsize their own demons and be able to say..."look I am not a racist" I support the cause.
Except the cause was never supporting them.
You might have accomplished that more effectively with a new pillow.
I've seen you and others, but mainly you, constantly make this statement throughout the thread and yet not one person, that I can remember, made this claim. It's been bothering me for the past day or so to see this statement applied to those of us who aren't so readily to condemn either man, and wait until the facts come completely out before making any definitive statements or declarations but haven't felt the desire to skim through the whole thread to find out where it's first mentioned that the officer was trying to pull Brown into the car through the window.
And not surprisingly, it was first said by you... two days ago at 9:35 am in a post you directed at me:
10 minutes later I responded with this:
Not once did I say that the officer was trying to pull Brown into his vehicle through the window. I said, and I believe I repeated it later on in the thread, that I can easily see him try to GRAB Brown in order to detain him.
You've been creating straw man arguments throughout this thread. You've made up stuff in order to try and prove your point and really... it's AT LEAST an annoyance. Then you also say:
It's only clear that he attacked the officer if that's how you're choosing to view this unfortunate event but it's far from clear to those of us who are really trying to have an open mind about what really transpired. There are some posters on this thread who seem to be on your 'side' of what they believe transpired but most, if not all, have also left open the POSSIBILITY that Brown was killed unnecessarily. Am I completely convinced that the officer shot and killed Brown unnecessarily? No, not at all. Am I leaning to it at this present time? Honestly, yeah. But I'm open to being wrong about my initial thoughts and if it's found that the cop acted correctly, then so be it and life goes on.
But I think what has bothered most of us during this whole 2-day conversation on this thread is the utmost certainty you have that the cop did everything right and his killing Brown was justified before you have and know all of the facts. There's something very wrong with that.
This is basically what you have to believe
Gentle baby face giant Brown was walking down the middle of the street. Wilson pulled up to him and when Brown didnt listen he tried to pull a 6'5" man into his window and what he was going to do with Brown on his lap...I have no idea even if it was possible which it wasnt. Then Brown assaulted Wilson in self defense which doesnt fit either if he was being pulled into the car...Then you have to understand Wilson was doing all of this with one hand because the other was on the gun...And of course the shots fired...
Then because Brown ran and didnt stop Wilson shot Brown with a magical set of bullets that curved around 180 degrees (if you believe Johnsons story) or that Brown had his hands up and was giving up. And then Brown is there giving up and Wilson decides to excecute him in broad daylight in the middle of the street witnesses all around.
And this was ignoring Brown on Video tape robbing and assaulting the clerk literally minutes before and goes to state of mind...
And this is all before we even begin to think about the evidence. Again soooo many here sided with the thug and despite the ridiculousness of that story (which there is more that I am skipping over) and now the evidence is rolling in supporting Wilson (Duh, unless you believe in magical thinking)
So why did so many support Brown despite the ridiculousness of the story and the continued mounting evidence? That is really what I am trying to figure out and I think I am starting too,
Brown almost certainly had some thuggish tendencies, and it seems pretty likely that his initial contact with Wilson, probably up to and including the first shot, was his doing.
The ONLY question on the table at this point is whether the entire sequence of bullets was legally necessary for Wilson to protect himself. I don't know the answer. You don't know the answer.
That you consider dealing with this question "supporting Brown" is a remarkable display of distorted thinking.
The one thing I DO know is that once the media sinks their teeth into a story like this one, millions of people make asses out of themselves based on hearsay and facts that are spun by media on both sides.
A cop killed a black kid in St. Louis. Justified or not, the only reason most of you give a shit is because CNN or some other bullshit news outlet manipulated you.
Now the same folks who bashed Wilson and supported what occurred in Fergtuson are considering Wilsons side? So nice of you...
However it is 99% against your stupid posts, and 1% for.
You suck. People need to stop being nice to you. You suck. You are awful. Stop posting here forever.
This is basically what you have to believe
Gentle baby face giant Brown was walking down the middle of the street. Wilson pulled up to him and when Brown didnt listen he tried to pull a 6'5" man into his window and what he was going to do with Brown on his lap...I have no idea even if it was possible which it wasnt. Then Brown assaulted Wilson in self defense which doesnt fit either if he was being pulled into the car...Then you have to understand Wilson was doing all of this with one hand because the other was on the gun...And of course the shots fired...
Then because Brown ran and didnt stop Wilson shot Brown with a magical set of bullets that curved around 180 degrees (if you believe Johnsons story) or that Brown had his hands up and was giving up. And then Brown is there giving up and Wilson decides to excecute him in broad daylight in the middle of the street witnesses all around.
And this was ignoring Brown on Video tape robbing and assaulting the clerk literally minutes before and goes to state of mind...
And this is all before we even begin to think about the evidence. Again soooo many here sided with the thug and despite the ridiculousness of that story (which there is more that I am skipping over) and now the evidence is rolling in supporting Wilson (Duh, unless you believe in magical thinking)
So why did so many support Brown despite the ridiculousness of the story and the continued mounting evidence? That is really what I am trying to figure out and I think I am starting too,
See? That's your problem. I don't have to believe any of what you wrote above. I JUST said that no one said anything about the cop trying to pull Brown into the car (that I've seen anyway... please point it out and I will gladly admit that I was wrong about that) and yet there you are saying AGAIN.
I don't HAVE to believe that Brown was a "Gentle baby face giant" because, as you've repeatedly let us all know, it's obvious the kid had some violent issues/tendencies by what he'd done just a few minutes before the police stopped him... and yet that doesn't automatically mean that the cop was justified in killing him... which is the part you don't seem to get.
You keep on saying that he went for the cop's gun...while using testimony from someone who wasn't even a part of the autopsy mind you, which is laughable... when we don't know that for a FACT at all. Is it possible he did? Sure, it's possible. It's also just as possible that the officer was reaching for his gun during the struggle with Brown and Brown saw this and started trying to get the gun from the officer for fear of being shot unnecessarily (which may have happened anyway) and that's when the shots in the car went off. The difference between you and I is that I'm not stating what I think POSSIBLY could've happened as a fact of what DID happen.
You also keep on intimating how the case should be an open and shut case because it's just so obvious that the Wilson was in the right and yet there's a city that's been/being torn apart because it's not so obvious to thousands of people. And yet it's as obvious as the sky is blue to you. I'm left wondering why the federal government has been called into getting involved in this case when it's just so obvious that Ray Charles can see that Wilson was in the right?
I don't know what to say any more. You're level of arrogance and closed-mindedness with regards to this story has simply been amazing.
There is lots of support for finding out a complete sequence of the events, from the initial encounter onward.
Why is that so f@*king hard to comprehend?
Randy is right. The world would be a slightly better place if you leave BBI to the adults.
Now the same folks who bashed Wilson and supported what occurred in Fergtuson are considering Wilsons side? So nice of you...
LOL! Wow... you are OUT THERE. I'm gonna try and go ahead and stay out of this thread from now on... key word being 'try'.
And while Brown may have been without a weapon, it does not mean that he wasn't threatening. He was 6'4 292 pounds. Size-wise, that puts him right between Jason Pierre-Paul (6'5, 278) and Ndomakong Suh (6'4, 307). Plus, the convenience store tape shows that Brown was willing to use his size in a threatening manner. Again, it does not justify him being shot in any way, but it does demonstrate that on at least one occasion that day, he used his size in a threatening way. Plus, it may have impacted Brown's state of mind at the time of the encounter with Officer Wilson.
Michael Brown was threateniing. I think the imbecile pointed that out 12,092 times on this thread and will continue to do so for the sorry reasons vibe mentioned.
The Michael Browns of the world will be jaywalking down the street today, tomorrow and into the infinite future. Thats why we have cops to maintain law and order and protect and serve. On that day we had one of Ferguson's finest, decorated veteran on the job. Exactly how this distinguished cop was able to allow this situation to escalate to the point where he had to shoot an unarmed man dead completely escapes me. I don't give a shit about Michael Brown per se. I dont care wether the cops actions were legal or not. I care about the officer's ability to do his job honorably and ethically. If legality is our standard, it is way to low. That the dumbest OP on the planet can gloat endlessly about this bears that out.
Maybe it's time to evaluate yourself and take a look in the mirror. You hang your hat on this made up notion that people think Michael Brown is a boy scout. I bet your family hates you, and you come here to get some sort of validation.
Some basic logic...If you begin punching a cop in the face through the car window, he is going to try and stop you even if that includes shooting you.
And the forensics show the gun was fired next to his Browns hand...And splatter inside vehicle...
Oh and the 7-8 witnesses backing up Wilsons story that according to the Wash post wish to remain anonymous for their safety...
So what do you think happened?
"Pray tell why Michael Brown got executed in public by someone that's supposed to serve the public without a trial?"
hmmmmmmmm...
Answer - He (or she) would appear to be a raging asshole.
I am still waiting for a single example of a poster "defending" Brown.
When you find one, please quote it.
Not a good few days for you Rob..
It's abundantly clear he hasnt read a word of this thread, and is arguing against the ghosts of what he perceives was said on prior threads. Disgusting.
Gotcha. Then I defend him as well.
Quote:
is still going?
I feel so dirty...
Didn't buford agree with you?
You should...
Some basic logic...If you begin punching a cop in the face through the car window, he is going to try and stop you even if that includes shooting you.
And the forensics show the gun was fired next to his Browns hand...And splatter inside vehicle...
Oh and the 7-8 witnesses backing up Wilsons story that according to the Wash post wish to remain anonymous for their safety...
So what do you think happened?
I. Do. Not. Know.
And neither do thousands of other people evidently or else this case would've been closed weeks ago don't ya think?
You seem to be the only person in America, that I've seen so far anyway, who has no doubt cracked this case and am ready to let Wilson go with no questions asked.
Have you ever been on a jury?
Not a good few days for you Rob..
And its been a great couple of days for you buddy - two days of your life you won't get back spent proving to a group of strangers that at best you are an idiot, at worst, a racist idiot. Bravo.
You are actually one of the biggest problems on BBI. Its kind of weird. Pride yourself on being some kind of contrarian but really you are just an asshole.
If that all it is now, is well maybe the last shots could have been excessive...again ignoring still forensics and testimony....why the hell are we worried about riots and looting and violence....
It is you fools that did this...
Nailed it. I'm playing the lottery today.
You are actually one of the biggest problems on BBI. Its kind of weird. Pride yourself on being some kind of contrarian but really you are just an asshole.
Some truth to that, but I am smart enough to try and learn when decent people present alternative views to me on this site. I have also been known to apologize for bad behavior, more than a few times.
In short, qualities that are completely alien to a troll such as yourself.
Here is the real question......Some bashing me for the thread, saying it is worthless, I am wasting time...as they type their umpteenth message here...
Ironic much?
You are actually one of the biggest problems on BBI. Its kind of weird. Pride yourself on being some kind of contrarian but really you are just an asshole.
The worst kind poster is actually someone that is smug, full of himself, not nearly as smart as he thinks and starts shit on threads he made with an OP that wreaks of "I told you so" and bordering on dancing on top of graves. You know, your kind.
You accuse me of doing it on this thread and then admit you do it on every thread? Are we coming to some sort of catharsis? Need a shrink? A priest? 12 step program?
Maybe you have reached the first step...
Is is the blindness to support illogical thoughts in the face of mounting evidence that is why there are riots and protests. In the previous threads I kept saying that you guys were backing the wrong horse here....Denial aint no river...
When people from both sides of the argument think that YOU are wrong. That is the case here.
Instead of continuing your jousting with the windmill, perhaps you'd be better served reading some of the critiques of your stances and see where you might be wrong/coming across badly.
When people from both sides of the argument think that YOU are wrong. That is the case here.
Instead of continuing your jousting with the windmill, perhaps you'd be better served reading some of the critiques of your stances and see where you might be wrong/coming across badly.
AMEN!
I suspect we won't be waiting long.
I do have to reassess my prior view based on new evidence (see how that works) - it is very clear you are thrilled that there is a dead black man in this story, facts or no facts.
Nope. I haven't been "arguing tirelessly for 2 days".
I haven't opined on one side of the other. I've just been flinging mud on large groups of faceless posters.
Not thrilled. DIsgusted that folks have gone to great lengths, wasted great opportunity, savaged a police officer, savaged a community in support of a thug, and bad logic.
And all that has been done ultimately is provide support for the actual racists....Not the tacit ones here trying to assuage their guilt through support of Brown and denial of mounting evidence.
He got over on us. He wins.
Well it's not immaterial for reasons that have been discussed by numerous posters. It is completely relevant. And the comparison of Brown to the movie theater shooter that you posted was absurd. But your interventions on this thread have been limited in number and so you're not getting the same treatment as the very dogged poster you're lampooning.
PROVE. IT.
simple as that.
PROVE IT.
and if you tell me it's because he was sooooo dangeroussss dudeeeee for committing an unarmed robbery of 75$, you're a moron.
Quote:
Brown tried to kill him.
PROVE. IT.
simple as that.
PROVE IT.
and if you tell me it's because he was sooooo dangeroussss dudeeeee for committing an unarmed robbery of 75$, you're a moron.
Lets Brown gives up and goes to jail. Charges would be Robbery, Menacing, Assault, Assault on a police officer with intent to kill...., just off the top of my head. Brown was going to jail for a long long time.
Wouyld you give a shit about him then? How about in 10 years when he gets out?
Your premise is completely flawed You're saying he assaulted an officer because he was afraid he was going to jail for a long time?
Ok first off, if that's what you're saying, then Brown would have been trying to avoid charges stemming from the gas station robbery. So right off the bat, throw off your assault on police officer bullshit, because that would have been before he, theoretically, tried to assault the cop.
So what do we have? An unarmed robbery/shove (I don't even know if that shove would be considered assault) of goods worth $80 max. No way he goes to jail for that, especially with no priors.
Quote:
In comment 11936638 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Brown tried to kill him.
PROVE. IT.
simple as that.
PROVE IT.
and if you tell me it's because he was sooooo dangeroussss dudeeeee for committing an unarmed robbery of 75$, you're a moron.
Or you're both wrong. That's where I lean.
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
Dude. I think if you actually look at my posts, I'm pretty down the middle on these topics. I have been pro defendant at times and pro law enforcement other times.
Your stupid statement was stupid. Stupid.
The position against Wilson has been ridiculous from the beginning. Just common sense and logic. I didnt just assume that some rogue cop gunned down some innocent sweet kid in the middle of the street in the middle of the day in plain sight because he didnt like black people.
NOBODY fucking thinks that, you stupid fucking moron.
Nobody thinks a rogue cop gunned down a black kid cause he felt like it.
People felt there was an altercation and the cop killed a teenager when he DID NOT have to and COULD HAVE avoided it.
People also contend that the color of his skin may have factored into the officer's threat assessment. (I am not taking a position on this).
Why do people think this? Because the number of minorities killed by police on a yearly basis is inordinately higher than those of whites.
The beef here is that cops are much more trigger happy with black people than white people.
Link - ( New Window )
Point blank:
Do white people and black people have the same experiences when coming into contact with a police officer?
That doesn't answer the question. EVERYONE knows the cop has a gun. That doesn't mean he's going to listen to the cop. You were pretty adamant about not listening to the cop in subway thread. Which is it?
NOBODY fucking thinks that, you stupid fucking moron.
To be fair to PA Giants Fan in his paranoid persecuted glory, I think you're overstating that. I've generally avoided this thread, but past threads have seen people at least insinuating that.
I agree that what's germane is whether or not this was excessive force. While the story emerging from the autopsy at least somewhat supports Wilson's version of the incident, there is still far too much unknown for anyone to definitively assert that the shooting was either justified or unjustified.
Quote:
And when you have no real argument, play the race card.
Point blank:
Do white people and black people have the same experiences when coming into contact with a police officer?
Quote:
"Just because Brown robbed a store"
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
There's nuance to figuring out the state of mind here. The perp JUST committing a crime where he got physical (and then threatened more) is EXACTLY what you'd look for when trying to figure out the perp's state of mind. To get what he wanted, he used physicality. Your waving it off as merely a "shove" puts you in the same camp as PA Giants Fan. You both bring your dumb game equally.
It's fascinating.
Gentle baby face giant Brown was walking down the middle of the street. Wilson pulled up to him and when Brown didnt listen he tried to pull a 6'5" man into his window and what he was going to do with Brown on his lap...I have no idea even if it was possible which it wasnt. Then Brown assaulted Wilson in self defense which doesnt fit either if he was being pulled into the car...Then you have to understand Wilson was doing all of this with one hand because the other was on the gun...And of course the shots fired...
Then because Brown ran and didnt stop Wilson shot Brown with a magical set of bullets that curved around 180 degrees (if you believe Johnsons story) or that Brown had his hands up and was giving up. And then Brown is there giving up and Wilson decides to excecute him in broad daylight in the middle of the street witnesses all around.
And this was ignoring Brown on Video tape robbing and assaulting the clerk literally minutes before and goes to state of mind...
And this is all before we even begin to think about the evidence. Again soooo many here sided with the thug and despite the ridiculousness of that story (which there is more that I am skipping over) and now the evidence is rolling in supporting Wilson (Duh, unless you believe in magical thinking)
So why did so many support Brown despite the ridiculousness of the story and the continued mounting evidence? That is really what I am trying to figure out and I think I am starting too,
YOU ARE FUCKING STUPID!
Nobody thinks he was trying to pull Brown into his lap.
Do you think this is so far fetched:
Cop pulls over, tells Brown to get out of the street.
Brown doesn't listen, starts to walk away.
Cop tries to GRAB Brown, to turn him around... why would he do this? Because when someone walks away, your first inclination if you don't want them to walk away from you is to try and GRAB them. Not PULL INTO YOUR LAP. Not PULL INTO YOUR CAR. Grab them, their shoulder, whatever, to turn around.
Situation obviously escalates from there...
But this whole "grab into the car" shit is such a fucking stupid misnomer.
You honestly think it's more likely that Brown decided TODAYS THE DAY I START KILLING COPS! I AM SUCH A BADASS CAUSE I SHOVED A CLERK AND TOOK DUTCHES! and went for his gun to kill a cop in broad daylight....
...as opposed to a cop tried to grab a guy to turn him around when the kid was disrespecting him and his authority by walking away.
Quote:
And when you have no real argument, play the race card.
Point blank:
Do white people and black people have the same experiences when coming into contact with a police officer?
Nope. That's what Ferguson is about.
Mike Brown is just a martyr for the movement (guilty or not).
But the national public spectacle, and this thread in itself are a creation of Cable News. Same as Treyvon Martin. Pouring gas on the fires of America's love of racism. Has nothing to do with the kid or the cop, everything to do with news outlets trying to keep you glued to the set and their websites.
Here is the real question......Some bashing me for the thread, saying it is worthless, I am wasting time...as they type their umpteenth message here...
Ironic much?
Once again, you're a dumb fuck if you think this riots have to do with Brown directly.
So the people who are sick and tired of feeling like they are unfairly targeted by police are the racists?
Let me guess, you think whites and blacks have the same interactions with cops?
Cause if the answer is NO to that question, then you should see what the real reason of these riots is.
Quote:
In comment 11936638 PA Giant Fan said:
Quote:
Brown tried to kill him.
PROVE. IT.
simple as that.
PROVE IT.
and if you tell me it's because he was sooooo dangeroussss dudeeeee for committing an unarmed robbery of 75$, you're a moron.
Or you're both wrong. That's where I lean.
I'm not saying anything or arguing anything except:
1) saying Brown was an imminent danger to peoples lives based on that gas station tape is fucking idiotic, and
2) its completely plausable that the cop put his hand on Brown if Brown was trying to walk away from him. It's not so absurd. This doesn't mean a pull, doesn't mean he tried to get him into the cruiser, but he could have possibly tried to grab him through the window.
Quote:
In comment 11936648 Randy in CT said:
Quote:
"Just because Brown robbed a store"
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
That shove was getting physical. With your ridiculous logic, the only crime he could have JUST committed which would be applicable was if he dove over the counter, trying to kill the shop owner for no reason.
There's nuance to figuring out the state of mind here. The perp JUST committing a crime where he got physical (and then threatened more) is EXACTLY what you'd look for when trying to figure out the perp's state of mind. To get what he wanted, he used physicality. Your waving it off as merely a "shove" puts you in the same camp as PA Giants Fan. You both bring your dumb game equally.
It's fascinating.
Sonic, I'm with Randy here. You can't simply dismiss what he did just a few minutes earlier than his meeting with Wilson with a shrug of the shoulders and say 'So what?'.
That said, the fact that he did what he did at the store does not AUTOMATICALLY mean that Brown would also assault a police officer and try to take his gun nor does it give a police officer an excuse to kill that person unnecessarily, IF that's what happened, as at least one poster on this thread is convinced it means.
holy fucking hyperbole.
assault battery menacing... you're a huge fucking pussy. Like I said, I've seen worse fights in New Brunswick streets.
He NEVER THREW A FUCKING PUNCH but its assault and battery. You fucking retard.
Why dont you just say he's a n****** that would have killed someone so you're glad he's dead? We all know that's what you want to say here anyway.
[quote] "when you have no argument, play the race card", as if racism has been magically been erased from society. I watched my friend, who was my DD get treated like shit in Huntington Beach, and I definitely think it was because he's black. He's someone that everyone describes as very polite and calm. [/quote Ofcourse, no one says there is no racism. But it devalues criticism of real racism when it is randomly thrown around.
What the hell was he doing punching Wilson in the face inside the vehicle? You see this is getting to the point....maybe finally...
How did Brown end up his arms all the way in side the vehicle and Wilson getting punched in the face and neck?
ANd then getting shot with the gun going off inside the vehicle and next to Browns hand as noted by forensics?
Brown is clearly has his arms inside the vehicle...Was he shaking WIlsons hand?
Quote:
In comment 11936648 Randy in CT said:
Quote:
"Just because Brown robbed a store"
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
That shove was getting physical. With your ridiculous logic, the only crime he could have JUST committed which would be applicable was if he dove over the counter, trying to kill the shop owner for no reason.
There's nuance to figuring out the state of mind here. The perp JUST committing a crime where he got physical (and then threatened more) is EXACTLY what you'd look for when trying to figure out the perp's state of mind. To get what he wanted, he used physicality. Your waving it off as merely a "shove" puts you in the same camp as PA Giants Fan. You both bring your dumb game equally.
It's fascinating.
Don't put words in my mouth.
If it was a savage beating, yeah, I could see the argument.
If he was armed, yeah.
He shoved him.
Things aren't black and white.
Go fuck yourself, dumbass. You tell me where what I'm saying is unreasonable. I'd love to see it.
Quote:
In comment 11936959 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11936648 Randy in CT said:
Quote:
"Just because Brown robbed a store"
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
That shove was getting physical. With your ridiculous logic, the only crime he could have JUST committed which would be applicable was if he dove over the counter, trying to kill the shop owner for no reason.
There's nuance to figuring out the state of mind here. The perp JUST committing a crime where he got physical (and then threatened more) is EXACTLY what you'd look for when trying to figure out the perp's state of mind. To get what he wanted, he used physicality. Your waving it off as merely a "shove" puts you in the same camp as PA Giants Fan. You both bring your dumb game equally.
It's fascinating.
Sonic, I'm with Randy here. You can't simply dismiss what he did just a few minutes earlier than his meeting with Wilson with a shrug of the shoulders and say 'So what?'.
That said, the fact that he did what he did at the store does not AUTOMATICALLY mean that Brown would also assault a police officer and try to take his gun nor does it give a police officer an excuse to kill that person unnecessarily, IF that's what happened, as at least one poster on this thread is convinced it means.
What people are missing is that I'm not saying "so what".
I'm saying the leap from a shove to cop killer is massive and a non-sequitor.
I have no idea what happened, and I'm not contending I do.
Truth be told, as more evidence comes out, it typically is going towards the officer's side.
Having said that, my point is about the fact that people are drawing the conclusion that Brown would have no problem shooting a cop BASED on that robbery video.
That's it.
I do not see how that is unreasonable at all.
I am arguing against a very specific part of this.
*starts banging head on his desk*
Quote:
In comment 11936985 Randy in CT said:
Quote:
In comment 11936959 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11936648 Randy in CT said:
Quote:
"Just because Brown robbed a store"
and
"was threatening earlier in the day"
therefore "didn't (necessarily) deserve to be shot"
are being purposefully obtuse in order for their side to be correct.
The picture has been painted from some that Brown was threatening/acting in a threatening manner towards the cop. Mentioning that Brown just committed a robbery, and how he did it, is so fucking pertinent it makes my head spin. It speaks towards his attitude, his judgement, his lack of morals, his tendency towards acting violent, etc etc...This is directly relevant to a bad interaction with a cop.
I lean toward the cop being in the right but will stand corrected as the evidence comes out. I don't see that being the case for many here.
Wow, you are so completely correct, but it goes against what you are saying.
Thinking of WHAT he did and HOW he did it... he robbed something less than $100 from a gas station, with a SHOVE.
That is the physical term for what he did in the robbery. SHOVE.
People will tell me I'm trying to sugar coat it -- I'm not sugarcoating shit. Give me a physical description of what he did to the clerk? Cause it definitely was NOT a punch.
If you think that shove means he was soooo dangerous and soooo violent that he was ready to openly start killing cops, then there are an absurd amount of people you need to apply that label to.
I have seen more violent fights, altercations, and yes ROBBERIES on Easton Ave while I was at Rutgers.
Like I said before, the robbery from the movie Superbad was literally more violent than his robbery.
People who are using that robbery to try and make it seem like its some sort of proof that he was so violent and so dangerous that he would start murdering cops need their fucking heads examined.
That shove was getting physical. With your ridiculous logic, the only crime he could have JUST committed which would be applicable was if he dove over the counter, trying to kill the shop owner for no reason.
There's nuance to figuring out the state of mind here. The perp JUST committing a crime where he got physical (and then threatened more) is EXACTLY what you'd look for when trying to figure out the perp's state of mind. To get what he wanted, he used physicality. Your waving it off as merely a "shove" puts you in the same camp as PA Giants Fan. You both bring your dumb game equally.
It's fascinating.
Sonic, I'm with Randy here. You can't simply dismiss what he did just a few minutes earlier than his meeting with Wilson with a shrug of the shoulders and say 'So what?'.
That said, the fact that he did what he did at the store does not AUTOMATICALLY mean that Brown would also assault a police officer and try to take his gun nor does it give a police officer an excuse to kill that person unnecessarily, IF that's what happened, as at least one poster on this thread is convinced it means.
What people are missing is that I'm not saying "so what".
I'm saying the leap from a shove to cop killer is massive and a non-sequitor.
I have no idea what happened, and I'm not contending I do.
Truth be told, as more evidence comes out, it typically is going towards the officer's side.
Having said that, my point is about the fact that people are drawing the conclusion that Brown would have no problem shooting a cop BASED on that robbery video.
That's it.
I do not see how that is unreasonable at all.
I hear you and agree with most of this post but it DOES seem like you're trying to minimize what Brown did in the store by downplaying what he did to the store clerk. I'm with you in that it wasn't like he jumped on the guy and started pounding his head into the floor... but at the same time, the fact that he so quickly became aggressive towards the store clerk is a valid reason to think that he can be as equally aggressive to anyone... including a cop.
That all said, my point to PA has always been that Brown doing what he did at the store doesn't automatically mean that he'd attack a cop... just as you've been saying.... which I agree completely with.
1) saying Brown was an imminent danger to peoples lives based on that gas station tape is fucking idiotic
It is amazing how this guy can continue to misrepresent what people have said despite it being explained to him a number of times.
[
Still waiting to hear what hsi arms were doing inside the vehicle...and how punching a police officer in the face and how the gun went off next to his hand....
1) saying Brown was an imminent danger to peoples lives based on that gas station tape is fucking idiotic
It is amazing how this guy can continue to misrepresent what people have said despite it being explained to him a number of times.
[
This is exactly what PA giants fan has been saying. I am not misrepresenting anything
No, I will not even attempt to answer you. Why should I? For the past 2-3 days you haven't even TRIED to hear someone else's opinion on what might have happened. You haven't even TRIED to keep an open-mind. So why should I waste my time trying to convince now?
No thanks. You keep on keepin on....
Idk what happened in the car. Im talking about the gas station
Still waiting to hear what hsi arms were doing inside the vehicle...and how punching a police officer in the face and how the gun went off next to his hand....
He just robbed a store, then some incredible coincidence he runs into a cop who decides to attack a 6"5" 300lb man through his window? And how did his arms get inside the vehicle or are we back to saying the cop was pulling him inside the vehicle? lol
Quote:
Sonic Youth said
1) saying Brown was an imminent danger to peoples lives based on that gas station tape is fucking idiotic
It is amazing how this guy can continue to misrepresent what people have said despite it being explained to him a number of times.
[
This is exactly what PA giants fan has been saying. I am not misrepresenting anything
OK I will explain it to you again despite it probably a waist of time. No one thought he was a danger to a cop based on that tape alone. However once we became aware of the subsequent events it spoke to his state of mind and his violent tendencies.
HAHA Benjy Vortex, perfect.
The secondarily derived stuff the autopsy the bullets fired from where and when that stuff is of course subject to way more interpretations as we can
not even check a video on them.
I'd guess a bunch of reason are why. This is why when one get a eyewitness account of any event a accident a killing whatever,r you will get usually 10 differing accounts with 15 or so people witnessing the event.
We humans are just not programmed in a way that allows objective analysis of things like these.
I am surprised at times that even in a court of law considering that, anyone innocent is found innocent and anyone guilty is found guilty. WE are finding these things on how we feel of the people representing them as much as with the actual facts of things.
A aside but it is to point…. please continue…..
My kudos to PA for continuing on this thread despite the pages and pages of posts. I happen to agree with most of his statements(not necessarily the technical analysis of the shooting) but even if I did not that is a daunting task accomplished.
Note that the kudos come from a 10/14.
Quote:
Now he gets 'kudos' for this thread and his posts on it.
Note that the kudos come from a 10/14.
Yeah I see that now in his profile. Which confuses me because I could've sworn ron in new mexico has been here for years. Maybe I'm thinking of another guy? Or he re-registered?
Oh fuck off. I hate seeing this sjhit from posters like you who I respect.
Please point out how I am ANYTHING like PA giants? Am I emphatically stating I know what happened? No. Have I made a judgment on who is right or wrong? No.
So why are you guys lumping me in with someone as closed off as him?
Get the fuck outta here with that shit. All ive been saying is that the video doesnt show thay some proof that brown was ready to start killing cops in plain view.
WE had occasion that a person who murdered someone in a jewelry store had hid out right by my house. It is a rural area and he was laying low till the heat was off. AS to me…. I talked to the guy not thinking he was anything and thought he was a pretty OK guy(says something I guess on what a judge of character I am).
Anyway long story short, the detective was in my house with the other neighbors who had seen the guy. This neighbor started to go on to the detective as she could tell this guy was not a nice guy as he didn't look you straight in the eye. She could tell he was guilty of something just by looking at him.
That I think is about how the majority of people go into things like this….already thinking they know just by looking at the guy.
AS here one is a cop and one not. So we judge it as much on social standing as of anything. Quite often if you don't like cops the cop is guilty, if you do he is innocent.
OJ before the trial the hash up of who thought he was innocent and who did not split almost exactly on racial lines. Minority you thought him innocent not minority guilty.
Seeing this over the years I know we have a perfect right to express this and discuss this and I am not saying we don't. But I add and continue to add we can't really take all this to serious. We don't have all the facts by a long shot(not even one witness court testimony) and in America we have a presumption of innocent until proven guilty.
I always fault for innocence first then guilty which is why I support PA in this, the PO he is innocent until found pre ponderously guilty by the weight of evidence, beyond the shadow of a doubt as they say.. If it was OJ years and years ago I would be supporting those who supported OJ as innocent(all the evidence is now out on that so it is not directly applicable I am talking before the trial), which likely would be in most part the exact opposite of those who support the innocence of the PO in this case.
Golly gee.
Unlike your stupid ass, I am NOT pretending to know what happened.
Once again, all I have been talking about is this notion that the video provides proof brown was ready to kill is false.
Golly gee.
Uh, once again thats not at all what I said.
I said its annoying to see posters that I do respect equating me to that idiot PA Giants fan.
I think your body of posts is enough that your misguided opinion and false equivalency of me to PA wont really affect how I view your posts.
You never answered my question. What the fuck did I say that warrants me being equated to him?
So what was Browns arms doing in the police vehicle? Are you denying that Brown assaulted the officer?
That entire part of this thread was laughably retarded.
Quote:
Into punching the cop in the face through the car window and his arms were pulled in by one hand, his off hand while the other hand reached for the gun...all unprovoked mind you....ignoring the robbery minutes before....
once again I NEVER said that. You posed a question, I answered it.
Unlike your stupid ass, I am NOT pretending to know what happened.
Once again, all I have been talking about is this notion that the video provides proof brown was ready to kill is false.
And SY validates my statement that trying to rational trying to explain something to him is a waste of time.
He just robbed a store, then some incredible coincidence he runs into a cop who decides to attack a 6"5" 300lb man through his window? And how did his arms get inside the vehicle or are we back to saying the cop was pulling him inside the vehicle? lol
SO the cop provoked him. Into punching the cop in the face through the car window and his arms were pulled in by one hand, his off hand while the other hand reached for the gun...all unprovoked mind you....ignoring the robbery minutes before....
Quote:
will act like matter and anti-matter and implode soon upon contact, with no ability to post?
Oh fuck off. I hate seeing this sjhit from posters like you who I respect.
Please point out how I am ANYTHING like PA giants? Am I emphatically stating I know what happened? No. Have I made a judgment on who is right or wrong? No.
So why are you guys lumping me in with someone as closed off as him?
Get the fuck outta here with that shit. All ive been saying is that the video doesnt show thay some proof that brown was ready to start killing cops in plain view.
People can throw bullshit at me and say im equal to PA but sorry, my views are not in the same stratosphere as his.
Essentially, youre telling me I am as bad as PA bc I dont buy that tehe gas station video is something that suggests brown was ready to kill.
If you disagree with me on that point so vehemently that you think I am equal to PA, I guess you're saying the video WAS enough to make that assertion. Fine, I guess, but I dont see how AT ALL.
Everyone pretends to say they want to know what happeend with those last shots but people can't accept that Brown was 1.5 seconds away from Wilson.
People say that is enough time to defend yourself. However that is making all kinds of assumptions that are not practical or make sense.
Quote:
In comment 11937083 kickerpa16 said:
Quote:
will act like matter and anti-matter and implode soon upon contact, with no ability to post?
Oh fuck off. I hate seeing this sjhit from posters like you who I respect.
Please point out how I am ANYTHING like PA giants? Am I emphatically stating I know what happened? No. Have I made a judgment on who is right or wrong? No.
So why are you guys lumping me in with someone as closed off as him?
Get the fuck outta here with that shit. All ive been saying is that the video doesnt show thay some proof that brown was ready to start killing cops in plain view.
As emphatic as PA is that his narrative is exactly what happened, you are equally adamant that the perp just committing a violent crime isn't relevant. In fact, you have laughed it off (LOL). You are both the same and should equally be ignored. But it is SO hard!
I am NOT saying its not relevant. I am saying its not an indictment on whether he was ready to kill cops.
Quote:
they're not a panacea but they'd help.
But I think the disconnect starts here. Some people want to look at Michael Brown and see every young black man, with lessons aplenty to extrapolate, while others look at him and see an outlier, a guy who wasn't necessarily a stranger to the criminal justice system, a guy whose death is lamentable (potentially criminal) but still not one whose life lends itself to many of these lessons.
Some people don't care who Michael Brown is at all. We are concerned about a cop, supposedly of sound mind and judgement, one who had received a commendation from his force, who demonstrated no ability to diffuse a perceived threat from an unarmed man without using lethal force. A man is dead and a community ravaged. Actions that are justified can still be incompetent. Exactly why this outcome was so bad can be examined, but there are thousands of Michael Browns out there, so to place blame on him is very misguided.
The article in the Washington Post I mentioned earlier says that Wilson testified that he was attacked in the car. He testified that Brown punched him and scratched him repeatedly and pinned him inside the car. He said that he could not reach his baton, his pepper spray would have affected him just as much as Brown and he did not have a taser. So at that point, he attempted to pull his gun and Brown reached for it.
How would you diffuse that ? Then, after someone has done that, they turn around and start charging you...what do you do to diffuse that? (I understand we don't know for sure if thats what happened, but for the sake of this scenario...let's assume that).
Perhaps my simple statement was not clear. This subject can refer to multiple threads on similar subjects.
You can play the "what-if" game all you want. I am perfectly comfortable with my characterization of your posts, and the equivalency I've created.
Everyone pretends to say they want to know what happeend with those last shots but people can't accept that Brown was 1.5 seconds away from Wilson.
People say that is enough time to defend yourself. However that is making all kinds of assumptions that are not practical or make sense.
Perhaps my simple statement was not clear. This subject can refer to multiple threads on similar subjects.
You can play the "what-if" game all you want. I am perfectly comfortable with my characterization of your posts, and the equivalency I've created.
Once again, please show me where I am acting as dense as PA? You cannot.
So maybe you should either come up with a reason, or stop treating me like a stubborn dickwad with an axe to grind.
Cause I am not. Ive been open to all new developments and the subsequent possibilities they suggest. My initial disposition back in August was based on reports at the time. As time has gone on, I've changed my perception on thid occurence.
Plus, ive been stating that this issue is more than about brown. Its about race relations and police actions in this country.
Quote:
In comment 11937126 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11937083 kickerpa16 said:
Quote:
will act like matter and anti-matter and implode soon upon contact, with no ability to post?
Oh fuck off. I hate seeing this sjhit from posters like you who I respect.
Please point out how I am ANYTHING like PA giants? Am I emphatically stating I know what happened? No. Have I made a judgment on who is right or wrong? No.
So why are you guys lumping me in with someone as closed off as him?
Get the fuck outta here with that shit. All ive been saying is that the video doesnt show thay some proof that brown was ready to start killing cops in plain view.
As emphatic as PA is that his narrative is exactly what happened, you are equally adamant that the perp just committing a violent crime isn't relevant. In fact, you have laughed it off (LOL). You are both the same and should equally be ignored. But it is SO hard!
I am NOT saying its not relevant. I am saying its not an indictment on whether he was ready to kill cops.
Oh fuck me.
Spare me the empty platitudes.
I am saying one thing, and one thing only:
You can draw conclusions about Brown's character or his respect for the law from his actions at the gas station, which I get. I don't think it suggests he is ready to kill cops.
That's all I've been stating in this thread. No more, no less.
Agree, disagree, whatever. That's all I'm saying and all I'm contending.
I have no idea what happened in the car, I don't know if it was justified or not, I dont' think Mike Brown was an angel, and I don't thin Wilson was some racist cop looking for a black guy to kill.
So yes, it's relevant, but no, I don't think it's enough to say he was ready to kill cops.
Why this is unreasonable to the point that people equate me to the pigheadedness that PA Giants Fan has displayed is beyond me.
There are different type police trainings. Some are standardized by state some on a somewhat national basis, some are individual to a municipality or local, and some are favoring one region perhaps over another. though all now pretty much have a state test which must be passed or internal state qualification which must be recognized. A NYC training model for instance may be specific to NYC but a Patterson NJ model may be used by every officer in NJ state,,just per example I don't know the specifics on where you are.
in police training one exercise used by one of the national training models a exercise is used and video shown that points to a person being a threat to a officer. How far away does that person have to be to pose a threat. One would be surprised how far away one can be who can before a officer can even draw his gun to deal a fatal attack.
Here in NM they are getting away from the use of that model. But if this goes to court this can indeed be a finding of importance. Did that police officer act as his training directed. In Albuquerque NM seeing we have as many DBPO in four years as NYC you can say unequivocally it has to do with the training.
What training is used in Ferguson…we don't know. Quite likely it is that the training will support the PO's decision.
We don't know the specifics of course but we haven't really even looked into how the PO is taught to respond. Which is really a big part of what a GJ or trial jury is looking at.
So the training may be at fault and libel. Does that then mean the PO who used the training is likewise at fault and libel and guilty of murder, the training being known as in Albuquerque to be faulted?
No one here on this six pages I think has even mentioned that. Some PO's training we are now finding causes DBPO. Albuquerque they just had a meeting yesterday on this issue and the training model they have used is being thrown out. But it is a national model which other depts may certainly have used. The officers largely subject to the training are individually innocent.
Quote:
Oh fuck me.
Spare me the empty platitudes.
I am saying one thing, and one thing only:
You can draw conclusions about Brown's character or his respect for the law from his actions at the gas station, which I get. I don't think it suggests he is ready to kill cops.
That's all I've been stating in this thread. No more, no less.
Agree, disagree, whatever. That's all I'm saying and all I'm contending.
I have no idea what happened in the car, I don't know if it was justified or not, I dont' think Mike Brown was an angel, and I don't thin Wilson was some racist cop looking for a black guy to kill.
So yes, it's relevant, but no, I don't think it's enough to say he was ready to kill cops.
Why this is unreasonable to the point that people equate me to the pigheadedness that PA Giants Fan has displayed is beyond me.
This will be my last post on the subject. I've learned, recently, to wholly ignore your posts on topics like these. You have shown little ability for nuance or compromise.
Feel however you want about my characterization of you, but you won't change it.
The training is the responsible party for the DBPO, not the officers. Which is why who conducts the training (the city) is the libel party not the officers.
So continue on of course but this this may be key to the individual officers liability or consideration of murder…did he operate outside the training model. The models nationally have specific names to them.The model may be F(*& up pieces of s*&^. The officers just doing what they are taught. That is the case in Albuquerque that is a proven.
This will be my last post on the subject. I've learned, recently, to wholly ignore your posts on topics like these. You have shown little ability for nuance or compromise.
Feel however you want about my characterization of you, but you won't change it.
Sorry, remind me again of how I've shown little ability for nuance or compromise?
Your characterization is bullshit. You can't even come up with an example of it.
Don't treat me like I'm pigheaded or pushing an agenda when I'm not.
If you're going to make a statement about my character, it'd be nice for you to back it up.
Otherwise, it's just an empty attack.
As is PA GF.
Agreed, it is beyond you, and what some of us are saying is that both you and PA need to examine yourselves here and try to see what others are seeing.
Where am I ignoring what others have been saying? The bulk my arguing in this thread is just with people telling me that I'm not listening to others.
Please, if for no other reason than to help me understand where you are coming from, point out what the imeptus was for you to think I need to examine and see what others are saying.
In fact, what ARE others saying? I disagree with the sentiment that the video implies Brown was ready to kill cops. Yes, it tells you about his character, but I, personally, do not feel it is indicative of the fact that he was ready to openly kill cops.
So what are others saying? If they're saying that the video DOES show he was ready to kill cops, I disagree with that.
That's it. I'm not understanding where this is coming from.
Instead of giving me nebulous reasons for why I am pigheaded, why can't you just point it out?
Does any here even know the name of the national truing model the national training model that Albuquerque nor the name or type of the training model used in Ferguson…no probably not.
Reporters are reporters they just don't know this field.. So they lead you in ways they perhaps did not intend. The training is the key piece in this narrative of guilt or innocence not how fast a person could run.
In Albuquerque's training……it would fit into their training as that is one exercise they do and watch video on…how far away a perpetrator has to be to kill you.
Ferguson I don't know. Really if you want to look at this in anything close to a juries perspective you have to look at that, this specific PO's training.
Sure continue on by all means…but to be even close to cheese the moon in this world of presumption and conjecture we have to look at Ferguson's training. I have not looked at each and every of the 600 posts but really I think this is the first this has been mentioned. It is the most relevant issue for the GJ or criminal jury to decide. This is not that guy in florida it is not parallel to that at all.
As is PA GF.
I'm not pushing shit. I repeatedly state that I don't know what happened. I am not pretending to know what happened.
I said one fucking thing: the video doesn't show that Brown was ready to kill people.
That's fucking it. Please tell me how that is pigheaded and pushing an agenda?
Seriously, tell me. Spill it.
Have I, at any point, made any type of comment on whether Wilson was justified or not? Nope.
The city….will loose million upon millions. I would say that is most probable and the most probable outcome of this whole thing. 10-20 million on this one case….quite possible as he was a young guy and his future can be painted as being quite a bright one.
Training considered it is probable he is innocent. City guilty by directing the training which led to the PO's actions.
How fast and far a guy can run or jump all that…... PO's are taught to think certain things by training. Did they have that faulted training in Ferguson.
I don't know but believe you me it it the first thing the liability lawyers are at this moment looking at. The training. And the criminal teams.
REally guilt of innocent…we should be studying and vying opinions on the training models not how fast someone can run or jump. This is a PO not some neighbor watch guy, they are trained to act in ways we may agree or disagree are good ways to act.
In Albuquerque it was and is found faulted the training. Any liability centered attorney in Albuquerque remotely connected to litigation on this issue will tell you that. What say that is not Ferguson?
The city….will loose million upon millions. I would say that is most probable and the most probable outcome of this whole thing. 10-20 million on this one case….quite possible as he was a young guy and his future can be painted as being quite a bright one.
Training considered it is probable he is innocent. City guilty by directing the training which led to the PO's actions.
If Wilsons version of events are accurate the city shouldn't have to pay anything, IMO. Not saying they won't...but they shouldn't. If his version of events are true he feared for his life because he had been attacked by a very large man who tried to take his gun from him...why should the city be on the hook for that?
No disagreement here. I never said anything remotely opposite of that.
The struggle happened within the cruiser (hence the bullet holes found inside the cruiser). I believe how the story goes (as far as I've read and heard)... cop pulls behind Brown and his friend and tells them to get out the street. They stupidly mouth off and at some point Wilson allegedly attempts to get out of his car and Brown allegedly pushes the door back onto the officer. I'm GUESSING (I feel the need to capitalize that word here) at this point the cop grabbed onto Brown either to try to detain him or get him off the door so that he can get out. A struggle ensues and for whatever reason the gun is un-holstered and shots two shots are fired off in the car (some choose to believe Wilson's story that Brown was going for his gun...I, personally, do not...and if he WAS, it's my opinion it was not to shoot the cop but to make sure he doesn't get shot himself...which happened anyway).
Brown and his friend begin to run away and while his friend ducks behind a nearby car, because the officer is now shooting at them, keep in mind they're RUNNNING AWAY at this point...and instead of running after them or getting in his car to chase them... he decides it's better to just let off a few rounds on a street with cars with people in them (I read a report that stated the car Brown's friend hid behind had people screaming from within the car) at two kids... even though besides a brief scuffle in the car the kids have shown nothing to show the cop that they are a threat to his life. It's already at this point that I'm thinking that the cop's judgement should and can be called into question.
At this point, I've read that Brown got hit in the arm or shoulder and after getting hit gave himself up to the cop with his hands out (IMO, he doesn't necessarily have to have his hands up over his head as much as show that he's giving himself up with his arms outstretched, which I've read he did... remember, he just got shot in one of his arms by Wilson so it's a bit much to expect him to raise them over his head I'd tend to think) and the cop, for whatever reason decided to keep on firing.
Now, that's from putting together everything that I've heard, read and seen regarding this case. To me, what happened above sounds MUCH more likely to have happened instead of the cop pulling up to Brown and his friend and Brown immediately starting to punch Wilson in the face and go for his gun inside the cop car and then after running away, comes back after the cop (who he knows has a gun because he just got shot TWICE with it... once in the hand and once in the arm) knowing he had no weapon himself.
Yes, I can agree with that. If/when Wilson grabbed him it would have been much smarter for Brown to just give himself up (actually, it would've been smarter for him to do it BEFORE he had to grab him) but he didn't. That still doesn't excuse Wilson firing off his gun on a public street in broad daylight at two kids who weren't armed... particularly if the final fateful shots were fired off while Brown was obviously giving himself up.
Regarding something you said in an earlier post:
SHOCKING! The cop said that everything was the fault of the dead guy! Yeah...sorry if I'm not taking Wilson's words as a gospel when it comes to what happened that day. He's trying to save his ass... if you think he's being completely truthful and honest that's fine but I have my doubts.
With all that said above, I'm STILL willing to wait until all of the facts come out and hopefully justice will be served...whether that means jail time for Wilson or not. If it's proven that Wilson acted accordingly and with the proper amount of restraint and had to do what he had to do for fear of his life... I can live with that and will not hate Wilson forever and I'd hope that everyone else can and will too (although I doubt it), despite PA seems to think (that if you're not behind Wilson you want riots, war and killing in the streets).
So let me ask you this question... why would Wilson continue shooting at Brown if he had his arms outstretched, giving himself up? To me, what happened before doesn't matter as much as what went on at that particular moment in time when Brown allegedly gave himself up by showing his arms outstretched after he'd already shot him not once but twice? And why did he have to shoot him multiple times AFTER shooting him twice and Brown giving himself up?
Your turn.
We are talking the time frames and less as those described here in many of these discussions.
Various depictions are shown of various criminals doing this and that with various weapons and the outcome on video. this is followed by exercises.
It leads a officer to respond in a certain manner.
It the training crap…yes it has proven to be. Albuquerque has the same amounts as result of DBPO as NYC.
Did they use this exact training in Ferguson…we don't know. Did they use some equilivency..we don't know. That almost solely is the issue. Did the officer act within his training perimeters not how fast or far one can jump or run.
This case seems more like suicide by cop then the cop acting in an egregious way.
WE can express personal opinion on all that but really that is established firmly in a court of law. It seems it may be very related to this case in time seconds or less may be a issue.
If Ferguson used the same model….they will loose. A different state regardless the model has proven substandard. A legal precedent has been sort of set.
Not literally as there is no case law judgement and all that…but all attorneys know nationwide what has happened in Albuquerque and its relevance to DBPO elsewhere. That particular national model has proven faulted. So the burden then falls on the city to defend a proven elsewhere faulted model.
Anything related to seconds like this here….it is way way difficult to defend if they trained the officers with that particular exercise. By that exercise yards and yards away is a potential deadly threat. So they will loose if they used that. Did they…I don't know.
Once you pulled that veil back it becomes more and more obvious. A little bit of Occams razor too to be sure.
I have this very clearly from the beginning and no predisposition whatsoever here. I am not usually on the side of the police but this one has been obvious.
The city will as mentioned be found libel for a large large cash award. The attorneys really not even having to do any work the model being already successfully challenged in albuquerque all they have to do is present the same arguments.
Did Ferguson use it or the equilivant….media should be asking that, but they are not they do us a disservice in that. DBPO is DBPO everywhere, most are related in a systemic thing if a potential issue such as training is the denominator.
Cop told kids to get out the street. Big Mike stepped to the door which would not allow Wilson to open the door. Wilson reached out the window to punch or force Brown back so he can get leverage to open the door. Brown began punching the cop through the window in the face in this struggle. Wilson reaches for his gun, they fight for it. 2 gun shots fired one hitting brown inside the vehicle.
Brown runs. Wilson pursues. Brown realizes he can't escape and turns to face Wilson about 25 feet away ot about 1.5 seconds...takes a step or two forward. Wilson fires at Brown eventually getting two head shots in to stop Brown.
Cop told kids to get out the street. Big Mike stepped to the door which would not allow Wilson to open the door. Wilson reached out the window to punch or force Brown back so he can get leverage to open the door. Brown began punching the cop through the window in the face in this struggle. Wilson reaches for his gun, they fight for it. 2 gun shots fired one hitting brown inside the vehicle.
Brown runs. Wilson pursues. Brown realizes he can't escape and turns to face Wilson about 25 feet away ot about 1.5 seconds...takes a step or two forward. Wilson fires at Brown eventually getting two head shots in to stop Brown.
Whatever dude.
So I will add one last part, and be done with this part. It is relevant as quite possibly the PO's used some equilivancy of the training in Ferguson.
Why has the DA Brandenberg in Albuq not taken one single PO to trial despite there being something like 37 deaths in terms…is she a right wing nut…is the DOJ calling for her head??? Some are far worse by depiction than Ferguson….Why?
No she cannot try a single officer as their training dictated their actions. WEre their actions faulted certainly. But they personally were not responsible for that.
The DOJ Issued quite a damming report on Albuquerque PO's admin. Brandenberg(she is liberal and in fact a staunch democrat) not a word of criticism.
The city is getting killed in litigation, literally killed.
What are you basing this on? The officers version, which is apparently supported by several eye witnesses, does not mention him firing any shots while they are running away. Nevermind the fact that the autopsy shows none of the shots hit him from behind. I believe Johnson said that he was hit from behind as well...
Brown got hit in the arm or shoulder from behind? And like I pointed out before, evidence suggests that he was coming at the officer, not getting down and giving up.
So it's more likely to you that a police officer, who for all we know hasn't had any complaints against him and has never killed anyone on duty, decided to shoot at someone running away, and then kill them once they were giving up? Why exactly do you think he'd do that?
Yes, I can agree with that. If/when Wilson grabbed him it would have been much smarter for Brown to just give himself up (actually, it would've been smarter for him to do it BEFORE he had to grab him) but he didn't. That still doesn't excuse Wilson firing off his gun on a public street in broad daylight at two kids who weren't armed... particularly if the final fateful shots were fired off while Brown was obviously giving himself up.
You sound like the Brown family's attorneys now. Public street and broad daylight are terms that are irrelevant and are used to make the story sound worse against Wilson. If Wilson's life was in danger, should he not defend himself because he's standing on a public street in broad daylight? Cmon man. And like I said before, evidence apparently shows he was moving towards the officer.
SHOCKING! The cop said that everything was the fault of the dead guy! Yeah...sorry if I'm not taking Wilson's words as a gospel when it comes to what happened that day. He's trying to save his ass... if you think he's being completely truthful and honest that's fine but I have my doubts.
With all that said above, I'm STILL willing to wait until all of the facts come out and hopefully justice will be served...whether that means jail time for Wilson or not. If it's proven that Wilson acted accordingly and with the proper amount of restraint and had to do what he had to do for fear of his life... I can live with that and will not hate Wilson forever and I'd hope that everyone else can and will too (although I doubt it), despite PA seems to think (that if you're not behind Wilson you want riots, war and killing in the streets).
What are your doubts of Officer Wilson based on? Do you know him? Do you know his history as a police officer? The evidence given to us so far seem to align with his version of events. What we know now is definitely different than what started this entire ordeal...which was that Brown was shot execution style in the middle of the street with his hands up, while on his knees.
You can have your arms anywhere and still be moving forward, which is apparently the case. If Brown tried to grab the officers gun, combined with the allegations that he repeatedly punched him in the face while in the car, combined with the fact that he's a very large man....that makes deadly force an option. Considering the fact that Wilson did not have a taser...it really made it the only option. No one in their right mind would try to fight a 6'4 300 lb man who has already tried to take their gun...again...if that's what happened. I'm not basing everything on just Wilson's testimony. I'm basing what I think happened on the evidence we have so far, along with his testimony.
Why…finding the PO subject to trial and potential guilt will work against a systemic problem being the issue.
Little will be retrieved by civil suit from a PO. If systemic problem due to training…the bottom to that well is large, the city even possibly the state will be subject and liable.
But they do not think so. Riots will probably be the result here, blaming the PO not the admin of the PO and their training.
The GJ and the DA is however significantly pressured to see this in criminal trial. Brandenberg here is not because she has a good rep and is guaranteed reelection. There I don't know.
Quote:
In comment 11937126 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11937083 kickerpa16 said:
Quote:
will act like matter and anti-matter and implode soon upon contact, with no ability to post?
Oh fuck off. I hate seeing this sjhit from posters like you who I respect.
Please point out how I am ANYTHING like PA giants? Am I emphatically stating I know what happened? No. Have I made a judgment on who is right or wrong? No.
So why are you guys lumping me in with someone as closed off as him?
Get the fuck outta here with that shit. All ive been saying is that the video doesnt show thay some proof that brown was ready to start killing cops in plain view.
As emphatic as PA is that his narrative is exactly what happened, you are equally adamant that the perp just committing a violent crime isn't relevant. In fact, you have laughed it off (LOL). You are both the same and should equally be ignored. But it is SO hard!
I am NOT saying its not relevant. I am saying its not an indictment on whether he was ready to kill cops.
That is as it is here and I suspect with little modification in most places. Some select places don't even have grand juries(despite their constitutional requirement) but that is another matter. This legal system in Ferguson seems pretty normal.
Regarding the first paragraph where you asked:
I'm guessing that's what occurred because, since there was a scuffle, I have a hard time believing this kid just outright started fighting with the police officer when he tried to get out of the car. I'm not basing that off of anyone's particular testimony... just what I happened to think occurred.
Regarding the blood splattering showing that Brown was moving toward him, I'm curious to know how it was determined the blood that was on Wilson wasn't from the earlier scuffle in the car when the gun went off and Brown was shot through the hand and it was when Brown was 25 feet away from him? Not saying it's impossible for them to determine this... I would just be interested in knowing how they did it.
The second paragraph:
What I said in that paragraph was something I'd read in an article or two. I'll see if I can find it for you. Doesn't make a lot of sense, to me at least, that a kid who's obviously gotten away from a PO would then turn around and confront said PO again with the officer's gun drawn if he wasn't getting fired upon. That simply makes no sense to me.
Third paragraph:
Again, something I read in an article (maybe the same one). Again, not seeing the sense in a kid who got away from a cop coming back at him some more... especially if HE'S the one that not armed. Can you explain to me why someone would?
Fourth paragraph:
Actually, in this very thread, someone said that the officer had been reprimanded in the past for doing something wrong (can't remember what). I didn't know that nor do I remember who said it, nor do I have time to go back and search for the post. Why do I think he'd do that? PERHAPS, that was his way of getting the perp to stop? Other than that, I couldn't tell you. Same reason, though, why I ask why, after getting away, would he turn around and confront the officer again?
Fifth paragraph:
On this one I actually agree with you and my bad about that (the first of your sentences I'm talking about). At this point I was starting to get a lil upset because I was thinking about my own negative experiences with the police and how crooked they can be and added that those terms (although I wouldn't say they're irrelevant) to what I said for effect.
Sixth paragraph:
I already mentioned that someone on this thread (it might actually been two different posters who said this...or it might've been one who said it twice...sorry, I don't remember) that this cop had already gotten in hot water before for something he did.
Last paragraph:
But if you have your arms outstretched as if you're giving yourself up, that doesn't mean anything? And you mean to tell me that he had to get shot in the head and not in the leg or even torso? YOU c'mon man!
Lastly, I keep hearing about all these 'eyewitness accounts' that supposedly prove the cop's story but what about the accounts that support Brown's side? What about the video of the workers who were working that day near where all this happened and saw the whole thing and had no idea who Brown was and was yelling at Wilson that Brown 'had his hands up'? Or do those accounts not count?
The PA will argue as the PO never saw the tape it is irrelevant to any action that may have occurred. What should be admitted is the police dispatch call relevant to the issue. NOt the tape
The PA will say the tape itself will be prejudicial to the jury and is incidental to the case itself as the PO never saw it prior to the shooting.
The defense will argue it should be admitted as it establishes context for the outcome.
I would not be so certain it is even allowed in a criminal trial if one occurs.
The judge may rule it out.
And I'd be interested in knowing what he as in trouble for. I doubt it compares to strong armed robbery though. And there's no way this officer shot him to get him to stop running away. You think Brown was the first person to run from Wilson in his career?
As I kind of expected, it appears both sides will need to take any autopsy findings with a grain of salt (or not).
I also found this part interesting:
The leaks have also raised questions about whether sources connected to the investigation are spreading this information to prepare the community for the possibility that the grand jury declines to indict. The information that has leaked suggests the likelihood of that may be greater than protesters realize.
I found it funny how it's been leaked that Brown had weed in his system... as if that really mattered to the case.
Also interesting enough, the woman who did the autopsy that supposedly confirmed that Brown was trying to reach for Wilson's gun has said her statement was taken out of context (sorry but I can only link one article at a time):
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/judy-melinek-ferguson-autopsy-report-msnbc
So not only has the forensic expert for the Brown family said that he believes that Brown's injuries prove that 'none of the teen’s wounds indicated he was shot at such close range', but then you have the original forensic expert, who if I remember correctly wasn't even a part of the autopsy (which is funny in and of itself), seems to be either retracting or felt the need to make sure it's understood that she was NOT making a definitive statement that Brown was trying to take the gun as was reported.
Time article - ( New Window )
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
So I have this straight. He was shot inside the police cruiser; ran away; and then came back at the officer but you would have fired a "warning shot"? Do you see how absurd that is? He had already been shot. What would a warning shot have done other than waste a bullet?
Warning shots are just not found in most depts training to my experience.
Their are exceptions to the central mass thing as in sharpshooters and perhaps special agents secret service who have reason for intelligence purposes to see to it he threat remains alive.
Other than that generally never draw your weapon unless you intend that you may care to use it and when used use it to kill.
That, I think, is where the eyewitness testimony becomes really important. There's a big difference as to whether Brown was running back toward Wilson, prepared to attack him again (with no gun) and whether he was, say, staggering back toward Wilson with two or three bullet holes already in him and willing to surrender, even if his hands weren't in the air. Was there a sufficient pause at such a point so that an officer of the law, facing an unarmed man, could reasonably conclude that there was no longer a threat? Say, before the last bullet that hit Brown in the top of the head?
I don't know for sure, and neither does anyone else who wasn't an eyewitness. I strongly suspect that the answer is "yes," but I admit to not really knowing. Some others here could really, really benefit from having or admitting that level of uncertainty.
A cleared fire area as per codes for a outdoor shooting range, as you find commonplace in Texas... usually in the open we are talking miles not yards.
Rifles are involved there but really handguns of a high caliber can go for quite a while before stopping. 1/4 mile certainly.
Every cop is trained that if you fire on someone you shoot at center mass, with the intent to kill them. Anything else is too difficult to achieve under the stress of combat. You are trained to only fire to save yourself or another person from death or severe bodily injury when the threat of either is immediate.
I would never give an opinion on this case until all facts are known, but the facts in the paragraph above are incontrovertible. While I am saying this without the experience of being in close combat, I hope for everyone's sake involved that is what it was in Ferguson. It is what all police officers are trained and I am glad I never had to rely on that training.
They try their best just to mash up the resistance
Warning shots and sirens from a distance
Riot gear and barricade for an instance
And the words from mi mouth, mi nuh response
Hollywood sending signals of destruction
Stereotype the ghetto youths as the bad man
Overcome the rough times and we grow strong
Step up in a life, now them want to shake we hand
We are eternal, made of the creator
Wont fall to the soul-less devastators
Divide and conquer, and try to separate us
Up to this day, them still try fi rape us
Thievery Corporation - ( New Window )
Gang members don't do such things. They lack the discipline to do so and won't spend their monies in such ways. And no one gets accurate with a weapon without using it practicing with it.
They spray bullets here and there kill as many innocents as targets they intend.
They suck.
Gun wise they have them but they are jokes. PO's have to certify and recertify at lest annually. Some departments more often. And you fail certification you are given quite a few retries but eventually if you are a field officer and seem to not be able to certify…you will yes be probably fired. They can't tolerate that level of incompetence.
Gang members Id bet not a one could certify. they suck.
He deserves in fact to have his d&^% sucked by Bill O Riley and Rachel Maddow in tandem he is just so superior in every fashion…
How by the way is that head…..feeling OK :)
Pork and Beans : 4:42 pm : link : reply
if I found out SY, PA and ron in new mexico were the same guy. Super troll
Quote:
IF Mike Brown deserved to get shot, then that's exactly what happened.
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
So I have this straight. He was shot inside the police cruiser; ran away; and then came back at the officer but you would have fired a "warning shot"? Do you see how absurd that is? He had already been shot. What would a warning shot have done other than waste a bullet?
Yeah if that's all it takes. Or, like I also said, shoot him in the leg. Shoot him twice if you have to... hopefully he'll live.
But six times or more? Sounds like he wasted about 3 or 4 bullets anyway.
I'm having a civil conversation here Peter. I'm no longer interested in getting into your silly pissin matches that you seem to like to get into lately and I haven't forgotten about what you said a few days ago... I just don't care enough to continue to ask you to explain yourself. If you want to continue having a civil discussion about this, then fine we can do that. But you can discuss this without all the 'OH MY GOD, DO YOU KNOW HOW ABSURD YOU SOUND?' bullshit as you know I'm not about it.
That, I think, is where the eyewitness testimony becomes really important. There's a big difference as to whether Brown was running back toward Wilson, prepared to attack him again (with no gun) and whether he was, say, staggering back toward Wilson with two or three bullet holes already in him and willing to surrender, even if his hands weren't in the air. Was there a sufficient pause at such a point so that an officer of the law, facing an unarmed man, could reasonably conclude that there was no longer a threat? Say, before the last bullet that hit Brown in the top of the head?
I don't know for sure, and neither does anyone else who wasn't an eyewitness. I strongly suspect that the answer is "yes," but I admit to not really knowing. Some others here could really, really benefit from having or admitting that level of uncertainty.
Exactly my point mg. Thank you. I agree completely with your whole post.
That's fine. You sound childish and I'm not about to stoop down to your level. I'll just ignore you and I ask that you do the same.
But then you come along. You know by now Peter that trying to talk and play tough on here has never been my style. So again, I ask you to ignore my posts from now on and I'll do the same. Cool?
So tell me Peter... why is shooting him in the leg once or twice so absurd? Also, do you think that shooting 6 or more bullets also absurd or naw?
Why are you so angry? LOL!
Why are you so angry? LOL!
Did you not read the other posts about warning shots not existing? Why are you so stupid? LOL!
So tell me Peter... why is shooting him in the leg once or twice so absurd? Also, do you think that shooting 6 or more bullets also absurd or naw?
Because what happens to the warning shot bullet?
And, do you know the accuracy rates of police with firearms?
Try hitting someone in the leg...
What have I done to you Peter? You've been acting like an ass towards me for a while now... and not really even just me but a several other posters as well I've noticed... I just never cared enough about your ugly attitude to ask but now I'm curious. You obviously have a very personal problem with me and just saying 'You sound stupid.' like you're a five year old doesn't cut it. C'mon man... what's on your mind?
Why are you so angry? LOL!
I know it's an imperfect analogy but in three tours I've never been anywhere warning shots were authorized for precisely the reason they're rarely authorized for law enforcement. If someone's conduct justifies a warning shot it probably justifies lethal force, and you have a much greater chance of hitting a bystander when you're aiming to miss something.
http://nation.time.com/2013/09/16/ready-fire-aim-the-science-behind-police-shooting-bystanders/
Less than 30% accuracy with no return fire. Aiming for the legs is simply not feasible. Because the accuracy is less.
Quote:
Well, it's halftime... so I got a lil time to spare.
So tell me Peter... why is shooting him in the leg once or twice so absurd? Also, do you think that shooting 6 or more bullets also absurd or naw?
Because what happens to the warning shot bullet?
And, do you know the accuracy rates of police with firearms?
Try hitting someone in the leg...
So you mean to tell me that this trained police officer would have a problem with this HUUUUUUUUGE 18 year old MAN CHILD from only 20-25 feet away? The distance in time of only a second?! *winks at PA*
And since Peter seems incapable of answering my question I'll ask you kickerpa16... do you think 6 plus bullets was necessary? Which... a warning shot Iwhether into the air, ground, his leg...I don't give a damn) or a shooting a man 6 or more times... is more absurd?
Quote:
warning shot is ever an absurd idea.
Why are you so angry? LOL!
I know it's an imperfect analogy but in three tours I've never been anywhere warning shots were authorized for precisely the reason they're rarely authorized for law enforcement. If someone's conduct justifies a warning shot it probably justifies lethal force, and you have a much greater chance of hitting a bystander when you're aiming to miss something.
Then shoot HIM once... or twice... or shit, maybe even three times if you're into it.
But six or more?
Why is no one responding to that?
http://nation.time.com/2013/09/16/ready-fire-aim-the-science-behind-police-shooting-bystanders/
Less than 30% accuracy with no return fire. Aiming for the legs is simply not feasible. Because the accuracy is less.
I feel like you guys are fucking with me now. LOL!
OK! SHOOT HIM!!!! BUT NOT SIX TIMES!!!! CAN WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT?!!!
Plus, why do you fire a bullet? To hit the subject, correct? With a hit rate of 18-30%, you think it's wise to stop at 1? 2?
Or, perhaps, people reflexively squeeze the trigger, because the time meant to process what's happening (and what's happening) is much slower than the trigger time?
What have I done to you Peter? You've been acting like an ass towards me for a while now... and not really even just me but a several other posters as well I've noticed... I just never cared enough about your ugly attitude to ask but now I'm curious. You obviously have a very personal problem with me and just saying 'You sound stupid.' like you're a five year old doesn't cut it. C'mon man... what's on your mind?
You moved on from your 9:44PM post to your next post at 9:55PM? Really? I didn't say that you "sound" anything.
Have you ever seen those fights where people only stop swinging after people stop them (even professional fighters?). Yeah. Imagine that, but with a differential (slower) response time...
AS the rule is per PO training... shoot to kill. This would make sense if the guy is still moving shoot until he is not. That is how PO's are trained.
A bit extreme and lacking common sense but if you follow the training to the T it makes sense.
A PO never takes out and uses his weapon unless he intends to kill someone that is the training.
AS the rule is per PO training... shoot to kill. This would make sense if the guy is still moving shoot until he is not. That is how PO's are trained.
A bit extreme and lacking common sense but if you follow the training to the T it makes sense.
A PO never takes out and uses his weapon unless he intends to kill someone that is the training.
The only revolver they carry is usually in an ankle holster.
Does anyone here know how many bullets he had in his clip of if in Ferguson they allow PO's to carry their own weapons…I don't do you?
Link - ( New Window )
Plus, why do you fire a bullet? To hit the subject, correct? With a hit rate of 18-30%, you think it's wise to stop at 1? 2?
Or, perhaps, people reflexively squeeze the trigger, because the time meant to process what's happening (and what's happening) is much slower than the trigger time?
I don't know shit about guns myself. Not my thing. So no... I don't know how easy it is to squeeze off 6... but I would hope it wouldn't be THAT easy... to where stopping at two or three... or at least 5 damn... is hard to do for a trained officer on the law who's allowed to carry it on his hip.
Yeah, I'd think after the third hit I'd hope he'd pause and give the guy a chance to stop. That's what I'd like to know... at what point did Brown stop moving forward? You mean to tell me he had to empty six or more shots before he stopped? But maybe that's just me.
How do you know he was hit? You don't. You don't wait for anything. Once you start shooting, you shoot until he stops.
I really think that this is what the case may come down to:
--Is there evidence that there were one or more substantial pauses? How long were they?
--Is there evidence as to what occurred during those pauses?
--Is there evidence as to what occurred after those pauses?
In other words, as I said above, is there evidence that there was a point in time at which Brown was no longer a threat, but that Wilson, KNOWING that Brown was no longer a threat, commenced to fire again after obtaining the upper hand? OF COURSE if an officer needs to fire, he shoots to kill. Of course, once he does, there is no question of a warning shot. But at some point, as an officer of the law, a policeman runs out of the legal right to keep firing, especially with time in between to reconnoiter and consider whether a threat still exists.
Hopefully there is sufficient eyewitness testimony to clear up this question. We just do not know, at this point, what the sequence of events was.
Did Officer Wilson use a revolver? A lot of cops carry glocks which hold 15 rounds in the magazine and 1 in the chamber. If someone is moving toward you, 15 rounds can be fired very quickly and should be if your life is in danger since there is no guarantee an attacker will stop instantly when hit, it's not like the movies and head shots are more difficult.
If that's what all police officers are being taught, then no wonder folks are getting picked off. I disagree that at least 4 or 5 more shots are a 'non-issue' when 2 or 3 might've accomplished the objective... stop the target. It's actually the first shot I think some would've let pass... it's the 5, 6, or more that followed is part of the question.
I really think that this is what the case may come down to:
--Is there evidence that there were one or more substantial pauses? How long were they?
--Is there evidence as to what occurred during those pauses?
--Is there evidence as to what occurred after those pauses?
In other words, as I said above, is there evidence that there was a point in time at which Brown was no longer a threat, but that Wilson, KNOWING that Brown was no longer a threat, commenced to fire again after obtaining the upper hand? OF COURSE if an officer needs to fire, he shoots to kill. Of course, once he does, there is no question of a warning shot. But at some point, as an officer of the law, a policeman runs out of the legal right to keep firing, especially with time in between to reconnoiter and consider whether a threat still exists.
Hopefully there is sufficient eyewitness testimony to clear up this question. We just do not know, at this point, what the sequence of events was.
Like the pause between the shot(s) fired in the cruiser and the ones outside it?
It simply isn't feasible. With technology and the processing speeds of our bodies.
You start limiting the shot counts of police, and you have a ton of dead people, police, bystanders, and aggressors.
It may, eventually, turn out that 6 was too many. But to pre-suppose that is the case is equally as bad as assuming no fault on the part of Officer Wilson, and equally as bad as the people who think that he was purely justified in his motives at this moment.
I have a acquaintance who killed someone who was threatening him with a rifle over the killing of two dogs. Why did he shoot the guy twice he posed a threat and that was what was required to kill him. Not a PO that guy but he was safe within the law and subject to not a single charge. Gj and all.
So even for ordinary people in the eyes of the law the idea of shoot to kill can mean multiple shots.
6 common sense wise seems excessive but the defense will bring up that this guy is a gigantic guy, which will lead to the impression that more was needed than normally we would find.
I would guess this PO lost his temper or was unnaturally afraid but in either case he will defend this with the protocol and training of the dept as defense.
If this was a revolver, I may be wrong in that but here officers could carry what they want, I don't know there. A revolver customarily 6 is the amount of shot. 8 in a clip. But we don't even know if his clip was full or not.
I when I carry I am no PO but I carry, with a single shot exempt, the first one to prevent accidental discharge(plax should have done that).
Guilty of murder no. He probably acted within the constraints of his depts training.
Complete conjecture as really are all the comments here as we have heard really no testimony.
That's how I read it. He was out of control afraid or mad but he acted as per their protocol, shoot to kill.
WE can hair split the shots where when what part of the body….the DA will have to prove he was outside the parameters of his depts training…doesn't sound like it.
The depts training sucks. They should loose in civl court and pay millions upon million(the taxpayers) and I guess firmly I predict they will. But this PO murderer if that is the charge he will not be convicted. 6 shots or 1
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
I can agree with that.
The early reports of of eyewitness testimony that I recall did not talk about a pause after the first shot, which would be when Brown is pulling away from the car after the initial encounter. If I recall correctly, and I may not, they talked about a pause after three or so shots, and maybe even a second one later in the sequence.
There is a massive difference between a cop who is in fear for his life, and a cop who is hopped up on adrenaline, and after a pause, starts shooting again when there is no longer a need to start shooting again.
I am hoping that there is sufficient eyewitness testimony to clear that up, because in my view, it is the key to the whole case.
I've read that too. But I've also read that some folks were told it was as many as eight... believe it or not one of them said they were told 12! Now 12 is just silly and obviously an extreme imagination but is it me or does even 6 seem like a lot? You mean to tell me it took 5 shots, and a 6th to the dome, to stop him from moving forward? Was the kid on steroids?
Like you and mg have said, I think that's an important question that needs to be answered. Was there a point where the threat was no longer a threat? And how many shots were fired after that point?
Quote:
autopsies suggest the six and final shot was the fatal shot that brought him down. That shot was to the top of the head.
I've read that too. But I've also read that some folks were told it was as many as eight... believe it or not one of them said they were told 12! Now 12 is just silly and obviously an extreme imagination but is it me or does even 6 seem like a lot? You mean to tell me it took 5 shots, and a 6th to the dome, to stop him from moving forward? Was the kid on steroids?
Like you and mg have said, I think that's an important question that needs to be answered. Was there a point where the threat was no longer a threat? And how many shots were fired after that point?
From what I heard some of the bullets exited and re-entered the body which would give the impression of additional shots.
I personally have seen big guys a hells angel type(banditos I think it actually was) shot dead by a single shot under his arm. I have seen another guy lying around apparently going about his business drunk out of his mind having been shot hours ago. No one knew he was shot till the ER did exrays. This guy this size my bet is the Po was very fearful. Cops tend to over react with big guys that scare them like that big guy in NYC recently put in a choke hold, her scared the PO's. The NYC guy it violated the protocol and training so the cop my guess is he was put on admin leave subsequent to firing. This cop….may have very well acted as per the training.
The training needs to change certainly. You have to basically stop the PO from going into a stance. Once in a stance the chances of a DBPO go way way up.
So you do away with training that shows PO's overpowered by guys that run at them or jump on them from yards away…it is really pretty simple to solve this training wise. You eat it some, PO's do occasionally die like that but in numbers so small you trade that for unnecessary DBPO.
That is the solution. You make the PO's job a bit more hazardous but with way less DBPO as result. And no law suits.
The early reports of of eyewitness testimony that I recall did not talk about a pause after the first shot, which would be when Brown is pulling away from the car after the initial encounter. If I recall correctly, and I may not, they talked about a pause after three or so shots, and maybe even a second one later in the sequence.
There is a massive difference between a cop who is in fear for his life, and a cop who is hopped up on adrenaline, and after a pause, starts shooting again when there is no longer a need to start shooting again.
I am hoping that there is sufficient eyewitness testimony to clear that up, because in my view, it is the key to the whole case.
That's what my first line was referencing, your earlier point about the pauses. If they did happen, if they were long enough to indicate some sort of deliberation, than certainly they introduce additional considerations - why the subsequent shots, was he still a threat, etc. But if four or five shots were squeezed off in just a couple seconds my point stands.
We don't know exactly how many shots there were, but the investigators surely do, just from examining the gun. I believe that there were at least 8, but I could be mistaken. And that gets back to the question as to whether there was a substantial pause in the sequence.
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
I would venture to say there is variance to that.
Some I venture to say will find in their training/SOP, and it is referenced by some here, only take out your weapon when you fear for your life and only use your weapon when you then intend to kill.
Its nice to think that the training/SOP does not say such things but I would suppose it does in some places.
More sophisticated places perhaps they may say shoot until the threat is removed. But really we do not know what their dept trainings says or their SOP.
Of course one can get carried away and it needs to be mentioned no SOP is to be followed blindly. But it makes a world of difference in how their SOP is worded as to if this PO is subject to charge or not.
When it comes to "excusing" things, many young black men have been "not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress" far more than any subsection of society.
That doesn't mean the scales get tipped if you put a cop away without cause, but it does explain anger in the community.
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
T bone, no offense but you don't know what you are talking about. It's extremely difficult to shoot someone in the arms or legs and if you waste your time aiming there, that could be your life. Arms and legs move...center mass is the easier target.
If the Brits can do it, we should be able to as well. But we're a sick, sick society. Utterly barbaric. And the stats prove that black lives are cheap in the eyes of the "law."
It some seriously sick shit, and all you guys can focus on is the technicalities of summary execution protocol.
But Ebola might be on your bowling ball....
AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
HOw does that fit in?.
Its findings included the following:
• The race of subjects: 57 percent were Hispanic, 27 percent were White, 3 percent were African American, 3 percent were Native American, 3 percent were Asian and the race of 8 percent was not known.
• 54 percent of subjects had a confirmed prior history of mental illness.
• The age of subjects: 16 percent were 18-20 years, 32 percent were 21-30 years, 19 percent were 31-40, 27 percent were 41-50 years, and 5 percent were over 50 years.
Thus, almost half of the victims were under 30, and over half suffered from mental illness. It is likely that subsequent victims of police violence in Albuquerque, from 2011 to the present, showed the same demographics.
But media wise which draws far more attention…..one DBPO in one town or 37 shootings which result in 18 deaths. Since then I know a bunch more though I don't have the number in front of me..
DBPO is DBPO
Point being you are being played..this is a DBPO thing nationwide going on as much as it is a race thing. The race thing is going on as in Ferguson and we all know America has much in the way of history, The militarization of the police force as we saw with the response in Ferguson….that is a nationwide thing that speaks to a nationwide attitude prevalent in police forces. It is a way of thinking of the constituency it represents and is thought to protect.
It reflects in different ways in different places but race as its basis…no. It reflects as race in a racially decided place. In another place it presents differently but it is the attitude change which is the thing resulting in DBPO not the new discovery of racism, existing suddenly in this one place.
Why do the police training model used nationally allow a shoot first thing which we are discussing here on this board resulting in this one?
The attitude has changed.
We have to change a thing we have to know what it is that has changed and in this specific it is not race at its heart.
It is a change in a way police depts look at things. It reflects in the training which then reflects in this specific in DBPO. Race is not the incipient thing here. It probably is the militarization of the police depts but it is certainly not race at its heart. If it was it would present in only racially problematic places. We can see clearly it does not. Albuquerque is the most racially diverse and antidiscriminitory place in America for a city of their size or bigger. Guaranteed is that as fact.
If the Brits can do it, we should be able to as well. But we're a sick, sick society. Utterly barbaric. And the stats prove that black lives are cheap in the eyes of the "law."
It some seriously sick shit, and all you guys can focus on is the technicalities of summary execution protocol.
But Ebola might be on your bowling ball....
AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
We have 300,000,000+ people in this country. In a given year maybe 350-400 die at the hands of law enforcement (a number that seems to have been pretty consistent even as the population has increased and the number of law enforcement officers has increased) and most of them in situations where there isn't much of a dispute. That doesn't make us barbaric, that makes you hyperbolic.
Quote:
There shouldn't have been ONE.
If the Brits can do it, we should be able to as well. But we're a sick, sick society. Utterly barbaric. And the stats prove that black lives are cheap in the eyes of the "law."
It some seriously sick shit, and all you guys can focus on is the technicalities of summary execution protocol.
But Ebola might be on your bowling ball....
AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
We have 300,000,000+ people in this country. In a given year maybe 350-400 die at the hands of law enforcement (a number that seems to have been pretty consistent even as the population has increased and the number of law enforcement officers has increased) and most of them in situations where there isn't much of a dispute. That doesn't make us barbaric, that makes you hyperbolic.
No point is applying any adjective to it. Defending the staus quo is wrong. Leadership calls for aiming higher. Civil service should be striving to make things better. Very proud of reduction in crime rates, and kudos are deserved. I hope it continues. DBPO needs to be addressed in the same way, because in the end schnitzie's right. Not one of those deaths is aceptable, ethically or economically.
Quote:
if I found out SY, PA and ron in new mexico were the same guy. Super troll
I'm not a troll dumbass. Just cause someone doesnt agree with you on a contentious topic they aren't automatically a troll. Dont lump me in with those others bc I dont think the video paints brown out to be a murderer.
Quote:
In comment 11937399 Pork and Beans said:
Quote:
if I found out SY, PA and ron in new mexico were the same guy. Super troll
I'm not a troll dumbass. Just cause someone doesnt agree with you on a contentious topic they aren't automatically a troll. Dont lump me in with those others bc I dont think the video paints brown out to be a murderer.
And you continue to prove Kicker's point, that you are incapable of understanding nuance in what others say. No one has said the video paints him as being a murderer. What it does is show hom as having a tendency to violence. Big dofference. You seem incapable of understanding many things others say except through what suits your straw man arguments.
PA Giants fan said that. So no, I am not proving kickerpa's ill concieved bullshit characterization of me.
Somehow by pointing out how little sense that makes, I'm the "troll".
Your insinuation is that the video tape makes it reasonable to believe he had no qualms killing that cop.
I think thats bullshit. A hard push/physical shove does not mean someone is so violent they are ready to start trying to kill cops.
Look, if he threw a savage punch, slammed the clerks head, or showed extreme violence id agree with te above statement. But that push/shove/whatever is not enough to say hes so violent he would shoot a cop with his own gun.
Blah blah troll blah blah pigheaded but I all I have done in this thread really is fight that assertion.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
LOL right so you never presented the video as some kind of proof that brown was a violent criminal?
Get the fuck out of here with that shit.
Quote:
In comment 11938145 schnitzie said:
Quote:
There shouldn't have been ONE.
If the Brits can do it, we should be able to as well. But we're a sick, sick society. Utterly barbaric. And the stats prove that black lives are cheap in the eyes of the "law."
It some seriously sick shit, and all you guys can focus on is the technicalities of summary execution protocol.
But Ebola might be on your bowling ball....
AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
We have 300,000,000+ people in this country. In a given year maybe 350-400 die at the hands of law enforcement (a number that seems to have been pretty consistent even as the population has increased and the number of law enforcement officers has increased) and most of them in situations where there isn't much of a dispute. That doesn't make us barbaric, that makes you hyperbolic.
No point is applying any adjective to it. Defending the staus quo is wrong. Leadership calls for aiming higher. Civil service should be striving to make things better. Very proud of reduction in crime rates, and kudos are deserved. I hope it continues. DBPO needs to be addressed in the same way, because in the end schnitzie's right. Not one of those deaths is aceptable, ethically or economically.
Really? None of them? A guy in Virginia was wanted, pulled over for a routine traffic stop, decides he doesn't want to be taken in. Pulls a gun and starts shooting at a cop. Cop shoots back. Cop missed, but if he hit him that death is "unacceptable"? It's unacceptable that the piece of shit opened fire on a cop, it's certainly not unacceptable that the cop shot back.
Quote:
In comment 11938212 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11937399 Pork and Beans said:
Quote:
if I found out SY, PA and ron in new mexico were the same guy. Super troll
I'm not a troll dumbass. Just cause someone doesnt agree with you on a contentious topic they aren't automatically a troll. Dont lump me in with those others bc I dont think the video paints brown out to be a murderer.
And you continue to prove Kicker's point, that you are incapable of understanding nuance in what others say. No one has said the video paints him as being a murderer. What it does is show hom as having a tendency to violence. Big dofference. You seem incapable of understanding many things others say except through what suits your straw man arguments.
PA Giants fan said that. So no, I am not proving kickerpa's ill concieved bullshit characterization of me.
As an aside can can you post that comment you referenced. You have a well known tendency to misrepresent what others say.
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
Oh and the UK has a ton of violent crime. And it's been on the rise. There are violent people in the world. Sometimes shooting them is the only way.
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
However, these riots are about a muxh larger issue than Brown. I dont understand how you cannot see this.
Quote:
In comment 11938286 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
What an awful example. People equated me to him and I asked HOW. Nobody have me an answer.
I TRIED to even understand where that baseless, inaulting equivalency/accusation came from. Gt crickets.
So no, your example is bullshit and we're back at square one.
Btw, if you think a bunch of strangers on a message board are going to send me into some deep fundamental aelf reflection in the middle of the day with a baseless claim, you're wrong.
If someone can show me one fucking reason they had the gall to compare me to this guy who thinks he knows all the answers about this situatuon, I'll admit I'm wrong and see where they are coming from...mostly cause who gived a shit about admitting youre wrong on here? Its so inconsequential.
But I asked and nobody gave an answer. So you want "seld awareness?" I directly asked the basis for that asinine comparison. The response? Nothing.
So unless youve got something of substance to criticize about the actual content of my argument, save your snide, condescending comments.
Glad to see you have now agreed that you have just been making up shit about what I said though. I will take that as an admittance on your part since I never stated things the way you say.
Quote:
In comment 11938286 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
Glad to see you have now agreed that you have just been making up shit about what I said though. I will take that as an admittance on your part since I never stated things the way you say.
There has been nothing to suggest the cop was predispositioned to commit murder in the middle of the street in the middle of the day in front of the general public but so many of you folks ate it up.
Then there was the video tape....
Then there was the riots and looting and the protestors....
Nah, I dont gloat about dead teens and ruined careers.
Theres so many articles aabout questionable police behavior. I think in my entire time posting here, I posted one thread, and that was before this brown thread.
I've had many chances to make a misguided "I told you so" thread.
But there's no point arguing with people when everyone is so set in their views, so its pointless to start a discussion.
Sometimes I jump in these threads cause I just can't control my impulse
Quote:
In comment 11938304 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938286 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
What an awful example. People equated me to him and I asked HOW. Nobody have me an answer.
I TRIED to even understand where that baseless, inaulting equivalency/accusation came from. Gt crickets.
So no, your example is bullshit and we're back at square one.
Btw, if you think a bunch of strangers on a message board are going to send me into some deep fundamental aelf reflection in the middle of the day with a baseless claim, you're wrong.
If someone can show me one fucking reason they had the gall to compare me to this guy who thinks he knows all the answers about this situatuon, I'll admit I'm wrong and see where they are coming from...mostly cause who gived a shit about admitting youre wrong on here? Its so inconsequential.
But I asked and nobody gave an answer. So you want "seld awareness?" I directly asked the basis for that asinine comparison. The response? Nothing.
So unless youve got something of substance to criticize about the actual content of my argument, save your snide, condescending comments.
Quote:
In comment 11938304 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938286 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
btw, the fact that I enjoy kickers posts is why I directly asked him how he could equate me with such a stubborn schlub like PA. And of course, I got nothin'. So again, your example is awful. Fuck "looking in the mirror". I directly asked and nobody has anything on grouping me with the jackass who made an "I told you so" thread about a dead 18 year old and a cop whose life is fucked.
Quote:
In comment 11938192 Dunedin81 said:
Quote:
In comment 11938145 schnitzie said:
Quote:
There shouldn't have been ONE.
If the Brits can do it, we should be able to as well. But we're a sick, sick society. Utterly barbaric. And the stats prove that black lives are cheap in the eyes of the "law."
It some seriously sick shit, and all you guys can focus on is the technicalities of summary execution protocol.
But Ebola might be on your bowling ball....
AAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
We have 300,000,000+ people in this country. In a given year maybe 350-400 die at the hands of law enforcement (a number that seems to have been pretty consistent even as the population has increased and the number of law enforcement officers has increased) and most of them in situations where there isn't much of a dispute. That doesn't make us barbaric, that makes you hyperbolic.
No point is applying any adjective to it. Defending the staus quo is wrong. Leadership calls for aiming higher. Civil service should be striving to make things better. Very proud of reduction in crime rates, and kudos are deserved. I hope it continues. DBPO needs to be addressed in the same way, because in the end schnitzie's right. Not one of those deaths is aceptable, ethically or economically.
Really? None of them? A guy in Virginia was wanted, pulled over for a routine traffic stop, decides he doesn't want to be taken in. Pulls a gun and starts shooting at a cop. Cop shoots back. Cop missed, but if he hit him that death is "unacceptable"? It's unacceptable that the piece of shit opened fire on a cop, it's certainly not unacceptable that the cop shot back.
Yes. None of them. The role of cops is protect and serve. DBPO is not any part of their mission. So if it happens, processes should be put in place to minimize the chance that happens again.
That piece of shit that opened fire on your cop obviously had a back story that can be analyzed for behavior risk. Why didn't he want to be taken in? That info upfront could aided the cop at the time of engagement, or even better, prevented it all together. Got him in jail on his prior, got the gun out his hand, revoked his license. Whatever the risks were prior to the event could be mitigated. Its an off-shoot of the broken window strategy which some really advocate.
I know that may sound unattainable, but that largely because so many see DBPO as a unavoidable consequence of law enforcement. Its not. Its an endpoint that can be studied, addressed and practically eliminated. You can't say it can't if you've never tried.
What are the chances that it happens again? Much lower.
Quote:
In comment 11937963 Big Al said:
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on that. If during a split second decision you kill someone... and it's determined that even within that split second decision you unnecessarily took someone's life... you still have to pay the price for your 'mistake'. Happens all the time to both civilians and law enforcement.
My point is, that if Wilson continued shooting Brown even after Brown was apparently no longer a threat, then there's something wrong with that. I get that Wilson felt like his life was in danger... what I have a hard time getting is that it took 6 or more bullets in order to stop the threat? If Brown kept coming and coming at Wilson and it took 6 or more shots (the final one being to the head) to put him down and stop the threat... then so be it. It's just right now, with the information that I know... I just have a hard time believing it.
It's like the case a few years ago with the guy who'd just gotten married and police riddled his car with like 30 or more bullets. 6+ bullets to stop a kid seems excessive to me.
Quote:
IF Mike Brown deserved to get shot, then that's exactly what happened.
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
T bone, no offense but you don't know what you are talking about. It's extremely difficult to shoot someone in the arms or legs and if you waste your time aiming there, that could be your life. Arms and legs move...center mass is the easier target.
halfback20, no offense but your still are missing my point. Ok, if it takes one or two bullets to his torso... and he still dies because of it... that would be a bit more understandable IF Wilson's life was still truly being threatened. But like I just said to Big Al, 6+ bullets seems excessive.
These are TRAINED police officers. I'm sorry but saying 'You don't know how hard it is!' when, truth be told you probably don't either (unless you've been put into the situation yourself... which I doubt very few here have been) doesn't fly with me. If it's possible to stop the threat without killing the person... I believe that should be the objective. If you're telling me that whenever a cop pulls his gun and pulls the trigger he should be shooting to kill, if the target isn't armed himself, then I disagree with that policy. Don't get me wrong... if Brown had a weapon of any kind then I'd be in complete and full agreement... TAKE HIS ASS OUT! But he wasn't armed.
A incident happened in NYC years ago a guy shot some absurd amount of times…..you ever wonder why?
That is why their training at that time and SOP said….when pulling out your gun and deciding to use it always shoot not to maim stop or injure….but to kill
So they changed it in training and sop to use your gun to best reasonably preent the attacker from causing harm to other or himself.
Albuquerque Ferguson quite a few places as mentioned they still have and use the old NYC protocol.
This is why the guy was shot 6 times. He was as they say following orders, his training and protocol.
We want to make this a race thing. 2 reporters were roughed up and throw into jail for no reason which is what all the protests are about this sort of treatment….know what they were white.
Al Sharpton others want to make this all about race and in some ways it is. In a lot of other ways it is not…this is all about how PO's act.
In this specific how they act as per how they were trained.
The PO…I can virtually guarantee you if this does go to trial which is about a 50/50 split right now…I predict he will be found innocent of murder.
I am able to predict the future as the information going in is correct. So the info going out the prediction is correct.
He was trained to act with 6 shots in that fashion.
AS years ago NYPD put something like 20 plus shots into someone…that was how they were trained…but it changed as it had to.
The officers were really not guilty of murder in that neither is this guy.
River Mike...there is no police department anywhere in the United States that has a policy to empty their magazine one they start shooting.
Your point about the mistaken shooting is just proof of that. The guy definitely fucked up but he stopped shooting before his magazine was empty.
A incident happened in NYC years ago a guy shot some absurd amount of times…..you ever wonder why?
That is why their training at that time and SOP said….when pulling out your gun and deciding to use it always shoot not to maim stop or injure….but to kill
So they changed it in training and sop to use your gun to best reasonably preent the attacker from causing harm to other or himself.
Albuquerque Ferguson quite a few places as mentioned they still have and use the old NYC protocol.
This is why the guy was shot 6 times. He was as they say following orders, his training and protocol.
We want to make this a race thing. 2 reporters were roughed up and throw into jail for no reason which is what all the protests are about this sort of treatment….know what they were white.
Al Sharpton others want to make this all about race and in some ways it is. In a lot of other ways it is not…this is all about how PO's act.
In this specific how they act as per how they were trained.
The PO…I can virtually guarantee you if this does go to trial which is about a 50/50 split right now…I predict he will be found innocent of murder.
I am able to predict the future as the information going in is correct. So the info going out the prediction is correct.
He was trained to act with 6 shots in that fashion.
AS years ago NYPD put something like 20 plus shots into someone…that was how they were trained…but it changed as it had to.
The officers were really not guilty of murder in that neither is this guy.
Ron police are not trained to shoot to kill either. They are trained to shoot center mass until there is no longer a threat. If they means they're dead...that's what it means. However there are police shootings all the time where the person doesn't die.
Quote:
on one of these threads that police officers are trained to pretty much empty their guns when a decision is made to shoot. That video of the guy stopped at the gas station and was shot while trying to retrieve his drivers license was a case in point ... multiple shots fired at a guy at point blank range after it was obvious he was not a threat. I imagine that policy, if it exists is to protect the officer, in which case I have to ask, how about protection for the civilian. Maybe the officer is mistaken, but the policy would be once you decide to shoot, kill him. I hope that policy does not exist.
River Mike...there is no police department anywhere in the United States that has a policy to empty their magazine one they start shooting.
Your point about the mistaken shooting is just proof of that. The guy definitely fucked up but he stopped shooting before his magazine was empty.
Halfback, I read it on one of these threads and I'm glad to hear its not the case. But the mistaken shooting in question is absolutely not proof of that. Even if the policy was to empty the gun (and I'm glad its not), its always possible that the lack of a threat is so obvious that the officer stops short. The fact that he fired as many times as he did is more of an indication that there might be such a policy than the fact that he did not empty his gun is proof that there isn't. And once more, thanks for clarifying that there is no such policy. I'm assuming you're in a position to know.
Quote:
In comment 11937674 T-Bone said:
Quote:
IF Mike Brown deserved to get shot, then that's exactly what happened.
But for me, if I was being attacked by a guy... even as big as Mike Brown was... who was still young at just 18 years old...it would take me a lot to not only shoot him once or twice... but multiple times. I've heard as much six or seven times. Shit, a warning shot in the air might do it.
And if Mike Brown was close enough to have blood splatter, from being shot by Wilson, all over the uniform, you mean to tell me you couldn't aim lower? Even a man that size is gonna stop in his tracks if he's shot in the leg... and this is a cop! It's not like you'd miss even if you shot him in the stomach. But at least he lives.
T bone, no offense but you don't know what you are talking about. It's extremely difficult to shoot someone in the arms or legs and if you waste your time aiming there, that could be your life. Arms and legs move...center mass is the easier target.
halfback20, no offense but your still are missing my point. Ok, if it takes one or two bullets to his torso... and he still dies because of it... that would be a bit more understandable IF Wilson's life was still truly being threatened. But like I just said to Big Al, 6+ bullets seems excessive.
These are TRAINED police officers. I'm sorry but saying 'You don't know how hard it is!' when, truth be told you probably don't either (unless you've been put into the situation yourself... which I doubt very few here have been) doesn't fly with me. If it's possible to stop the threat without killing the person... I believe that should be the objective. If you're telling me that whenever a cop pulls his gun and pulls the trigger he should be shooting to kill, if the target isn't armed himself, then I disagree with that policy. Don't get me wrong... if Brown had a weapon of any kind then I'd be in complete and full agreement... TAKE HIS ASS OUT! But he wasn't armed.
You willing to risk your life unnecessarily when somebody wants to kill you? Police aren't any different than anyone else. They have a right to defend themselves.
If the officers version of events are true and Mike Brown tried to take his gun, Mike Brown made it a deadly force situation. Add that in with the fact that he's huge...And that's just another reason.
I never said police should shoot to kill. I think they should stop the person from hurting or killing them though.
And you have read the articles posted, I hope, about what happens in a shooting. The fact that Wilson didn't empty an entire magazine means he showed some restraint. A lot of things happen to a person during a high stress situation like this. Things training can't completely change
As for you saying I don't know hard something is...are you talking about shooting at someone's arms or legs? I do know how hard that is. Go to a range with a pistol and shoot at a target from 10 to 15 yards. Then imagine shooting at someone's moving arms or legs. Then imagine that person is running at you and wants to kill you.
The training varies as per region and per dept. The model used in Albuq is used to some extent nationally(there is a name to it which I forget),,,trains the PO's to do that.
A gun is pulled out and used…it is to kill. Center mass has to do with that but nuance of stopping in some training methodologies it is mentioned and in some not. Stop the threat may be mentioned but overtly firstly the gun is used to kill by PO. The nuance is dependent upon the training.
Why do you think peoples in some places are shot 20 or 30 times by PO's have they suddenly gone collectively mad, with this one person…no they are in some places not all trained when pulling out the gun and using it to kill not stop.
Quote:
In comment 11938515 River Mike said:
Quote:
on one of these threads that police officers are trained to pretty much empty their guns when a decision is made to shoot. That video of the guy stopped at the gas station and was shot while trying to retrieve his drivers license was a case in point ... multiple shots fired at a guy at point blank range after it was obvious he was not a threat. I imagine that policy, if it exists is to protect the officer, in which case I have to ask, how about protection for the civilian. Maybe the officer is mistaken, but the policy would be once you decide to shoot, kill him. I hope that policy does not exist.
River Mike...there is no police department anywhere in the United States that has a policy to empty their magazine one they start shooting.
Your point about the mistaken shooting is just proof of that. The guy definitely fucked up but he stopped shooting before his magazine was empty.
Halfback, I read it on one of these threads and I'm glad to hear its not the case. But the mistaken shooting in question is absolutely not proof of that. Even if the policy was to empty the gun (and I'm glad its not), its always possible that the lack of a threat is so obvious that the officer stops short. The fact that he fired as many times as he did is more of an indication that there might be such a policy than the fact that he did not empty his gun is proof that there isn't. And once more, thanks for clarifying that there is no such policy. I'm assuming you're in a position to know.
The fact that he fired so many times is nothing more than the fact that he felt there was a threat and adrenaline, tunnel vision etc kicked in and took over. The article posted earlier here about the effects of a shooting is very informative and everyone should read it. I don't remember how many times he shot but I know that a person can empty a15 round magazine I'm only a few seconds.
That said, he still killed him... perhaps unnecessarily... perhaps not. With over 6+ holes in the Brown's body... at the moment I'm leaning more to the 'unnecessary' side. But if more SOLID evidence comes out saying that it was necessary, I have no problem accepting that and moving on.
The part in bold is what I have a problem with if it's being used as an excuse for an officer being able to continue to shoot at someone if the threat is no longer there... particularly if the person being shot is unarmed.
It is because the training is faulted the individual officers are doing what they are trained to do and thus innocent.
Why do I know about all this stuff….part is personal but more of it is that it is a local thing most who bother know about, every lawyer who is involved in this type litigation knows about this. Basically they just show up in court and collect a million dollar paycheck for the litigant all the work was done in court on the training about 6 or so years ago.
Ferguson…I be my bottom dollar they use the same training methodology or a similar one.
The training varies as per region and per dept. The model used in Albuq is used to some extent nationally(there is a name to it which I forget),,,trains the PO's to do that.
A gun is pulled out and used…it is to kill. Center mass has to do with that but nuance of stopping in some training methodologies it is mentioned and in some not. Stop the threat may be mentioned but overtly firstly the gun is used to kill by PO. The nuance is dependent upon the training.
Why do you think peoples in some places are shot 20 or 30 times by PO's have they suddenly gone collectively mad, with this one person…no they are in some places not all trained when pulling out the gun and using it to kill not stop.
You can not prove what you are saying because it's not true.
"Now they're taught to 'shoot and assess,' to judge the effect of their shots as they continue to fire, an on-going process. This allows the officer to continually defend himself, but because the brain is trying to do 2 things at once-shoot and assess-a very significant change in the offender's behavior needs to take place in order for the officer to recognize the change of circumstances.
This article seems to be pretty informative but I'm not done reading it yet.
Here is another good part...
.
link - ( New Window )
Quote:
The fact that he fired so many times is nothing more than the fact that he felt there was a threat and adrenaline, tunnel vision etc kicked in and took over.
The part in bold is what I have a problem with if it's being used as an excuse for an officer being able to continue to shoot at someone if the threat is no longer there... particularly if the person being shot is unarmed.
I didn't say Wilson shot any after Brown stopped being a threat btw, I'm just saying sometimes if you see a high number of shots that is why.
The article I posted says it takes 1/4 of a second per round fired.
And you keep saying unarmed like Brown wasn't a threat. He was 6'4 300 lbs and allegedly grabbed for the officers gun, then was coming towards him...He was a threat if all that's true whether he was armed or not.
That said, he still killed him... perhaps unnecessarily... perhaps not. With over 6+ holes in the Brown's body... at the moment I'm leaning more to the 'unnecessary' side. But if more SOLID evidence comes out saying that it was necessary, I have no problem accepting that and moving on.
The final shot stopped Brown. If he was still coming towards him what do you expect the officer to do?
In any event it is here. Albuq the DOJ stepped in told them change it or we take over. So they are changing it, not because they want to because they have to. Their has been so much litigation the DOJ has cause to take over the dept. When things get out of control police wise in places this is what happened. The DOJ related to litigation and the impact of police action on civil rights and other things has to step in by law.
Ferguson…..again this 6 shot thing. Most likely seeing the obvious militarization we have seen there they use this military type training model as well, possibly the same one used in Albuquerque.
So the guy is shot 6 times as they are trained to shoot to kill whenever they shoot at all…that is just how it is.
6 shots may be what it takes. 1 would stop him but not kill him 1 then is counter to the sop and training. The intention is not to stop but by training to kill, when the gun is ever used by the officer.
It is counter to common sense which is why like in A they loose loose loose in litigation and eventually the DOJ steps in. What they have created by administration is unconstitutional. It takes quite a while however for that to happen.
riots all that racial forces the hand a bit but really this is not race but militarization of the police forces in America. We need to modify that it is clear.
The PO he will be found innocent of murder, I am as certain as I can be in things. Occasionally I am wrong in things(as all are ) but not a whole lot when I take the time to predict a thing and know a bit about a thing.
Quote:
Quote:
The fact that he fired so many times is nothing more than the fact that he felt there was a threat and adrenaline, tunnel vision etc kicked in and took over.
The part in bold is what I have a problem with if it's being used as an excuse for an officer being able to continue to shoot at someone if the threat is no longer there... particularly if the person being shot is unarmed.
I didn't say Wilson shot any after Brown stopped being a threat btw, I'm just saying sometimes if you see a high number of shots that is why.
The article I posted says it takes 1/4 of a second per round fired.
And you keep saying unarmed like Brown wasn't a threat. He was 6'4 300 lbs and allegedly grabbed for the officers gun, then was coming towards him...He was a threat if all that's true whether he was armed or not.
I understood what you were saying.
No... I keep saying he was unarmed because he wasn't. I never said he wasn't a threat because he was unarmed. What I did say was that because he was unarmed, I'm wondering how many shots did it take until Brown was no longer a threat and did it have to take 6+ shots (including already one in his hand from the struggle in the vehicle remember) in order for him to be at that point? If Brown was armed, then I'd have no problem with Wilson shooting him as much as he felt it took to stop the threat. But that wasn't the case.
Quote:
I also don't think he'll be charged and convicted of murder. I wouldn't have a hard time at all believing him if Wilson said his it wasn't his intent to kill Brown (I don't know if he's stated this one way or the other).
That said, he still killed him... perhaps unnecessarily... perhaps not. With over 6+ holes in the Brown's body... at the moment I'm leaning more to the 'unnecessary' side. But if more SOLID evidence comes out saying that it was necessary, I have no problem accepting that and moving on.
The final shot stopped Brown. If he was still coming towards him what do you expect the officer to do?
I expect him to asses whether he is still a threat with at least 5-6 bullets already in him before that last shot.
The reason I say that is because I've been hearing different stories as to when exactly Brown stopped. I've read that Brown was still coming at Wilson when Wilson delivered the final shot to the head, while Brown was still on his feet, and that stopped him. I've also read that the final shot was delivered while Brown was on his knees. And I've also read that the final shot was delivered to Brown while he was already on the ground and Wilson was standing over him.
P depts don't go to that extent but they have assumed some of the military fashion of training in the last 15 years or so. One can see that with the equipment they are acquiring, they are leaning towards a more military response to policing.
DBPO the training methodology adopted by Police depts in some instances produces inordinate and inappropriate types and number of DBPO.
This methodology is reflective of the lean towards the militarization of police depts.
The officer is simply the subject of his training and with a few rogue exceptions will do what he is trained to.
Seeing the dept how they acted initially with the demonstrators and all…clearly this is a militarized police dept.
The officer is innocent he is simply a product of the training and climate.
Do we need to get away from that…certainly it is for one unconstitutional and it leads to bocu losses in litigation. The legal system is not so militarized and will vie for the litigation every time in WD suits related to this.
Look to Albuq that is the future for every dept that goes down this and Ferguson's path. the riots all that secondary to loosing hand over fist all your tax dollars in litigation.
The pendulum swings in policing but this guy is likely found innocent of murder. He was but a product a eventual predictable outcome of a militarized police force...
Some here have been in basic training…is that not how you are trained?
Think then this is a bit not all, but a bit, now going into police training as some of the equipment of the military is seeping into the police depts as a whole nationally.
That in a nutshell is the why of the 6 bullets. He was indeed trained to it.
Quote:
In comment 11938018 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11937963 Big Al said:
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on that. If during a split second decision you kill someone... and it's determined that even within that split second decision you unnecessarily took someone's life... you still have to pay the price for your 'mistake'. Happens all the time to both civilians and law enforcement.
Quote:
In comment 11938018 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11937963 Big Al said:
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on that. If during a split second decision you kill someone... and it's determined that even within that split second decision you unnecessarily took someone's life... you still have to pay the price for your 'mistake'. Happens all the time to both civilians and law enforcement.
In case of civilians, you need to look at the circumstances. A civilian who makes a legitimate mistake thinking self defense, should not be the same as someone who inadvertently kills in the course of committing a crime.
Quote:
In comment 11938076 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938018 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11937963 Big Al said:
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on that. If during a split second decision you kill someone... and it's determined that even within that split second decision you unnecessarily took someone's life... you still have to pay the price for your 'mistake'. Happens all the time to both civilians and law enforcement.
You ever see one of those simulations where military or police trainees go into a building and cardboard of villains or innocent suddenly appear and you have to make a a split second decision on whether to shoot or be shot. In that situation the innocent cardboard I s often shot. Now imagine telling a trainee I'd you make that mistake in real life in under even more stress you go to prison for years. Doubt if many would be willing to serve knowing even good faith decisions put you in prison no matter how much danger you might be in.
In case of civilians, you need to look at the circumstances. A civilian who makes a legitimate mistake thinking self defense, should not be the same as someone who inadvertently kills in the course of committing a crime.
Yeah I've seen it. And I've also seen prospective police officers who are taking part of that simulated training get dinged for if they make a mistake and shoot the innocent cardboard... and in some cases don't even make the force... and personally, if someone who is ready, able and allowed to use lethal force can't make good decisions within those split seconds... I'd personally he NOT receive a badge. But that's probably just me. I'll trust my life against the criminals who I KNOW are bad vs the guys who I'm supposed to be trusting.
By the way, check out the below link to some of what I (and I believe ron in new mexico) are referring to. It's not a site I've ever been to before and only found it by Googling 'Police overkill'.
Militrization of Police force - ( New Window )
Yep.
Quote:
In comment 11938561 T-Bone said:
Quote:
Quote:
The fact that he fired so many times is nothing more than the fact that he felt there was a threat and adrenaline, tunnel vision etc kicked in and took over.
The part in bold is what I have a problem with if it's being used as an excuse for an officer being able to continue to shoot at someone if the threat is no longer there... particularly if the person being shot is unarmed.
I didn't say Wilson shot any after Brown stopped being a threat btw, I'm just saying sometimes if you see a high number of shots that is why.
The article I posted says it takes 1/4 of a second per round fired.
And you keep saying unarmed like Brown wasn't a threat. He was 6'4 300 lbs and allegedly grabbed for the officers gun, then was coming towards him...He was a threat if all that's true whether he was armed or not.
I understood what you were saying.
No... I keep saying he was unarmed because he wasn't. I never said he wasn't a threat because he was unarmed. What I did say was that because he was unarmed, I'm wondering how many shots did it take until Brown was no longer a threat and did it have to take 6+ shots (including already one in his hand from the struggle in the vehicle remember) in order for him to be at that point? If Brown was armed, then I'd have no problem with Wilson shooting him as much as he felt it took to stop the threat. But that wasn't the case.
You did it again. It's like you think the only way he could have been a threat is if he had a weapon and simply is not true.
One of the possible scenarios that happened is that Brown attacked the Officer and tried to take his gun. He then took off running towards the Officer...
In that situation do you expect the Officer to ask him nicely to stop? No...he's going to stop him. He doesn't have a taser, pepper spray is out of the question and a baton is as well because Brown has already tried to take his weapon.
You keep saying you expect police to make split second decisions or go to jail...but what you don't seem to get is that sometimes it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. I've posted an article that says it takes 1/4 of a second to fire a round...how long do you think it takes for your brain to assess and tell yourself to stop shooting?
Take this made up scenario for example...
Jimmy comes at Officer Smith with a knife. Jimmy says out loud that he is going to kill Officer Smith. Officer Smith fires his gun 6 times and it is discovered that the 6th and final shot came 1/4 of a second after Jimmy starts falling to the ground dead. You want Officer Smith prosecuted for that? Change the scenario a little...and say Jimmy is attacking your wife/girlfriend/brother/or anyone you care about. Officer Smith is there and shoots Jimmy and stops him, but its discovered that the last shot came 1/4 of a second too late and Jimmy was already falling to the ground...
You want him to go to jail?
Quote:
In comment 11938558 T-Bone said:
Quote:
I also don't think he'll be charged and convicted of murder. I wouldn't have a hard time at all believing him if Wilson said his it wasn't his intent to kill Brown (I don't know if he's stated this one way or the other).
That said, he still killed him... perhaps unnecessarily... perhaps not. With over 6+ holes in the Brown's body... at the moment I'm leaning more to the 'unnecessary' side. But if more SOLID evidence comes out saying that it was necessary, I have no problem accepting that and moving on.
The final shot stopped Brown. If he was still coming towards him what do you expect the officer to do?
I expect him to asses whether he is still a threat with at least 5-6 bullets already in him before that last shot.
The reason I say that is because I've been hearing different stories as to when exactly Brown stopped. I've read that Brown was still coming at Wilson when Wilson delivered the final shot to the head, while Brown was still on his feet, and that stopped him. I've also read that the final shot was delivered while Brown was on his knees. And I've also read that the final shot was delivered to Brown while he was already on the ground and Wilson was standing over him.
Ive never seen it from anyone or any site that is credible that the final shot came from Wilson standing over Brown.
buford, I may be mistaken and either read what I'd thought I'd read wrong or else the story has changed over the past few weeks (most likely). I found the below linked article using Google and it says he was standing over him after he'd been killed already. It's from about a week ago.
In the article, while talking about how many times Brown was shot I notice that he'd been shot twice in the head. I'd be interested in knowing when those shots occurred? It says he was shot 4 times in the arm and twice in the head.
Wilson standing over Brown - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 11938478 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11938076 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938018 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 11937963 Big Al said:
Quote:
6 shots? Link - ( New Window )
Thanks for that link Big Al. That was very informative. I now have a new understanding about the thought process of what officers go through when they fire their gun.
But while admitting that... that doesn't mean that they should be excused if they 'accidentally', only for lack of a better way of putting it, shoot someone more than what's necessary to end the threat. But I do appreciate the link and the info in it.
.
I don't know what you mean by excused. If you believe that being not excused and therefore sentenced to prison time for a split second decision made under extreme stress, I would strongly disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree on that. If during a split second decision you kill someone... and it's determined that even within that split second decision you unnecessarily took someone's life... you still have to pay the price for your 'mistake'. Happens all the time to both civilians and law enforcement.
You ever see one of those simulations where military or police trainees go into a building and cardboard of villains or innocent suddenly appear and you have to make a a split second decision on whether to shoot or be shot. In that situation the innocent cardboard I s often shot. Now imagine telling a trainee I'd you make that mistake in real life in under even more stress you go to prison for years. Doubt if many would be willing to serve knowing even good faith decisions put you in prison no matter how much danger you might be in.
In case of civilians, you need to look at the circumstances. A civilian who makes a legitimate mistake thinking self defense, should not be the same as someone who inadvertently kills in the course of committing a crime.
Yeah I've seen it. And I've also seen prospective police officers who are taking part of that simulated training get dinged for if they make a mistake and shoot the innocent cardboard... and in some cases don't even make the force... and personally, if someone who is ready, able and allowed to use lethal force can't make good decisions within those split seconds... I'd personally he NOT receive a badge. But that's probably just me. I'll trust my life against the criminals who I KNOW are bad vs the guys who I'm supposed to be trusting.
By the way, check out the below link to some of what I (and I believe ron in new mexico) are referring to. It's not a site I've ever been to before and only found it by Googling 'Police overkill'. Militrization of Police force - ( New Window )
You google "police overkill", what do you expect to get? You get a website that is full of bias and has an agenda against police.
Here's an article from a former member of the military...it has a clever title. Maybe some people here will accidentally stumble on it when they google "I hate cops".
LINK - ( New Window )
Zoltar the magnificent(ron in new mexico)..begins his trail of conquest ;)
Soooon all you will think or know..it will be ron in new mexico……through that screen flung…...
Quote:
and put in the final shots, then he should be charged. But I don't think the autopsy or testimony supports that.
buford, I may be mistaken and either read what I'd thought I'd read wrong or else the story has changed over the past few weeks (most likely). I found the below linked article using Google and it says he was standing over him after he'd been killed already. It's from about a week ago.
In the article, while talking about how many times Brown was shot I notice that he'd been shot twice in the head. I'd be interested in knowing when those shots occurred? It says he was shot 4 times in the arm and twice in the head. Wilson standing over Brown - ( New Window )
I didn't see it anywhere in that article that Wilson was standing over Brown when the final shot was fired.
He actually ran away from the office first. So that makes your possible scenario moot... and that's if, in fact, Brown tried to take the officer's gun... which we only have the officer's testimony telling us that. We have other witnesses saying that there was a scuffle in the car, but none (as far as I know) have confirmed that he was going for his gun.
Why is pepper spray 'out of the question' OUTSIDE the car? Supposedly Wilson said he didn't use his pepper spray while in the car because he was afraid he'd be affected by it also. So why not use it once he got out? And I disagree that the baton is also out of the question simply because Brown went for his gun earlier. If he can't use his pepper spray and baton on someone... after shooting him in the hand already... what are they there for? Or should they only be used for smaller people but for the bigger guys it's ok to shoot to kill?
Technically, no I didn't. I said a PO should be PUNISHED if they make the wrong decision...even if it's within a split second. Big Al mentioned jail time. I was going to say the same to him but it slipped my mind. If jail time is deemed it should be part of that, then so be it.
And sometimes it isn't. That's what needs to be determined in THIS case.
With regards to your made up scenario, of course I wouldn't expect the PO to be punished in THAT scenario. But that scenario isn't the same as Brown's is seeing as how Brown didn't have a knife... nor did he, as far as I know, yell 'I'm going to kill you' to Wilson.
Quote:
In comment 11938686 buford said:
Quote:
and put in the final shots, then he should be charged. But I don't think the autopsy or testimony supports that.
buford, I may be mistaken and either read what I'd thought I'd read wrong or else the story has changed over the past few weeks (most likely). I found the below linked article using Google and it says he was standing over him after he'd been killed already. It's from about a week ago.
In the article, while talking about how many times Brown was shot I notice that he'd been shot twice in the head. I'd be interested in knowing when those shots occurred? It says he was shot 4 times in the arm and twice in the head. Wilson standing over Brown - ( New Window )
I didn't see it anywhere in that article that Wilson was standing over Brown when the final shot was fired.
Yeah... I kind of already admitted that I either read it wrong a few weeks ago OR new, different info came out and have apologized for that.
it is precious ;)
Zoltar the magnificent(ron in new mexico)..begins his trail of conquest ;)
Soooon all you will think or know..it will be ron in new mexico……through that screen flung…...
LOL! You're alright with me ron!
Quote:
One of the possible scenarios that happened is that Brown attacked the Officer and tried to take his gun. He then took off running towards the Officer...
He actually ran away from the office first. So that makes your possible scenario moot... and that's if, in fact, Brown tried to take the officer's gun... which we only have the officer's testimony telling us that. We have other witnesses saying that there was a scuffle in the car, but none (as far as I know) have confirmed that he was going for his gun.
Quote:
He doesn't have a taser, pepper spray is out of the question and a baton is as well because Brown has already tried to take his weapon.
Why is pepper spray 'out of the question' OUTSIDE the car? Supposedly Wilson said he didn't use his pepper spray while in the car because he was afraid he'd be affected by it also. So why not use it once he got out? And I disagree that the baton is also out of the question simply because Brown went for his gun earlier. If he can't use his pepper spray and baton on someone... after shooting him in the hand already... what are they there for? Or should they only be used for smaller people but for the bigger guys it's ok to shoot to kill?
Quote:
You keep saying you expect police to make split second decisions or go to jail
Technically, no I didn't. I said a PO should be PUNISHED if they make the wrong decision...even if it's within a split second. Big Al mentioned jail time. I was going to say the same to him but it slipped my mind. If jail time is deemed it should be part of that, then so be it.
Quote:
but what you don't seem to get is that sometimes it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE
And sometimes it isn't. That's what needs to be determined in THIS case.
With regards to your made up scenario, of course I wouldn't expect the PO to be punished in THAT scenario. But that scenario isn't the same as Brown's is seeing as how Brown didn't have a knife... nor did he, as far as I know, yell 'I'm going to kill you' to Wilson.
He ran away only to turn back and at some point come back towards the Officer. That has been apparently confirmed by blood spatter.
The pepper spray is out of the question because it's a 6'4" 300 lb man who, if he went for his gun, has already displayed intentions to kill. Same for the baton. If a 6'4" 300 lb man wanted to kill you, has already punched you in the face, and tried to take your gun, are you going to get anywhere close to them to give them another chance?
As for the punishment...maybe I shouldn't have said jail but the point still stands. You want someone punished for something that they might not physically be able to control. Would you be willing to do the job of a police officer knowing that if you fired one extra round 1/4 of a second too late you are going to be punished, even though you were physically incapable of stopping yourself from doing it?
As for the last part...that is what you don't seem to get. Brown didn't have to have a knife or a gun to be a deadly threat. He's huge, he allegedly attacked the officer and allegedly went for his gun...that makes him just as deadly. It's almost like you'd want the officer to give him another chance to go for his gun before he decides to stop him...
All misguided...People see what they want. Been a lesson in that for sure.
Watch a video of a robbery, assault, menacing say it wasnt violent...
Say cop was standing over him according to some reports but no one has really said that.
Ignore forensics repeatedly
There is a desperation to believe in this poor troubled sweet kid, a teen, just a teen is all...
Truth is he would have gone to jail for a long long time and no one would give a shit about this kid who assaulted a cop and committed a robbery. But he is just a kid...lol
At this point you are just making things up. I never said that the police don't screw up. I will say that it is far less than what you think. In 2010 the CATO Institute did a study showing that there were just over 6000 police officers in the United States ACCUSED of misconduct. That same year there were over 700,000 police officers in the United States. That comes out to just under 1% of police that were ACCUSED of misconduct that year...not convicted or confirmed cases of misconduct...ACCUSED.
And in your last scenario it sounds like your problem should be with the woman who pointed someone out, not the police who listened. If she had been telling the truth and they ignored her you'd have just as many people saying they didn't do their jobs right.
I've asked before and I'll ask again, how do they KNOW that the blood on him wasn't from the shot that occured in the car that went through his hand? That's an honest question.
No real offense meant to you or PA but you're starting to sound like PA at this point and if that's going to start to be the case then I'm probably going to stop because you're ASSUMING 1) that he actually went for his gun (which, besides the Office's testimony, can't be confirmed) and 2) that even had he gone for the gun that it was with the intention to kill the officer and again, besides the officer's testimony, we have no way of knowing if he was in fact going for his gun and if he was, was it with the intention to kill him with it.
One extra round? Probably not. But 4 or 5 or 6 or more? Yeah... you have some 'splainin to do mister.
No.. I want the officer to get home safely to his family... but, if at all possible, I'd like to see an 18 year old kid go home to his momma too. Again, if at all possible. The question is, what it at all possible? For some reason some of you have a problem with asking that question and I don't understand why?
.stopped for letting a minor drive on the beach…they let you drive on the beach there, not a road on the sand. As I was not driving and it was a usual place bright sunny day in the middle of the afternoon on the beach... safe environment and all that I did the wrong thing….
I started to open the door to get my wallet which was in the back seat….the ranger yells at the top of his lungs….get back in the car, while in a crouch with himself behind the door as they are taught in certain situations….
Ok I did a wrong thing…..ten or so years ago he says in a polite but hearable tone….please get back in your car sir(this is after all TExas they are polite there).
But things have changed it is as they are.
PO's PDs not all certainly not NYC places like that, but often probably mostly the smaller depts…..they have become militarized and no longer do things as they were done even ten years ago.
So DBPO is the result.
This guy this PO is found innocent.
6 bullets is the result of what I mention.
Why can't I have a problem with the woman AND the police? The woman for wrong accusing my brother and friends and the police for not even giving any of us an opportunity to explain how it couldn't possibly be us (we had just came from a party and could've provided witnesses and photos confirming that). The immediately came up to our group and just started grabbing those of us that was closest to the door and any one of us that came outside to find out what was wrong she was just standing by the door and as each one of us came out the door she was just standing there pointing 'him...and him...and him....'. They never even gave us a chance to plead our case. My father wasn't too happy to hear about that and made sure he voiced his thoughts to the New Brunswick PD.
LOL! Ok... EVENTUALLY he would've went home to his mommma... after he got out of jail for all the stuff you keep repeating over and over and over and over and over again. Thanks.
Quote:
He ran away only to turn back and at some point come back towards the Officer. That has been apparently confirmed by blood spatter.
I've asked before and I'll ask again, how do they KNOW that the blood on him wasn't from the shot that occured in the car that went through his hand? That's an honest question.
Quote:
The pepper spray is out of the question because it's a 6'4" 300 lb man who, if he went for his gun, has already displayed intentions to kill. Same for the baton. If a 6'4" 300 lb man wanted to kill you, has already punched you in the face, and tried to take your gun, are you going to get anywhere close to them to give them another chance?
No real offense meant to you or PA but you're starting to sound like PA at this point and if that's going to start to be the case then I'm probably going to stop because you're ASSUMING 1) that he actually went for his gun (which, besides the Office's testimony, can't be confirmed) and 2) that even had he gone for the gun that it was with the intention to kill the officer and again, besides the officer's testimony, we have no way of knowing if he was in fact going for his gun and if he was, was it with the intention to kill him with it.
Quote:
Would you be willing to do the job of a police officer knowing that if you fired one extra round 1/4 of a second too late you are going to be punished, even though you were physically incapable of stopping yourself from doing it?
One extra round? Probably not. But 4 or 5 or 6 or more? Yeah... you have some 'splainin to do mister.
Quote:
Brown didn't have to have a knife or a gun to be a deadly threat. He's huge, he allegedly attacked the officer and allegedly went for his gun...that makes him just as deadly. It's almost like you'd want the officer to give him another chance to go for his gun before he decides to stop him...
No.. I want the officer to get home safely to his family... but, if at all possible, I'd like to see an 18 year old kid go home to his momma too. Again, if at all possible. The question is, what it at all possible? For some reason some of you have a problem with asking that question and I don't understand why?
*Who said anything about the blood on Officer Wilson? I don't think the blood spatter they are talking about is the blood on Officer Wilson.
*Notice the keyword in my post was IF. You seemed to miss it. I said IF he went for his gun. Although it is hilarious that you think there is another reason he might have been trying to grab a police officers gun...
*As for your last statement... Would I like to live in a perfect world where no one dies? Yes. I also do not expect a police officer to risk his/her life unnecessarily because someone is trying to kill them. Again, so you don't accuse me of being like PA....(maybe I need to do this in every post now) I don't know exactly what happened and I'm only saying these things based on the possibility that what Officer Wilson says might be true. I will say that I feel like the evidence appears to favor Wilsons version of what happened more than the original story we got from eye witnesses who claimed he was on his knees with his hands up...
It seems hard for you to admit that Michael Brown might bear the responsibility of his own death. If he did in fact do the things Officer Wilson says, its no one's fault but his own that he is dead.
Ok, fine. I just said he should be disciplined. Still not sure if I agree that criminal prosecution should be also be applicable...but that's for a convo for another day.
I am pretty sure I would have been shot. It is a policing style. The thinking is it is now so dangerous we must at each and every opportunity protect ourselves first so we act in ways of difference than in the past.
But the stats really don't support that. Stat wise things are about the same or better than ten years ago on Police deaths.
If in Ferguson..i have no doubt the reaction by PD in the same situation would have been the same or considering it is a ghetto area….possibly quite worse.
Do we need in america to hazard being shot for opening a car door…are thing now so bad here….no I say firmly not.
WE need to go back to a time when our depts were not militarized. They need to give back most if not all and get back to training which protects cops but not from dangers which usually do not present.
Yeah it is a high risk job that is why they are paid so well. Make it no risk by training them in these ways….we suffer this result. Safer they are safer we are not.
Exactly what I was thinking. This sounds nothing like the Ron I remember. The posting style is more like Frank in Harrisburg, although the content is not like Frank.
Officers statement not good enough?
Witnesses not good enough?
Forensics not good enough?
Autopsey not good enough?
I am attacked for saying I basically know what happened but that is based on all the items above and common sense, deductive reasoning combined with these items as well.
So if I am the pariah for saying I know...how will you know?
Zoltat(i mean ron) knows all…..
Art where the heck is art…he could settle this debate….
Talk about obsessive…I wonder what M in Syracuse is up to nowadays?
You don't quite remember obsessive I pale buy comparison ;)
I'm sorry because I assumed you meant 'blood splatter' on Wilson when you said earlier:
PA had mentioned that it was obvious that Brown was close to Wilson because of the 'blood splatter' on Wilson's uniform earlier in the thread. So I assumed you were talking about Wilson's uniform as well. If you weren't, my bad. But that's the only time I've seen 'blood splatter' even brought up in this thread so what blood splatter were you talking about?
I think it's hilarious that every one is taking Wilson's testimony that that was what Brown was trying to do as gospel as if he'd never lie to save his own ass... nevermind what Brown was going to do with the gun if he'd gotten a hold of it.
Neither do I and it appears, as I said before, we're all letting our own biases affect who and what we want to believe.
It seems hard to you because I'm not as prepared as you obviously are that the evidence that has been presented so far is 100% accurate because in my mind some things still just don't add up. I can't think of any instance (unless the person is high on PCP or something) where a person would rush a cop pointing a gun at him. Only if he was high on something (which weed wouldn't) or if he had a death wish. As of right now, I haven't heard any evidence that Brown was either. I agree with your last sentence 100% and have said so many times on this thread but because I don't see things the way some of you do it's been ignored.
Zoltat(i mean ron) knows all…..
Art where the heck is art…he could settle this debate….
Talk about obsessive…I wonder what M in Syracuse is up to nowadays?
You don't quite remember obsessive I pale buy comparison ;)
M in Syracuse is probably in a rubber room somewhere. Now there is someone who totally lakes self awareness.
Art is probably somewhere justifying the Spanish Inquisition.
Usually they are so far gone physically their rush is more like a stumble. I don't know of course any of what was going on nevertheless in the PO 's mind but a 300 pound paint sniffer late stage crack head…..that could happen.
Stumble…perhaps he thought he missed and the stumble he may have seen was thinking this is a crack heads stumble. They sort of forget how to walk late stage it seems.
Who know what the PO was thinking? Is there enough to probably support this type of thinking. WE can't really separate the person from the equation…this was a 300 pound big guy. A threat even without a weapon.
Quote:
and put in the final shots, then he should be charged. But I don't think the autopsy or testimony supports that.
buford, I may be mistaken and either read what I'd thought I'd read wrong or else the story has changed over the past few weeks (most likely). I found the below linked article using Google and it says he was standing over him after he'd been killed already. It's from about a week ago.
In the article, while talking about how many times Brown was shot I notice that he'd been shot twice in the head. I'd be interested in knowing when those shots occurred? It says he was shot 4 times in the arm and twice in the head. Wilson standing over Brown - ( New Window )
I'm going back to the original autopsies from right after the incident. What the guy said on tv was that either Brown was leaning over to charge the officer or he was staggering with his head down and that's why the shots were in the head. I'm sure thats open for interpretation.
AGain, people seeing what they want. Not even reading the information but then accuse me of beign ridiculous. Is it just that I have actually the items in question? lol
Quote:
In comment 11938686 buford said:
Quote:
and put in the final shots, then he should be charged. But I don't think the autopsy or testimony supports that.
buford, I may be mistaken and either read what I'd thought I'd read wrong or else the story has changed over the past few weeks (most likely). I found the below linked article using Google and it says he was standing over him after he'd been killed already. It's from about a week ago.
In the article, while talking about how many times Brown was shot I notice that he'd been shot twice in the head. I'd be interested in knowing when those shots occurred? It says he was shot 4 times in the arm and twice in the head. Wilson standing over Brown - ( New Window )
I'm going back to the original autopsies from right after the incident. What the guy said on tv was that either Brown was leaning over to charge the officer or he was staggering with his head down and that's why the shots were in the head. I'm sure thats open for interpretation.
I see. So they were from the top of his head downward (in a sense)? Thanks as I did not know that. From the picture they have in the article it looked like one of the bullets went through his high neck area.
Why do I think he would get on well with Filmgiant?
Quote:
would that be justifiable?
Why do I think he would get on well with Filmgiant?
Quote:
In comment 11938818 buford said:
Quote:
would that be justifiable?
Why do I think he would get on well with Filmgiant?
Same tone but perhaps PA is a little more thoughtful.
I am right, have been right and it has been based on data which all those arguing here don't even friggin read...pretty funny..
Half of the last four or five pages here would be moot if people just read the linked articles....
So a jury could attempt to be in the middle reject murder and take IM or some charge for restriction of civil rights for which he will do time. But who knows I don't know their legal system. Could be he only gets charged with murder in which case he is found innocent by my take, no doubt about it.
A good not political DA I say they charge him with solely IM pr some equilivent in their legal local lexicon.
But that is a personal opinion.
Quote:
In comment 11938327 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938304 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938286 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 11938276 Sonic Youth said:
Quote:
In comment 11938267 Big Al said:
Quote:
You have also shown is a total lack of self awareness. Pretty much everyone here sees this.
empty platitudes once again.
Self awareness about what?
The insinuation was made. I think it is asinine. What do I have to be self aware about?
If you were self aware, you would not need to ask that question.
LOL and if you could give me an answer, you would.
Im open to criticism if its valid, if nothing else but in the name of self improvement.
You got nothing though
OK I will give you one example even though I do believe you are open to criticism. A number of well respected sensible posters have said that you were pretty much the same as PA Giants Fan in your posting here. A self aware person would think to himself maybe I have a problem when hearing that. Your lack of self awareness does. not allow you to even consider this possibility. No thought given but a quick response of bs is how people with that characteristic respond.
btw, the fact that I enjoy kickers posts is why I directly asked him how he could equate me with such a stubborn schlub like PA. And of course, I got nothin'. So again, your example is awful. Fuck "looking in the mirror". I directly asked and nobody has anything on grouping me with the jackass who made an "I told you so" thread about a dead 18 year old and a cop whose life is fucked.
Sometimes you need to self examine rather than constantly asking others for examples which you always quickly label as bs.
Sometimes you should stop using self examination as a cop out.
You can't give me an example cause you can't find one.
I get it, you don't like me cause you think I'm anti-cop or support a thug or whatever, but if you're going to call me stubborn and equate me to PA Giants, at least come up with a reason why.
So this lack of self awareness stuff is a stupid way to try and like you're wiser than me, or whatever. It's a vague jab as it is, and you can't even back it up with a specific example.
Again: self aware about what? Cause when I look over what I've contended in this thread (specifically my sentiments about the video of Brown), I see absolutely no area where I've shown a lack of "self awareness".
Until you can give me an example of my lack of self awareness, it's just complete bullshit. But if you give me a valid one, I'll gladly listen. I'm always trying to improve myself.
And the whole "if KickerPA equated you to PA Giants Fan, maybe you should look in the mirror" says nothing and is really just a statement with no content.
You want to talk about lack of self awareness? How about people who don't realize the connotations they create when using the word "thug" in this context, regardless of whether or not they mean to use it as a disparaging term for blacks. That's a lack of self awareness right there.
And no one can answer this question...
How will you know what happenned absent video proof?
Officers statement not good enough?
Witnesses not good enough?
Forensics not good enough?
Autopsy not good enough?
I am attacked for saying I basically know what happened but that is based on all the items above and common sense, deductive reasoning combined with these items as well.
So if I am the pariah for saying I know...how and when will you know?
Thank you for proving my point by calling it bs exactly how I expected you to respond.
Because it's not a specific example. It's you saying "Go to your room and think about what you did cause KickerPA told you you're acting like OP!"
I cited the use of "thug" as a lack of self awareness.
If you want me to analyze my self awareness, here's one for you: I can see how my comments about the video can be construed as trying to marginalize the previous crime Brown committed.
So I get that, sure. But that's not my intention - I'm merely stating my opinion that the fact someone committed a comparatively low level crime such as that robbery isn't enough to draw the conclusion that he was ready to kill the cop, or violent enough to kill the cop.
So there's your self awareness - I get what the perception may be, and that people might think there's some alterior motive. But there isn't, that's just my true thoughts on the matter.
If Brown punched the guy in the face and slammed his head against the counter, I'd be agreeing with the notion that he was reckless enough to actually try and kill a cop.
I know. Bullshit.
I know. Bullshit.
Give me a fucking break dude. You wanted an examination, you wanted an examination of how what I came off said? You got it.
But you can go fuck yourself if you can't even come up with a valid fucking criticism.
NOTHING I stated implies a lack of "self awareness".
What the fuck do you consider self awareness? You want this?
"oh Big Al, you are so right! I am merely nothing but a young adult with much to learn from someone of your experience and many travels through life. I should have known better than to have an opinion regarding what conclusions can be drawn from the videotape in this controversial issue! How dare I! next time, I shall only speak when spoken to! Continue on, kind sir".
Save your fucking condescending garbage, and come back when you have some sort of criticism with content.
I asked you FOUR FUCKING TIMES for a "lack of self awareness" and the best you can come up with is "well you should have had a long, hard look in the mirror cause kickerPA said you're like PA Giants"
That's the best you can come up with? Shove it up your ass, dude.
You come up with an actual way in which I'm self aware, and I'll actually use the advice to improve myself and the way I communicate.
But again, nothing. You're example was shitty and made no sense. I gave you an example of how the use of "thug" is a lack of self awareness when it's used in this context. That's what I consider a lack of self awareness. Not the fact that I didn't have a deep look at a reflecting pool after kicker compared be to the dumbass OP.
See I now control your minds…you fill in the blank automatically. I no longer need to ever even mention that place…you do it for me. So starts my conquest.
Ha Ha Ha …he cackles quite loudly and inanely.
I think maybe Peter in Atlanta, but he's just a bitter asshole to everyone anyway.
Besides, you're the one who tried to chastise me for getting my "news from comedians" when I posted a Jon Oliver segment right?
Maybe you should have some self awareness with how you come off. You should be self aware that by making that ridiculous statement after I posted the segment in an effort to discredit me makes you come off as discrediting those who disagree with you.
so yeah, I'll be waiting for your example that I'm aloof other than "kickerPA was mean to you". Tell me when you come up with something better.
Until then, GFY.
I'm the one who can't get an answer out of you. But whatever, I'm done with you and this dumbass thread.
God, I can't believe how much time I've wasted on this fucking thread.
You still have a problem of not accurately describing what others say. I said a kicker and many others have had problems with your posts. Not just him. If it was only one, it could be shrugged off but it is a number. My reference to kicker alone was in regard to your inability to understand nuance.
You still have a problem of not accurately describing what others say. I said a kicker and many others have had problems with your posts. Not just him. If it was only one, it could be shrugged off but it is a number. My reference to kicker alone was in regard to your inability to understand nuance.
Ok well that is a valid criticism and maybe I inadvertently misrepresent other's arguments when I'm trying to voice my opinions...
But generally I have an implicit understanding that there is no black and white and that things lie within shades of gray.
To give an example, while I feel the video doesn't imply he was ready to kill a cop, I do understand it obviously is relevant with regards to Brown's character/mindset/respect for the law.
Also, this label of aloofness and unwillingness to see others opinions has really been confined to this subject
I am more than willing to admit that I feel there are problems with how the police treat minorities in this country, and that my biases tend to make me skeptical of the official reports of the authorities as a first reaction. I'm openly admitting it.
However, if facts come out that show otherwise, I have no problem admitting I am wrong. And, like I said, I know things operate in shades of gray. In this case, there are probably things both Brown and Wilson could have done to avoid this encounter.
Quote:
I have had this discussion with two previous posters who shared you self awareness problem. Matt in Syracuse (football) and Buckyd (politics). Both of them were criticized by many thoughtful posters and asked to consider why so many had problems with them. Neither could do this and always blamed numerous others rather than look with themselves about what the problem might be.
I know. Bullshit.
Give me a fucking break dude. You wanted an examination, you wanted an examination of how what I came off said? You got it.
But you can go fuck yourself if you can't even come up with a valid fucking criticism.
NOTHING I stated implies a lack of "self awareness".
What the fuck do you consider self awareness? You want this?
"oh Big Al, you are so right! I am merely nothing but a young adult with much to learn from someone of your experience and many travels through life. I should have known better than to have an opinion regarding what conclusions can be drawn from the videotape in this controversial issue! How dare I! next time, I shall only speak when spoken to! Continue on, kind sir".
Save your fucking condescending garbage, and come back when you have some sort of criticism with content.
I asked you FOUR FUCKING TIMES for a "lack of self awareness" and the best you can come up with is "well you should have had a long, hard look in the mirror cause kickerPA said you're like PA Giants"
That's the best you can come up with? Shove it up your ass, dude.
You come up with an actual way in which I'm self aware, and I'll actually use the advice to improve myself and the way I communicate.
But again, nothing. You're example was shitty and made no sense. I gave you an example of how the use of "thug" is a lack of self awareness when it's used in this context. That's what I consider a lack of self awareness. Not the fact that I didn't have a deep look at a reflecting pool after kicker compared be to the dumbass OP.
No communication style problems to fix here...
Okay, I get that.
A lot of times I find myself really arguing against a concept or notion as opposed to what an individual poster said.
I also get set off too easily by dumbass one liner jabs... like pork and beans up above.
Whatever, if people can't get past the fact that my posts read as abrasive, that's their prerogative. One thing I will maintain is that I at least have an opinion and substance in my posts and come up with coherent arguments that I try to back up.
not this one here. I've already changed my opinion on what happened based on the information that has been released.
not that my opinion really matters anyway. I always thought the larger, more macro level issues with law enforcement oversight and interaction with minorities was the the topic that should have be in the forefront of any discussions to this case.
Not how fast a fat teenager can run 25 feet.
Those with agendas try to minimize the threat. the issue. the evidence....
I havent changed my position because I have been correct. I have also seen this clearly from the beginning. Many here continue to see this how they want without evidence or data
This from the socialist workers web site…
The denial of police violence against white workers and youth is aimed at separating police repression and violence from its fundamental class character by elevating race as the primary factor in society. This actually promotes racism by sowing divisions within the working class. The proponents of identity politics then attempt to channel the justifiable anger and frustration felt by masses of people back into the safe confines of the Democratic Party and the defense of the capitalistic system.
In contrast to this reactionary ideology, socialists have never denied or ignored the existence of racism. However, we maintain that the struggle against racism and all forms of oppression must be based on the fight to unite all workers, on the basis of their common class interests, against the capitalist system.
To do otherwise serves to obscure the more fundamental source of oppression of workers and youth of all races, colors, ethnicities, etc.—the exploitation of the working class—and the real driving force of history—the class struggle.
Point being race is not universally considered the issue in Ferguson. Earlier on it describes that while there are certainly a disproportionate number of minorities killed each year statistically every year it is white not black that have more killed. The claim of race is depicted to their view as a means by the corporation the media to claim the issue of this thing always to one of race.
I support that view here in part with my comments.
Just for your consideration. Some do not know of another side being present in this thing that is not the American left or right on this but a global left on this opinion.
Just wondering.
Oh, and by the way, it really doesn't matter whether you believe you are correct or not, because no one who has every stopped by on this thread has any respect for you or your views.
It gets back to the question I asked the other day: what do you think you are accomplishing? Stating repeatedly that you know that you are correct doesn't have any affect on anyone, so why bother? What kind of victory does that achieve?
How will you know what happened absent video proof?
Officers statement not good enough?
Witnesses not good enough?
Forensics not good enough?
Autopsy not good enough?
I am attacked for saying I basically know what happened but that is based on all the items above and common sense, deductive reasoning combined with these items as well.
So if I am the pariah for saying I know...how and when will you know? What is the threshold when opinion becomes fact?
You haven't answered my question as to what you think you are accomplishing, btw. Spending hours and hours on this crap ought to be linked to some sort of goal, I would think.
This case has been obvious from the beginning really because the assumptions you had to make were beyond reasonable. People here willfully ignore the evidence, make up evidence as they go along to support the violent offender over the police officer. The community is rioting, protesting, looting....and ultimately in my view it is the responsibility of the larger collective to be smarter. Maybe if people didn't do all these things I note, there wouldnt be riots and there wouldnt likely be more when the obvious verdict is handed down. Instead people cling to the shreds of a chance they might be right because it justifies the riots and protestors and assuages their guilt...but the clock and data is running out on that.
So for all those saying I am a fool and I don't "know" anything are those that refuse to read the links and analyze the data at hand.
But is that a valid thing or thought bearing of more weight as it is the prevailing opinion….I say no. Things like that trends of philosophy they come and go in time often being completely eradicated at times some ways of thinking.
Is this uncertainty what leads to a moral degradation ….that is my take.
I don't claim a forceful opinion on this personally nor to I claim that I know on this for sure….I do support PA's ability to say he knows quite definitively that.
It is not a common view to state one does actually know a thing such as this…but one may certainly express that view. To consider one as a pariah for expressing view that is firm resolute and reflective of them knowing a thing….no to my opinion such a way of thinking it helps society not harms…generally.
Would people feel better if I said I was 90% sure? People are rioting and protesting...Are they 90% sure? Are they 100% sure? Enough to riot and protest and put their issues on the line of the repercussions of being wrong?
And is saying I am sure rendering opinion or am I saying it is a fact? Or is fact something only represented to oneself? The world was flat and round and both facts to some people.
Not standing on firm ground considered, one can do none of those things. So in the fashion no firm ground never held, one cannot be found to be doing any of those things that in this context are as well firmly held opinions on things.
Point being succinctly….how can any of us change opinions if none of us ever really hold them…..we cannot. The outcome of this world of no held opinions other than of the personal….all remain firmly entrenched in their opinions as they never really in their minds hold them.So how can they change them…they cannot.
Better we be found in our strong opinions held or firm ground standing to be wrong than that….that is nothing is that. That is a bad way to be. American society with its loss of moral bearing to my opinion reflectes directly that.
Or simply put..Bob Dylan he was and is wrong.
Truth in most things can be found and it is not as we seem to be being told a thing which changes as the wind. The wind some objects to have that nature mostly they do not. The truth it is a real thing which with dedication and effort we may likely find.
Thinking we may never find it….it for us is never possible.
You are right as I see it in this and in the way you have defended it. I differ a bit but agree.
I am of socialist opinion overall, and certainly you don't agree with many of my views and rationals but on this we do agree.
Or is that I went straight at the loud BBI collective to rub their face in it after previous attacks.
The hypocrisy shines through for the collective but they don't see it. I treat people how they treat me. You insult, I insult back. You treat me fairly, I treat you fairly back. Funny how that gets lost in this....Again...message board lord of the flies at work here....Except it is not life or death...And I am not personally vested here. I never was the most popular kid, have to sell yourself out usually for that...Many here have done so.
I certainly now paint a target firmly on my back, but I do not care and likely will not be here long….You are slandered by having me support you. Quite slandered. It should not be as peoples think but it is quite what they think and how they think.
So no matter you are right in tho,s have presented it adamantly and likely have changed some minds on this even though many read and don't post.We will never know that.
So kudos to you I say job well done. I wish I had the energy and time for such things but I do not.
And even though I stated numerous times I generally do not side with the police. Also called a racist numerous times, a couple times by the supposed most erudite amongst the posters here. Also far from the truth.
Thanks for your words.
So it is a bit silly some things like that. I posed Democrat for a lot of years as I was a local official in the democrat party, and this area was unrepresented. But my heart was never in it. My area was reapportioned so I lost my position….so now I can say firmly openly I am socialist(not communist) in orientation. For years I could not do that. But this will limit my stay here considerably despite my seeing very many old friends I certainly like conversing with on things.
It is simply as things and people are in the current world and place when ideas are more important than peoples.
you could PA have been saying any thing at all. To participate in that amount of comments pretty much always on top of it…..
that is quite amazing to me. Content totally abstract from that. I agree and all that but that in itself is amazing.
The traffic itself, I will not belabor the point , infers you have quite a high standing and your opinion is highly valued despite the statements to the contrary. That happens in these things of discussion.
Link - ( New Window )
Stay a shithead.
If they don't want the rule of law enforced on them, fine,
just keep rioting, they'll get wghat they want, after they have finished trashing the local business community and vandalized the infrastructure,
lets see them drum up any kind of money from the local tax base. Bottom line is there isn't gonna be shit for money for law enforcement there in 5 years, the locals don't want it, they want the police out and they are more than likely going to get what they want.Myself I don't see how it works out for them, and i think they are in for a rude awakening if they want to burn their own house down, then ask their neighbor to build them a new one.They can come to the state of Missouri with their hand out, but Missouri has empty pockets as it is.
Michael brown is another Tawana brawley far as i'm concerned, an Issue for politicians to exploit, and an opportunity for thugs to loot and riot.Had another Kid been shot that day, Michael brown would more than happily have gone to a local convenience store, looted it, laughed his ass off all night with his friends and not given the dead kid a second thought.To pretend this is over Michael brown is nonsense, you are right.
Sure this isn't going to do end with Michael brown.The people of ferguson are who they are, and they have no desire to change that. They apparently want no law enforcement at all.Criminal elements usually don't.Then they can riot all they want in peace by their lonesomes.
Oh, and you can tell I'm a racist because I started a thread about police brutality when 2 cops killed a black kid in walmart and I said the cops were wrong, but hey, you keep on keepin on, fellah.You have a really swell day.
Speaking of which…remember early on in Ferguson when the peoples were legally demonstrating and the police adapted riot gear military gear and tank like vehicles and did indiscriminately arrest bunches of people which probably only came to the publics eyes when 2 national media staffers were arrested in a McD for the crime I guess of being in the McD, and being on their lap tops at the time. State representatives for the area, arrested for the crime of being peaceably present in a demonstration…we cannot act as these things did not in the first few days actually happen. The local police were taken out of management of the area not for no reason but because they royally screwed it up, about every part of it.
So you restrict rights to assemble and demonstrated legally and the response gets illegal. And illegal, like as not it gets violent and turns into a riot.
Then with time outside peoples come in and agitate and this becomes sort of self sustaining.
REally early on if they had the community to legally demonstrate and work to make their voices heard probably this particular ball would not have started rolling. Once started it develops its own momentum and is very hard to stop.
"Hands Up. Don't Shoot."
"Pants Up. Don't Loot."
Both are absolutely important.
Sad as he was a hero to that generation of a sort for quite a while, civil rights and all…but no I admire many of the things he did but disagree with his ideology.
REally Ferguson I am serious in saying the riots were half a consequence of the way the police acted in those first things which were really demonstrations. Community mad as hell and they tried to instal a curfew….it was just stupid police work and decisions. Let them blow off steam demonstrate yell march eventually it would have petered out. Trying to overtly stop it caused it to radicalize. All demonstrators became in the eyes of the law rioters as they disobeyed police. Then when allowed the agitators had already stepped in. A bunch of anarchists and such do exist that are just waiting for things like that to happen and will go there when they do.
Ferguson…those people had a subpar police dept for years and years. No doubt about that.
I could see clearly all those with the exception of Bundy himself and his family they were all outsiders just waiting for something to happen.
Same in Ferguson as I see it. More locals as I mention even the legal became outside of the law…. but many agitators as well.
If they had not put the state police in charge I really think it would have evolved into running street battles and a full scale riot. Things like that gradually worsened but I take it as the media the publicity brought in those intending to do harm which likely were not in majority Ferguson people.
I read it that way. The other poster above I read his statements as the peoples of Ferguson as just being a bad lot. I don't agree with that.
Some of course are as in all places. I think the majority were being treated badly and this was the straw the broke the camels back. Really stat wise Ferguson had not had that many DBPO. This was only a final thing in a list of grievances. I don't doubt those grievances were real ones. I mention the racial disparity of the police force as that is most obvious but it appears they were running a stop and harass type of place. like I mention…a militarized police force. I mean arresting a state senator….something is wrong there.
I don't think the police are above criticism and some things were done wrong by police but I think the blame can be passed around to about everyone including journalists, senators (nasheed) and protesters.
As for your militarized police bs...what do the police have that they didn't need? Armored vehicles? Yeah those have saved lives across the country and are not a threat to the public in any way. ARs ? Anyone can buy an AR
The equipment leads to a attitude of military as in they are them and we are us. So the acquiring of some equipment is perhaps handy for a dept to have but it leads to a atmosphere of military. Which is not what you want your PD to have. Military even the military has PO's it is a different thing than the military.
And how often do depts use that stuff…about never. Very rarely is it used in swat…it just is not practical.
Large large cities could justify it others they never use it.
You want to hold your opinion and call all I say BS….feel free but I don't think you will be accomplishing much.
I am familiar with this as it is a issue and clearly one present in America. The question is not that it is but do we want to go that way?
You say yes, I guess you do but to say it is BS and doesn't exist….I mean just look around. They didn't used to have these type vehicles and equipment and depts did have different training methodologies.
Did policing get a real more dangerous since 2000 or is it a response to some other threat? I take it as that. Really we are about the same DOPO as it has been in the past. A bit up or down year by year but really nothing justifies all this stuff.
To say we are not going in that direction with equipment and training…I don't see that as a defendable point. Its obvious we are. I know from discussions of the training others know by just looking around at the equipment changes in the last 15 years.
Does the threat really justify that move, is there a new larger threat…perhaps you think there is and that is defendable and debatable.
I think it is wrong to have one and will cause as many problems as it serves and Ferguson shows that a bit. But that is only my opinion.
Again to say it is not and has not happened….I don't know what to say as it obviously has.
The question for debate as I read it is should we or should we not. Good arguments can be made on both sides.
This is not to rehash the 60's but look at it…cops would beat the F out of you with clubs but not be carrying weapons of the sort they are now.
Which was better…by my take…..I'd take clubs any day and time.
Did mass shootings actually occur in Ferguson no. But I could see that if things were let to continue with their Police in charge I could see that happening.
Years ago no that would never happen. Hoses clubs those sort of things were used and threatened, not these type things.
Things have changed some would say for the better more modern and efficient I say not. But each is entitled to their opinion neither is BS.
But it is a choice to make we have to make. Clearly it is going that way…do we want it?
But if your point was that only major US cities should have Humvees or comparable vehicles, a reasonable point perhaps, why wouldn't St. Louis qualify?
I am not military or police, but I imagine training for riot response and active combat are some of the hardest things to simulate and get the responders prepared.
it's not like there are a lot of experienced riot responders in Boston (or Ferguson). I'm not taking sides or excusing, just offering up an example that removes race, removes motive, and hate, and just shows the human side of these kinds of events even if for very different reasons.
But this from the WSJ..just one article of a thousand or so out there….
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) singled out a one-man police department in Michigan that she said had received 13 assault weapons. Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) criticized the 14,000 bayonets the Pentagon distributed to local law enforcement across the country for reasons he said he couldn't fathom.
"Giving military-grade weapons to every police force and every officer comes with costs," Ms. McCaskill said. "Officers dressed in military fatigues will not be viewed as partners in any community."
Billions of dollars of excess military equipment and funding to buy other gear has flown to local police departments over the past two decades. At first, Congress approved such programs as a way to help departments outgunned by drug gangs. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the flow increased as lawmakers spent more money to help police prevent terrorism."
Bayonetts ?? I didn't really scratch the surface on this thing.. I bet with a look see I could find about a thousand things which are absurd.
The problem is not so much in the equipment but the message it sends. Even the color of a police car is chosen for reasons of the psychological, one color means things unconsciously to us another doesn't. Not to mention the effect on your local dept perception if it is issued bayonets…..??? Suppose that becomes known of.
But those are police things..bayonets military no doubt about it.
I'm going to peruse this stuff to see how absurd it has gotten just for fun……
I'm not having to look very far nor deep to see which way it has gone. The training as I mentioned it is the same..it is leaning military. I could look up the models and all that the same as the equipment though it would be a bit more difficult.
Do we want that …I don't but maybe you do. That you do is not BS it can be argued for and is a valid position. not one I agree with but it is as valid as mine. I know that.
But this from the WSJ..just one article of a thousand or so out there….
Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) singled out a one-man police department in Michigan that she said had received 13 assault weapons. Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) criticized the 14,000 bayonets the Pentagon distributed to local law enforcement across the country for reasons he said he couldn't fathom.
"Giving military-grade weapons to every police force and every officer comes with costs," Ms. McCaskill said. "Officers dressed in military fatigues will not be viewed as partners in any community."
Billions of dollars of excess military equipment and funding to buy other gear has flown to local police departments over the past two decades. At first, Congress approved such programs as a way to help departments outgunned by drug gangs. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the flow increased as lawmakers spent more money to help police prevent terrorism."
Bayonetts ?? I didn't really scratch the surface on this thing.. I bet with a look see I could find about a thousand things which are absurd.
The problem is not so much in the equipment but the message it sends. Even the color of a police car is chosen for reasons of the psychological, one color means things unconsciously to us another doesn't. Not to mention the effect on your local dept perception if it is issued bayonets…..??? Suppose that becomes known of.
WTF is an "Assault Weapon?" It's a BS made up term. Anyone in the United States can buy the same "Assault weapons" given to these small town police departments.
Bayonets...I'm not sure why anyone has them but it's quite possible departments use them for honor guards or something. Other than that I'd say they are useless and shouldn't have been given out. With that said, any stories of police departments killing people with bayonets? Or even using them?
What are these military grade weapons? They're no different than anything anyone in the US can buy on their own. If they got the money, they can buy an armored truck, an AR, ...
Military fatigues? Police departments use them for special units (swat teams) because they're cheaper and easy to replace. Many rural areas they come in handy too. Pretty stupid to complain about since your average police officer isn't wearing them out on patrol.
Related: The Pentagon Equipped Ferguson’s Police Dept.
Since Congress first approved the 1033 program in 1990, local police have received more than $5.1 billion in military-grade property – from surplus desks to Mine Resistant Ambush P (MRAPS), M-16s, and Kevlar body armor. In 2013 alone, more than $449 million in military equipment was transferred; the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and FEMA paid for it through grants appropriated by Congress.
Although DOD officials say Ferguson police did not use any of its military-grade tactical equipment (which is still under review in a separate federal investigation), the war zone-like images that came out of Ferguson sparked new concerns.
“There is no role for the federal government in state and local police forces in our country,” Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) said Tuesday. The longtime deficit hawk pointed out that a tiny police department in his home state had received two MRAPs from the Pentagon though it only has one full time police officer.
- See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/09/10/40-Percent-Used-Military-Equipment-Given-Police-Brand-New#sthash.lLYhE1VE.dpuf
Tom Coburn is about the most conservative senator to be found anywhere…
He sees it as a waste of money, which it is to my opinion.
But yeah we can by the reaches of our imagination justify a lot of this….mostly I don't think so but you may and do I guess.
So we differ.
It's odd that these things are brought up now because of Ferguson though. In a year where police officers are being murdered almost every day. Police deaths by gunfire have increased 52% so far this year (38 police officers have been murdered by guns, 7 by vehicular assault and 1 by assault).
Here from a trade magazine is a quote from 2013 before all this stuff happened in Ferguson. But I am not making this stuff up or pulling it out of my A.
This mag is directed at career officers….
Here is the quote I included it as it references training in the context I mentioned it. Keep in mind this is 2013 way before Ferguson….
Stress training in police academies, and its warrior-like orientation that tends to create an “us versus them” mind set in rookie officers, has the potential of creating barriers between the police and the community. Even when community policing is part of a stress academy curriculum, it has been shown that the stress training creates obstacles to the kind of police-citizen relationships necessary to operationalize community policing.6
Police chiefs and sheriffs may want to ask themselves—if after hiring officers in the spirit of adventure, who have been exposed to action oriented police dramas since their youth, and sending them to an academy patterned after a military boot camp, then dressing them in black battle dress uniforms and turning them loose in a subculture steeped in an “us versus them” outlook toward those they serve and protect, while prosecuting the war on crime, war on drugs, and now a war on terrorism—is there any realistic hope of institutionalizing community policing as an operational philosophy?
Karl Bickel
Senior Policy Analyst
The COPS Office
Here is another excerpt from another article earlier in 2013.
He talks about the model which is what I have been talking about the different training models…..
…"Police recruit training is generally found to be based on one of two models—stress or non-stress——with a range of variants drawing from both models. Stress training is modeled after a military boot camp, characterized by paramilitary drills, daily inspections, intense physical demands, public discipline, withholding privileges, and immediate reaction to infractions. Non-stress recruit training is associated with a more relaxed academic or collegiate atmosphere, characterized by emphasis on academic achievement, a relaxed instructor/trainee relationship, and administrative disciplinary procedures.1
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Report on State and Local Law Enforcement Training Academies (BJS Report), the majority of police recruits receive their training in academies with a stress-based military orientation. 2 This begs the question; is this military model—designed to prepare young recruits for combat—the appropriate mechanism for teaching our police trainees how to garner community trust and partner with citizens to solve crime and public order problems? …
We are trending military in equipment and in training.Do we want that? That is the question not is it occurring. He is the expert so to speak in the field.
2000
162
2001
241
2002
157
2003
150
2004
165
2005
163
2006
156
2007
191
2008
147
2009
125
1914
116
2010
161
1915
130
2011
171
1916
154
2012
122
1917
165
2013
100
I left some of the real old stats in there for comparison. Conclusion. deaths of police officers in the line of duty have largely not changed over the years. Sometime way up sometimes way down but usually in the same range, actually for quite a long time. 1917…165 2013…100.
Google it yourself the organization is tasked with these type stat generation.
So why the militarization?
it is up to the norm 2013 was really a aberration statistically. A low aberration.
I can hear it now the politicians who favor this they are saying….we are so much higher than last year how can we not do this?
so one cannot win.
But no…the stats go up and down but really stay about the same no real trends obvious. Overall considering population increases…it is way way safer to be a PO than in say 1917 or so.
But in the last 50 years or so…about the same up and down from year to year always in the same overall range.
But exactly on point to Ferguson…it has as lot to do with why the community reacted as it did . Success or failure of community policing it could be called.
So a class that starts with say 40 will graduate 20 or less.
The other model the academic model will hire 20 use extensive screening background, even extensive use of mock scenarios/oral board type things, to weed those who are unqualified but as consequence they then graduate maybe 18 or the 20. Or even 20 of the 20.
So we are tending the military model as I mention. With the new equipment being mostly military and the culture being military it leaves that perception with the people they serve, not as a police dept to help them but a military force to control them. So peoples tend to get bothered by that not immediately but after it goes on for 10 or 20 years.
Which brings me back to my earlier point. England and the redcoats the soldiers were used to colonialize and to put down other peoples. So the people in England had a aversion to redcoats as that would put them in the category as being just another colony with people to be surpressed. So a decision was made to have the police wear blue. Little things mean a lot to perception. Having our police wear black riot gear helmets and all the rest they are safer but the community itself looks at that as being a occupying force not a police force, a military.
I think it is a big big mistake personally. The result is when a thing happens regardless of that thing or its independent merit it escalates, which is what happened in Ferguson. It is not so much this one killing, likely this officer is innocent of murder. but the past that comes back to haunt.
I read the amnesty international report on this just yesterday. The local police were completely out of control. They for just one, had the amnesty international group, who were clearly marked and are pretty easy to spot(not threatening by appearance at all are those people) at one time at the point of a gun lie on the ground. I mean really…amnesty international…geese louise what were they thinking. To mention just one the list goes on and on. 19 journalists arrested, sure one or two may have been out of line but 19?
A local council person trying to mediate between the crowd and the police…they shot him in the stomach with a rubber bullet…..out of control they clearly were. 7 pages was the report some of it biased to the left, but the incidents you just can not say they are made up. I am mentioning only a few in there.
and I think the whole militarization thing is oversold. the major proponent's argument is that because they receive military equipment - it will transform police agencies into small armies. but, that ignores the fact that exponentially more resources were provided to agencies based on community policing grants. and most of that military gear never gets used in the day to day delivery of police services. you report a burglary - cop is probably more likely to show up in a police car as opposed to a tank.
policing has come a long ways and has a long way to go, but, these high profile incidents - well, often the responses to them go off track.
the point the militarization guru makes fairly well is the use of SWAT teams/raids to execute drug warrants. lot of force, lot can go wrong - what's the reward and does it justify the risk. too often - no. That's the important point, IMO, not whether some agency got an armored vehicle they may use once or twice a year for transport purposes.
re: Ferguson - well, they were overwhelmed, unprepared, etc. and the influx of "tourists" certainly didn't help matters. I'd be interested in reading the civil rights investigation report. not re: the shooting so much, but the agency policies and practices.
The state academy was the inverse for years and years I am not current on them now however.
That state has a particular to the wording of its use of force law which will likely protect this officer from any murder charge. Killing is allowed by a PO without necessary protection from a immediate mortal danger which is present in most state wordings. The way it is worded is more important to my opinion than 90% of the whys and wherefores. Essentially to my read if you know of a felon or person committing a felon lethal force is a option to stopping him even if he poses no immediate threat.
Amnesty is requesting they change it.
I suggest if you have the time to read the amnesty report. It is quite a good read. Not the digestions by the media but the report on their web site.
That is usually a felony offense.
Another had a person self barricaded in a house, about a thousand of that per year swat incident really pretty common and typically easily handled…
this other Bum F ARiz place, they sent a hum vee up the front lawn…know why…because they had one.
I disagree in that I think it is clearly out of control in these small places. They don't have any training nevertheless to use the stuff. Hurricane Sandy places like that Hum Vee's came in real handy, Bum F utah…..not so much.
I will read that amnesty report - the issue of necessity is huge ad should be a part of any df policy.
re: police officer line of duty deaths -for a while the leading cause was auto accidents. that and liability for pursuits were the major catalysts for the trend towards restricting police pursuits.
in addition to the df policy, the training is an important piece. police generally don't get enough training and the right types of training.
... 59 60 54 70 41 50 60 73 50 31 548..total
Thought that may interest you as well bc
It comes down to the cop's inabiltiy to control a threat without lethal force. Probably due to poor training and lack of community relations.
It comes down to the cop's inabiltiy to control a threat without lethal force. Probably due to poor training and lack of community relations.
Or maybe due to the kid being 300 pounds. "Probably" should not presume to know things you clearly know next to nothing about.
You're the poster-child for jumping to conclusions. No matter what your training or your community relations, if Brown was in fact a 300 pound man acting aggressively, short of a taser (which some units don't use for reasons related to community relations) or pepper spray - maybe - or being Anderson Silva "controlling" someone his size is something that seems a lot easier to do in the comfort of your computer chair than it does on the ground.
What is relevant is this….
A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
That is the Missouri law on police use of deadly force. It is quite unconstitutional as a similar law was struck down in the mid 80's. This is essentially a fleeing felon law which was declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. It has not been changed in Missouri to reflect that…
So this officer is clearly innocent of murder. The guy committed a felon when he pushed the officer, that is a felony offense to assault with intent to harm a police officer in the pursuance of his duties….
So felony established he was within the states constitution to use deadly force to stop him…it is right there above the rational for doing so.
Section 2A
This law is unconstitutional but you can't fault the cop for that.
Conversely, 300 lbers can be killed because officers believe it is necessary to effect arrest. But using deadly force on an unarmed 98 lb weakling would lead to charges, because no one would accept that a cop believes that the use of deadly force is necessay to arrest the kid.
A defense attorney of that cop all he really has to do if the cop is charged with murder….read that statute to the jury.
Clearly that cop was within the perameters of that stature. ONce the guy fights with him it is a felony. Taken to a wrong extent then(what the law is unconstitutional) if a cop wants to kill someone all he has to do is get into first a fight with him.
But it is what it is….. a law presently in that state.
This law is unconstitutional but you can't fault the cop for that.
Sure, if you believe that right and wrong begin and end with the law.
If you don't, you absolutely can fault the cop, albeit not legally.
He sucks as a cop no doubt about it, should not be one.
But guilty of murder…no not at all in this state.
State sucks as well for having that on the books 25 years after it has been outlawed.
In civil court likely the state is named as a defendant as well. Someone in that state is not doing their job. That statute should have been removed 25 years ago.
When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest
Combined with section A under this
If the guy is big and you expect he may beat you down or quick in that he may run away from you….you may use deadly force.
So the onus in this specific would be on the prosecutors to show that this 300 pound guy could not reasonably be believed to be able to beat down the officer…..good luck with that I would say.
ron in new mexico at 12% (started a day later than anyone else)
vs
the original michael brown thread
Sonic Youth at 12% of the posts there (but he wins on volume 227 posts)
The winner?
PA Giant fan
Collect your prize! a night in Beez's basement
On the Missouri law despite it still being present I would say it is likely that any police depts training would reflect the 1985 court ruling. So this officer would likely have violated that. the ruling was so well known in law enforcement. Why Missouri did not change theirs as they were one of the states directly affected or changed it to what is present now which is the same fleeing felon rule…is beyond me.
Nevertheless it will be a point for the officers potential defense and will certainly be mentioned.
The question will then lie on wether Brown posed a threat to the officer? I say it will be hard to prove not, but we could go on and on about that for about 1000 or so posts.