Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Just forget it. You already have your mind made up. No sense in exploring the new. If I tried to tell you then you would just say 'I only read the first sentence, then I quit reading.' Hello? You still there.
Police Power and Racial Tensions in Ferguson, Missouri
- Thread starter HighlandHomie
- Start date
Just forget it. You already have your mind made up. No sense in exploring the new. If I tried to tell you then you would just say 'I only read the first sentence, then I quit reading.' Hello? You still there.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I say it again. This is a great video
I don't know the exact truth, but my gut tells me this guy is right.
What's more likely?
Thug just robs store. Doesn't want to get arrested. Assaults cop trying to talk to him. Cop kills thug.
Or
Gentle Giant minding his own business(except robbing stores and bullying people) is gunned down by lunatic racist cop hell bent on killing a black kid "for no reason"
I don't know the exact truth, but my gut tells me this guy is right.
What's more likely?
Thug just robs store. Doesn't want to get arrested. Assaults cop trying to talk to him. Cop kills thug.
Or
Gentle Giant minding his own business(except robbing stores and bullying people) is gunned down by lunatic racist cop hell bent on killing a black kid "for no reason"
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
I imagine the scenarios where a person could be shot through the front part of the head and into the clavicle from a distance (no powder burns on body). He could be in the act of falling or charging. It would be very difficult if Brown was laying flat or on his knees. And if he was falling it would be a tough shot too.
The other thing is, if I am a murderous cop, and two suspects have their arms up saying dont shoot, why didnt I kill both of them? Why leave one alive to dispute my story? I agree that cops words have too much pull in our system, but as stated before, even if the officer was in the wrong, shooting someone that fits the exact description (from head to toe) of someone who just forcibly robbed a store, your co-robber's version of events probably wont hold up in court.
And even if I do not have a sense of ownership in my neighborhood, you can be sure if I protest it will be in the neighborhood of the perpetrator. Instead of destroying random stores, destroy the cops house...
The other thing is, if I am a murderous cop, and two suspects have their arms up saying dont shoot, why didnt I kill both of them? Why leave one alive to dispute my story? I agree that cops words have too much pull in our system, but as stated before, even if the officer was in the wrong, shooting someone that fits the exact description (from head to toe) of someone who just forcibly robbed a store, your co-robber's version of events probably wont hold up in court.
And even if I do not have a sense of ownership in my neighborhood, you can be sure if I protest it will be in the neighborhood of the perpetrator. Instead of destroying random stores, destroy the cops house...
I'd say "shoot to kill" is just as false. You shoot center mass. Not because it kills but because it is the center of the target you're trying to stop. Missing slightly from hitting center mass will have the best chance of still hitting the overall target and the least chance of hitting an innocent bystander. Hitting the chest also has the benefit of stopping a person relatively quickly.
If people were trained to shoot to kill then they'd shoot at the head...and they'd miss a lot...and hit innocent people more often...and die more often because the threat continued to do them harm.
DutchJazzer
Banned
all the looters and protesters should apologiz and say my bad.
ooh wait we live in a society where everybody is a victim
ooh wait we live in a society where everybody is a victim
Another important point here. Police cannot use their firearm as a "less-than-lethal" alternative. They can only use their firearm when lethal force is justified. When lethal force is justified it is because someone is threatening their life or the life of another innocent person. In such a scenario the police officer's reaction is an emergency reaction that needs to have the best chance of stopping the threat. If a cop were to take an aimed shot at someone's hand or knee it would indicate that lethal force wasn't justified and open the officer up to repercussions. Not only if the officer was successful in hitting their target but if they were not and an innocent person died because the threat was not stopped when it could have been.
No ****. What's your point? I raped some prostitute, but it was two weeks ago... So ya, I'm cool. Crime is crime, even if it is a horribly ****ty law, it is what it is.
I'm trying to figure out why you're making excuses for this level of stupidity. You're too smart for this kind of crap.
Judas, things are starting to get hazy in my life when I'm nodding in agreement with a Stroked post.
And then this happened, and my transformation to The Dark Side was complete.
Cowhide might be the dumbest poster on this board next to heyhey. Dutch is jealous, tbpfhwy.
What's your point exactly? The difference is you would actually be convicted of rape if you were arrested, while testing positive for weed is not a crime at all, despite the fact one has to possess it beforehand. Not to mention even if you're talking about his possession whatever time ago, since when do misdemeanor count for anything other than the misdemeanor being committed. He might have had a failure to use his left turn signal ticket too. Ohh, crime. Hell, he was walking in the middle of the street when this happened. More crime. Crime is everywhere!!
What's the argument with the weed thing? He might have been stoned when this happened? Does that actually carry weight?
Last edited:
Scat's link offered a version of that video with subtitles on the comments to which you refer:
https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php...er-in-Missouri&p=892034&viewfull=1#post892034
However, we don't know exactly who the speaker is talking about; there are only pronouns used.
The second option, minus the hyperbole.
What makes you think peaceful protests would have been allowed in Officer Wilson's neighborhood to begin with?
I agree that as a deliberate shot, the shot through the top of the head is unlikely. However, if the officer is still firing while Brown is falling, it's not that unrealistic.
My point is that the presence of marijuana has no relevance on Brown's behavior during the shooting.
Explanation =/= excuse. I think the violent protesters should be arrested and tried. I also understand why so many think that the neighborhood they live in is not something they have ownership of.
You say that as if Stoked and I disagreed.
framer
Well-Known Member
The problem is that everything in the original narrative proposed by the press, protesters, and Brown's family turns out to be a lie. Everything. That doesn't mean the shooting wasn't tragic, it certainly was. But I'm tired of this crap. Holder should not come in to a case where he has no real jurisdiction and start dictating terms like a third autopsy and trying to suppress the video from the cigar store. Go the Hell away, dillweed, and take Sharpton and Jackson with you. Are you going to start using government funds to manage protests like you did against Trayvon Martin too?
See if people REALLY cared about stuff like this, they would have raised a stink about Jose Guarena from my hometown. Dude, a vet, was asleep in his house when he got no knock raided by SWAT in his house. Hearing his front door kicked in, he ran downstairs after grabbing a weapon and was then shot several dozen times by automatic weapon fire. Turns out that he wasn't really guilty of any crime and any charges that they might have had against him and his family have faded into the ether. He wasn't a thug. But because he was Hispanic and not black:
The press didn't care
Holder didn't care
MSNBC didn't care
One Brow didn't care
The President didn't care
Jesse Jackson didn't care
Al Sharpton didn't care
and nobody rioted.
Guarena was a MUCH better example of police militarization gone awry, and you didn't have to lie about the circumstances. SO why wasn't anyone interested then?
See if people REALLY cared about stuff like this, they would have raised a stink about Jose Guarena from my hometown. Dude, a vet, was asleep in his house when he got no knock raided by SWAT in his house. Hearing his front door kicked in, he ran downstairs after grabbing a weapon and was then shot several dozen times by automatic weapon fire. Turns out that he wasn't really guilty of any crime and any charges that they might have had against him and his family have faded into the ether. He wasn't a thug. But because he was Hispanic and not black:
The press didn't care
Holder didn't care
MSNBC didn't care
One Brow didn't care
The President didn't care
Jesse Jackson didn't care
Al Sharpton didn't care
and nobody rioted.
Guarena was a MUCH better example of police militarization gone awry, and you didn't have to lie about the circumstances. SO why wasn't anyone interested then?
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
So a cop with no complaints record has less credibility than a man who just robbed a store? I don't want to hear that we don't know that it's him in that video. We know. Even his buddy has admitted that it was them.
The cops side of the story is leaking and he says he was bum rushed by Michael Brown twice. Once where he punched the cop and tried to take his gun. The next time was when he was shot and killed.
If this is true, does the cop not have every right to protect himself by eliminating the threat?
I don't care if Michael Brown was high on weed. That has nothing to do with it. I'd like to know if he was on something else, but even that still doesn't matter. Michael Brown's credibility went right out the window as soon as the robbery video posted.
Also, I don't think any sympathy should be given to the man who feels like he needs to steal if what he is stealing is drug paraphernalia. It's not like he was stealing something to eat. So apparently he had enough money to buy a bunch of weed, which isn't cheap.
The cop may have been able to deescalate the situation without killing him, but I'm not going to judge him on that because in situations like that you have little time to think. Especially if the huge man showed no fear of you or your gun the first time he attacked. Which I'm sure will come out as proof when photos of Darren Wilson's face after being struck come out.
It may also end up being decided that Wilson carries some blame. But even then I don't care. I don't care for thugs at all. I'm not going to miss this guy. We know he was a threat to society. We have video proof. We don't need people like him.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I also think that the authorities need to apprehend Michael Brown's accomplice on the charge of robbery, and put the squeeze on him and make him tell the truth. He's out stating they were just minding their own business. No, you just got done robbing a store. This guy is what helped start all the riots with his little sob story about how innocent they are. I guarantee that it wouldn't have been so easy to feel sorry for them if he let everyone know what they were just doing before the shooting. Instead he quickly painted a picture of how innocent they were. What a crock of ****! He has zero credibility as well.
The crazy thing about something like this is, those people in Ferguson are fighting for a guy who is threat to them. I'm so tired of people like this crying about how hard it is to live where they live, and how rough it is. But then celebrate and protect the the same people who are hurting them. It's bizarre how messed up that type of thinking is.
The crazy thing about something like this is, those people in Ferguson are fighting for a guy who is threat to them. I'm so tired of people like this crying about how hard it is to live where they live, and how rough it is. But then celebrate and protect the the same people who are hurting them. It's bizarre how messed up that type of thinking is.
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
How do you know that? Your statements show a lot of bias. If he was really high at the time of the incident, it could have had an effect on his behavior. Depressants like pot and alcohol affect people differently. I know some people that get totally relaxed and are fun to be around. I know others that get paranoid and violent. I have a good friend that is a former golden gloves champion boxer. When he gets drunk he literally gets punchy and violent to the point people do not want to be around him.So if he had smoked pot recently, it definitely could have made an impact on Brown's behavior.
I agree they should be tried and arrested, but how do you do that when it will only incite more violence? There is a reason the police have largely held back. And honestly, the neighborhood issue has nothing to do whether they take "ownership" of it. It has to do where the protest will have the most exposure to make a change. Why protest at all if you are advocating change? If you think your neighborhood, comprised mostly of blacks, is being oppressed and violated by the white police force, what neighborhood should be you be looting and vandalizing?
Who said anything about a peaceful protest? Actual peaceful protests are actually more difficult for the police to stop. When the violence occurs it gives the police carte blance to shut it down to protect the safety of everyone. If they had gone to the affluent neighborhoods, and more shooting occurred by the police, it is only going to magnify the cause for the protesters. This is more or less the status quo of these protests. Poor people destroying their neighborhoods. And the outside world doesn't care too much.