Ferguson: too much or not enough?

[Esquilax]

The media doesn't have the public's best interest in the forefront rather the opposite is true. With treyvon it seem they were down here trying to start trouble, but here the locals wanted nothing to do with it.

Not a sufficient reason to fire tear gas at a media outlet just trying to set up their camera, sorry.

Besides, you're talking about sensationalism and I'm talking about the seemingly concerted effort from the police down there to make it difficult for any information about what's going on to get out. Those are two different things, and when you have cops arresting journalists for no reason and attempting to shut down attempts to film, I'd suggest the latter is a more pressing concern than the former.

How much looting went on in the name of Rosa Parks? How many death threats did the bus driver get? Was his family ever in danger? Did rosa beat the bus driver and get shot running away?

Can you seriously not see the difference between the honorable actions of the non violent black protests/protesters the Dr.MLK lead and supported and the crap that is going on now pretending to be of the same honorable nature?

As far as I know, it's been a few days since the looting in Ferguson, and... we still have police brutality going down.

Look at how your arguement has changed from before you know mike brown was a robbery suspect to now... How much more would it change is the officer is able to reveal some more evidence that shows mike to be more than some poor honor student who was to start collage that was wrongly profiled.

This line is really weird. Of course the argument is going to change as we learn new things... would you prefer that not to happen? Do you want us to stick with wrong things in the face of better evidence?

Edited to add: Oh, and by the way? On the "he was a robbery suspect" front? The officer that killed him wasn't aware of that at the time he pulled the trigger. The chief of police admits that, so it has no bearing on the incident in question.