What are your thoughts on the police reaction or the reaction of the people?

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/michael...ri-n180166

I work and live near sanford Fl where treyvon Martin was shot and killed. And I saw a huge contrast between what everyday people who lived in sanford verses what the news reported. (A lot of the protesters where shipped/bussed in) To me it seemed a lot of the anger and hate put on tv was not what the community felt. A lot of the black people I spoke with in the area thought treyvon got what he deserved, and if they were in zimmerman's place they would have shot him as well.

I get there are a lot of angry people and rightly so if the news is accurate. But even if this one man was wronged and life cut short is the looting and riots they way to Handel this wrong?

On the otherside is the police response too strong? Or is this show of force what is needed to contain the situation?

I'll bite, even though you never respond to the weightier posts I put up.

(August 14, 2014 at 7:14 pm)Drich Wrote: I get there are a lot of angry people and rightly so if the news is accurate. But even if this one man was wronged and life cut short is the looting and riots they way to Handel this wrong?

An uprising is needed, yes!

(August 14, 2014 at 7:14 pm)Drich Wrote: On the otherside is the police response too strong? Or is this show of force what is needed to contain the situation?

Do you mean the situation where people are exercising their right to freedom of speech and peaceful protest?

The police are in the wrong. The police will always be in the wrong in this fight. There's a difference between "keeping the peace" and "fucking everyone over just because we can".

(August 14, 2014 at 7:20 pm)ShaMan Wrote: I'll bite, even though you never respond to the weightier posts I put up.

(August 14, 2014 at 7:14 pm)Drich Wrote: I get there are a lot of angry people and rightly so if the news is accurate. But even if this one man was wronged and life cut short is the looting and riots they way to Handel this wrong?

An uprising is needed, yes!

(August 14, 2014 at 7:14 pm)Drich Wrote: On the otherside is the police response too strong? Or is this show of force what is needed to contain the situation?

Do you mean the situation where people are exercising their right to freedom of speech and peaceful protest?

The right to peaceably assemble is a right, but it is not with out limitations. Once the peace is gone then the right to assemble gets regulated. If the crowd does not adhere to said regulations then they must be disbursed. The question is was what they did too much?

The police share some responsibility for the looting. One of their own has apparently executed a person in cold blood, and whether or not it is true, they are giving this police officer special treatment and keeping him out of the normal process of justice. They are attempting to enforce the law while acting as if they are above it.

(August 14, 2014 at 8:10 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: The police share some responsibility for the looting.

Oh come off it. The only people responsible for looting are the fucking looters. A while back when Britain had riots, the only people doing the looting were opportunistic, scum bag thieves. People don't go looting to show they have a moral compass or to make some sort of stand.

(August 14, 2014 at 7:36 pm)Drich Wrote:

(August 14, 2014 at 7:20 pm)ShaMan Wrote: I'll bite, even though you never respond to the weightier posts I put up.
An uprising is needed, yes!
Do you mean the situation where people are exercising their right to freedom of speech and peaceful protest?

The right to peaceably assemble is a right, but it is not with out limitations. Once the peace is gone then the right to assemble gets regulated. If the crowd does not adhere to said regulations then they must be disbursed. The question is was what they did too much?

... and why is the peace gone in the first place?

How do we know the police side of things? All the news has reported on was what the community's pov was.

As far as keeping the officer out of the public eye, it only makes sense the way things are now. Once things calm down the officer in question will have to face the music. I'm sure this guy has a family and it is not their fault that he did what he did. Linch mobs don't typically care when they are out for a pound of flesh.

---

(August 14, 2014 at 8:21 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(August 14, 2014 at 7:36 pm)Drich Wrote: The right to peaceably assemble is a right, but it is not with out limitations. Once the peace is gone then the right to assemble gets regulated. If the crowd does not adhere to said regulations then they must be disbursed. The question is was what they did too much?

... and why is the peace gone in the first place?

See the explaination provided in post #6

The police force has the firepower to start a war, and they're also preventing reporters from attempting to do their jobs.

(August 14, 2014 at 8:21 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(August 14, 2014 at 8:10 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: The police share some responsibility for the looting.

Oh come off it. The only people responsible for looting are the fucking looters. A while back when Britain had riots, the only people doing the looting were opportunistic, scum bag thieves. People don't go looting to show they have a moral compass or to make some sort of stand.

I don't mean to suggest that the looters are in no way less than 100% responsible for what they are doing, and should be punished accordingly. The police are responsible for the way that they enforce the law, and the way they are choosing to enforce it is only stoking the fire, when it should be trying to put that fire out. They aren't making anybody loot, but they are creating the conditions for it with their lack of transparency and their protection of a person who should be a murder suspect. If they didn't have a large number of decent people rightfully angry with them, the looting scumbags wouldn't be able to do what they're doing.