(September 5, 2014 at 5:03 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(August 30, 2014 at 3:10 am)Losty Wrote: Well isn't he innocent until proven guilty?

Isn't the cop?

Sure. In fact, the way they have things set up he would be found innocent regardless of how many people he shot. All he has to do is say "I felt threatened" and that is cart blanche for murder in these United States.

How he was threatened by a guy with his hands up in the air is a mystery to me but not to district attorneys, apparently.

(September 5, 2014 at 5:22 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(August 30, 2014 at 12:49 am)Losty Wrote: Ooohhhh I thought he was innocent. Do you have a link to the video when they took his corpse to trial and it was convicted by a jury of its peers?

It's in the same place as the video of the cop's trial, whom you've already convicted in absentia.

There's a good chance this is going to go down as a lawful shooting, unless physical evidence to discredit the cop's version is found: he didn't shoot Brown during the tussle at the police car, at that range there would have been gunshot residue. He didn't shoot Brown from behind, all the wounds are consistent with Brown facing the cop. The version of the witnesses, one of whom was close enough friends with Brown to steal cigars with him, is pretty shaky. It's not definitive yet, but since under our law the man is innocent until proven guilty, I think he's got a good chance of being acquitted, based on what we know so far.

I feel sorry for this kid and his family, and the response of the Ferguson police to protests was foolish, but the shooting is being investigated by the county and the feds, not the Ferguson PD, and it's their job to evaluate whether there's enough evidence to warrant bringing Wilson to trial, and then it's the jury's job to determine his guilt, not ours. We can't have as much evidence as they will before they have to make their decisions. The rightness or wrongness of the Ferguson PD response to rioters is independent of whether the shooting went down one way or the other. I think it's a mistake to attach too much to one version of the shooting when the real issue is cops who look like they're equipped to free hostages from ISIL showing up for crowd control in an American town and detaining journalists.

I don't think he should be prosecuted as a murderer. I don't think he should go to jail. I don't even think he should lose his job. What I think is that he should have been trained not to kill unarmed civilians. What I think is, he should have a taser gun on hand at all times. I think that in the future we should start holding our policemen to higher standards. Much higher standards.

(September 5, 2014 at 5:22 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(September 5, 2014 at 5:03 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Isn't the cop?

Sure. In fact, the way they have things set up he would be found innocent regardless of how many people he shot. All he has to do is say "I felt threatened" and that is cart blanche for murder in these United States.

How he was threatened by a guy with his hands up in the air is a mystery to me but not to district attorneys, apparently.

That Brown actually had his hands up in the air is in question. A lot hinges on that. In this day and age, cops should be being filmed whenever they interact with the public.

(September 5, 2014 at 12:13 am)Minimalist Wrote: Wrong, shithead. From your own posting.

Quote:Several witnesses have told investigators that Mr. Brown stopped and turned around with his arms up.

A cop does not have the right to shoot someone because he is pissed at him.* Even a fucking moron like you should be able to comprehend that simple fact.


* May not apply in parts of the fucking south.

Or California, inconveniently west though it may be.

(September 5, 2014 at 5:29 pm)Losty Wrote: I don't think he should be prosecuted as a murderer. I don't think he should go to jail. I don't even think he should lose his job. What I think is that he should have been trained to to kill unarmed civilians. What I think is, he should have a taser gun on hand at all times. I think that in the future we should start holding our policemen to higher standards. Much higher standards.

Tasers aren't a panacea. When a large man is charging you at a range of less than 40 feet, bullets are the instrument that give the cop the best chance of being alive at the end of the encounter. A taser reliable enough to take a person in motion in a high-stress combat situation down instantly is powerful enough to kill someone, not to mention the officer would only be able to get off one shot with a taser, if that missed, Brown would be in control. Until better less lethal options than tasers are available to the average police officer, it isn't reasonable to expect them to engage in unarmed combat with someone strong enough to take their gun away from them OR try to use a taser for defense instead of subduing someone who is resisting arrest but not actually attacking the officer. Tasers are used to 'gain compliance' not for combat (unless you're a civilian and that's your main tool for self defense). What this cop really needed for a different outcome was a partner (preferably African American). I think that would have changed the whole dynamic.

If Brown was surrendering, the cop is guilty of murder. If Brown was charging him at close range, shooting him is what cops are trained to do, and with current technology, rightly so. We expect cops to risk their lives, not throw them away.

(August 14, 2014 at 7:20 pm)ShaMan Wrote: [quote='Drich' pid='730501' dateline='1408058049']

Quote:An uprising is needed, yes!

Looting =/= Uprising. Looters are self-serving thieves...as opposed to an uprising where people are making some kind of stand to change their conditions.

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

Looting and rioting =/= freedom of speech and peaceful protests.

I feel like you're confusing a taser with a taser gun. The metal thingys (excuse my lack of vocabulary) hook into your body and you can continue electrocuting the person until they're down and/or electrocute them again if they try to get back up. I've seen it done to some rather large highschoolers. Even then guys usually peed their pants and were down within seconds.

(September 5, 2014 at 5:29 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(September 5, 2014 at 5:22 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Sure. In fact, the way they have things set up he would be found innocent regardless of how many people he shot. All he has to do is say "I felt threatened" and that is cart blanche for murder in these United States.

How he was threatened by a guy with his hands up in the air is a mystery to me but not to district attorneys, apparently.

That Brown actually had his hands up in the air is in question. A lot hinges on that. In this day and age, cops should be being filmed whenever they interact with the public.

Yeah - the witnesses who have come forward agree that his hands were up and the cop? Well, the cop hasn't been heard from, has he?

In fact, all we've heard from are a bunch of racist twats who think that if a black kid spits on the sidewalk any time in his life he should be gunned down by a cop at any opportunity.

Comparisons are fun.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/06/wh...-get-shot/

Quote:White teen in BMW hits three cars, assaults cop in Pennsylvania and doesn’t get shot

I guess none of that is as bad as jay-walking.

(September 6, 2014 at 6:12 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Comparisons are fun.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/06/wh...-get-shot/

Quote:White teen in BMW hits three cars, assaults cop in Pennsylvania and doesn’t get shot

I guess none of that is as bad as jay-walking.

A young girl?? Yep she certainly is a physical threat..

Speaking of comparisons,

When's the last time you saw a white mob attacking a black man at work minding his own business? 60 years ago, maybe?