• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Response to oppression

Starbuck said:
First of all, a thief is innocent until proven guilty.

Second of all, as much as I respect Police Officers, I see them as neither above the law nor unimpeachable.

In his statement to the Grand Jury Officer Wilson clearly states:



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/25/us/darren-wilsoyn-testimony-ferguson-shooting.html?_r=0"]-Officer Wilson


During that same testimony he also stated that he keeps his firearm [or weapon as he calls it] on his right hip. So, I'm wondering how it was even remotely possible for Brown to reach inside the vehicle and somehow get hold of the Officers Gun [fingers inside of trigger guard] while it was holstered on his right hip?

Maybe the Officer was driving a mail truck or some small Euro Sedan?

Again, that is just one of the inconsistencies.
Click to expand...

Wilson's story is entirely credible, given Brown's height and reach. I myself have experienced a thief trying to reach into my car, across me to the passenger seat. It happens.
 
Jack Hays said:
Wilson's story is entirely credible, given Brown's height and reach. I myself have experienced a thief trying to reach into my car, across me to the passenger seat. It happens.
Click to expand...

Personally, I find almost every detail of his story, aside from the fact that he did shoot Michael Brown several times, pretty hard to believe.

Purely from a technical standpoint, I don't see it as a very credible story. You may have had someone reach inside your car, but I doubt that any unarmed civilian would be able to reach a cross the front seat of a police officers patrol vehicle and manage to get their hands inside of the trigger guard of a holstered firearm. I'm sure there's no statistic for this however, because I'd guarantee that it's never happened before.

Also, if the gun was holstered the trigger guard was covered by the holster, thereby making it even more improbable for someone to have any possibility of discharging the gun from outside the vehicle.
 
Starbuck said:
Personally, I find almost every detail of his story, aside from the fact that he did shoot Michael Brown several times, pretty hard to believe.

Purely from a technical standpoint, I don't see it as a very credible story. You may have had someone reach inside your car, but I doubt that any unarmed civilian would be able to reach a cross the front seat of a police officers patrol vehicle and manage to get their hands inside of the trigger guard of a holstered firearm. I'm sure there's no statistic for this however, because I'd guarantee that it's never happened before.

Also, if the gun was holstered the trigger guard was covered by the holster, thereby making it even more improbable for someone to have any possibility of discharging the gun from outside the vehicle.
Click to expand...

Not all holsters cover the trigger guard, but that's a minor point. The grand jury found Wilson's account credible, and it was supported by the forensic evidence.
 
Jack Hays said:
Not all holsters cover the trigger guard, but that's a minor point. The grand jury found Wilson's account credible, and it was supported by the forensic evidence.
Click to expand...

The grand jury was shown a haphazardly put together presentation by the DA, who obviously didn't want this to go to trial.

Thing is, this case will never actually be examined because it isn't going to court. However, from his testimony it's pretty obvious that there are lot of inconsistencies and implausible statements.

You should actually read his statements.
 
Starbuck said:
The grand jury was shown a haphazardly put together presentation by the DA, who obviously didn't want this to go to trial.

Thing is, this case will never actually be examined because it isn't going to court. However, from his testimony it's pretty obvious that there are lot of inconsistencies and implausible statements.

You should actually read his statements.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I think you're in tinfoil hat territory.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but I think you're in tinfoil hat territory.
Click to expand...

If I'd mentioned aliens or the illuminati, I can see where the tinfoil hat reference might be applicable.

However, from simply reading the testimonies provided to the Grand Jury, it's pretty clear that there are some serious holes in the officers story. It's really interesting because both the testimony of Officer Wilson and of Dorian Johnson align almost perfectly in several places, and about really interesting details, but vary greatly in others.

If one were to actually take the Officers statements literally, it would not only make him a terrible police officer [tactically speaking especially], but also defied the laws of space and time.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but I think you're in tinfoil hat territory.
Click to expand...

He kept walking, as he is walking he said, "we are almost to our destination."
Click to expand...

-Officer Wilson

He asked us to get on the sidewalk, I told him we were going to our destination.
Click to expand...

-Dorian Johnson

It's almost eerie how close several excerpts, such as the ones above, coincided, but yet others were so different. Like I've said, if you were to take Officer Wilson's Testimony literally he's not only a terrible police officer, but also can defy the laws of space and time.
 
Starbuck said:
If I'd mentioned aliens or the illuminati, I can see where the tinfoil hat reference might be applicable.

However, from simply reading the testimonies provided to the Grand Jury, it's pretty clear that there are some serious holes in the officers story. It's really interesting because both the testimony of Officer Wilson and of Dorian Johnson align almost perfectly in several places, and about really interesting details, but vary greatly in others.

If one were to actually take the Officers statements literally, it would not only make him a terrible police officer [tactically speaking especially], but also defied the laws of space and time.
Click to expand...

Then I'm sure the world awaits your expose.
 
Starbuck said:
-Officer Wilson



-Dorian Johnson

It's almost eerie how close several excerpts, such as the ones above, coincided, but yet others were so different. Like I've said, if you were to take Officer Wilson's Testimony literally he's not only a terrible police officer, but also can defy the laws of space and time.
Click to expand...

The world awaits your expose.
 
After looking things over for a few days, it seems to me Wilson should have been indicted. It also seems like it's an open-and-shut case that he should have been, thanks to one piece of physical evidence: the bullet trajectories through Michael Brown's head. The fatal shot entered at the top center of the skull, and traveled through the brain in a forward trajectory, back towards his face. The only way that trajectory could have been achieved, given that Wilson and Brown were approximately the same height, is if Brown had been on his knees, looking downward, with Wilson standing over him. It's true that, when a person charges forward, their overall stance drops, but not enough to ensure that kind of trajectory. Brown would have to have bent over at nearly 90 degrees at the waist and been within just a few inches of Wilson's gun's barrel to get the same trajectory while on his feet.

In short, the forensic evidence indicates that Wilson executed Brown.
 
Jack Hays said:
The world awaits your expose.
Click to expand...

No, actually they don't.

In fact, the world isn't waiting for anyone's response on this anymore, which is the really unfortunate part. As a simple matter of protocol, this case, which should've went to trial, is shut. The DA threw the indictment and honestly put more people in danger, because less people will trust the police after this incident.
 
Starbuck said:
No, actually they don't.

In fact, the world isn't waiting for anyone's response on this anymore, which is the really unfortunate part. As a simple matter of protocol, this case, which should've went to trial, is shut. The DA threw the indictment and honestly put more people in danger, because less people will trust the police after this incident.
Click to expand...

The evidence spoke.
 
Jack Hays said:
The evidence spoke.
Click to expand...

The evidence never saw the courtroom, and therefore couldn't have spoken.

Regardless, that wasn't really the topic for this thread. The actual topic for this thread was the notion that non-oppressed people are trying to prescribe actions to end the oppression.

Do you think that people who aren't being oppressed should be able to prescribe the preferred method for ending said oppression?
 
Starbuck said:
The evidence never saw the courtroom, and therefore couldn't have spoken.

Regardless, that wasn't really the topic for this thread. The actual topic for this thread was the notion that non-oppressed people are trying to prescribe actions to end the oppression.

Do you think that people who aren't being oppressed should be able to prescribe the preferred method for ending said oppression?
Click to expand...

First, you have to establish that someone has been oppressed.
 
Starbuck said:
That is a good point, he was very specifically non-violent. I'm also quite sure that he carefully instructed protestors to accept any blows dealt to them, without reciprocation. However, as a member of an oppressed group it's his prerogative to say that. Thing is, I don't think it's up to anyone but the oppressed to actually say what type of reaction is warranted.

The parents of Michael Brown have called for peaceful demonstrations, and I believe that's who everyone should really be listening to.
Click to expand...

"Burn the bitch down" These choice words from Michael Browns step dad.
 
Starbuck said:
So, as a question I'd ask:

Can someone who's not being [and never has been] oppressed honestly tell members of an oppressed group that they're overreacting, or that any particular course of action is wrong?
Click to expand...

No.


;;;;;;;;;;;;
 
rhinefire said:
"Burn the bitch down" These choice words from Michael Browns step dad.
Click to expand...


"But a pile of trash in the middle of the street? The Washington Post is making a call over this?"

-Officer Timothy Zoll (Ferguson PD)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom