• 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!

Should Michael Brown's Step father be prosecuted?

Should Michael Brown's Step Father be prosecuted


  • Total voters
    40
Not exactly the classiest guy and nobody I'd want as a next door neighbor but a few things:

1. Anyone committing arson KNEW is was a crime regardless of what the step dad said. They are truly the guilty ones.
2. Although calling for rioting is a crime, I tend to give people suffering a recent death of a loved one some leeway when no one was harmed as a direct result of their actions, at least until some time has passed.
3. That naturally leads to this question: Would the rioters have rioted anyway or where they just going to get together and sing cum ba ya but were driven to barbarism by Michael Brown's stepdad? I personally then no.

If your loved one dies, would you be screaming to burn down your town? Would any of us here?

He chose his words and he should be responsible for them. He is not a child, even if people want to treat him like one.
 
That is an excuse. Why would you think he didn't chose his words carefully?

I kind of suspect that he's not the brightest bulb on the tree to begin with and, from the look of things, has the emotional maturity of a 2 year old.
 
I kind of suspect that he's not the brightest bulb on the tree to begin with and, from the look of things, has the emotional maturity of a 2 year old.

That might be, but none of that excuses his behavior, nor should it. Would you have chosen those words even if you were emotional about your girlfriends son?
 
That might be, but none of that excuses his behavior, nor should it. Would you have chosen those words even if you were emotional about your girlfriends son?

What are you going to punish him with? There was no secret that there was going to be rioting and I have no reason to believe that he was the reason for the caution.

If there's going to be anything that should be done then it should be that jackass in the White House getting on the tube and actually condemning that kind of behavior.
 
I'm not about to condone throwing the book at someone who simply has an emotional meltdown. As I said before, the threat of riots had already been considered well before this guys outburst.

He admitted his error in judgment. Who's going to convict a grieving father who does that? No one.
 
I agree. Plus, if the guy had any kind of relationship with his stepson, he may have been overly emotional as most fathers would be. I say leave the dude alone.

He may have been speaking from grief for his stepson..
People say stuff they don't mean when they are angry.
And if he was prosecuted, this whole sad affair is never going to end..

Until the next time..
He wasn't his step father, but just the thug his mother was shacking up with.
And it wasn't an immediate reaction as they were told before it was made public.





He admitted his error in judgment. Who's going to convict a grieving father who does that? No one.

What grieving father?
He was not a step dad. He was his mother's thug boyfriend who help the mother assault and steal from her son's grandmother on his fathers side.
Grieving? Surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreee! 90 days later. Not.
It wasn't an immediate reaction as they were informed prior to the public being notified.





Anyways, the whole potion of the video wasn't made available earlier.

They have intent if they want to pursue the charges.

@ 00:16 he can clearly be heard saying;
“if I get up there, I’m going to start a riot”

 
:lol: Yeah, same here. Before this happened, I'd never even heard of Ferguson.

That's my point. Until the media decided 24/7 that Ferguson was the center of the human race, few people had. Nothing else, not in the whole world, not in Congress, not anywhere, was 1/10th as important.

The media used to have reporters around the world. But that cost money. So instead they have zip pinhead talking heads on one topic and one news crew one place. That's cheap.
 
Nah. While he may have said "Burn this bitch down" at the end of the day, the people who committed arson are responsible for their actions. You may condemn what he said, but the people who committed arson still had a choice as to whether or not they would go through with the act. They have ears, eyes, and minds of their own.

While I agree, he does have the freedom of speech, he was one of the de-facto leaders of the protest. Just as you would have any leader prosecuted for carrying out criminal actions he commanded his followers to do, he should be as well. Hell, Charles Manson is in prison for life, and he never killed anyone. He just told others to kill them for him.
 
No, he shouldn't be prosecuted. He did admit to being wrong, and going over the top. Doesn't make it right, but we don't need to prosecute.

Saying you're sorry doesn't bring back the businesses that were burned down.

Personally I think that he should be prosecuted as he most certainly did incite the crowd to violence as is evidenced by his words and the fact that buildings did get burned down. I also think that everyone that lied in their witness statements should be charged with perjury. I'd like to get them for incitement also since its their lies that got this crap started in the first place. Though I know that legally speaking they hold no accountability on that particular issue as all this violence was JUST a side effect that fed a much larger problem.

That said, prosecuting him would just incite more violence so I can understand why the state wouldn't charge him...even if its wrong not to do so.
 
He admitted his error in judgment. Who's going to convict a grieving father who does that? No one.

Grieving fathers get convicted all the time. Someone committing a what you think to be a crime against you, does not give you a free pass to break the law yourself.

 
In front of a large crowd of protestors, Michael Brown's stepfather on a platform started shouting "BURN IT DOWN! BURN IT DOWN!" to a larger crowd in a situation were arson was not only a possibility, but then in fact did happen.

[video]http://blog.honest.com/5-natural-ways-to-treat-infant-eczema/#[/video]

hould he be prosecuted?



Maybe the same grand jury that let his stepson's killer walk should make that call, eh?

Who would argue with their wisdom? :roll:
 
Grieving fathers get convicted all the time.
Someone committing a what you think to be a crime against you, does not give you a free pass to break the law yourself.





What do you think should give someone a 'free pass to break the law' ?

Fill us in.

Where are these free passes handed out? :roll:
 
Saying you're sorry doesn't bring back the businesses that were burned down.

Personally I think that he should be prosecuted as he most certainly did incite the crowd to violence as is evidenced by his words and the fact that buildings did get burned down. I also think that everyone that lied in their witness statements should be charged with perjury. I'd like to get them for incitement also since its their lies that got this crap started in the first place. Though I know that legally speaking they hold no accountability on that particular issue as all this violence was JUST a side effect that fed a much larger problem.

That said, prosecuting him would just incite more violence so I can understand why the state wouldn't charge him...even if its wrong not to do so.

I find it interesting that while you admit that it would just incite more violence, you still think it's wrong not to charge him. I'm curious, is charging this one man, a grieving father who in the heat of the moment says something he has since apologized for, worth many more businesses being burned down and even further unrest? Just how much value do you put on locking up one man when a city burns around the jailhouse?
 
Excon;1064061060 He wasn't his step father said:
Really?..I wondered why his mother wasn't up there with them..I assumed she was too grief stricken....
 
I find it interesting that while you admit that it would just incite more violence, you still think it's wrong not to charge him. I'm curious, is charging this one man, a grieving father who in the heat of the moment says something he has since apologized for, worth many more businesses being burned down and even further unrest? Just how much value do you put on locking up one man when a city burns around the jailhouse?

1: Don't care that he "apologized". That doesn't bring back the businesses that were burned down due to his incitement to violent actions. Nor does it bring back the life that was taken that night either. Something which I've noticed very little news coverage on.

2: As for the rioters...I really have no sympathy for them. There are ways to deal with them. Use em.
 
Has anyone ever watched I spit on your Grave?
Should rape victims revenge themselves, or call for other rape victims to start a lynch mob? We may know where the perps live, so lets loot and burn down their neighborhoods.
If my child is molested and killed, do I have the right to "shorten" the perp a few inches and call for burning down the perp's entire neighborhood.
Well see now, you have to understand that I am a grieving mother.
C'mon people, are we the wild west or are we a land of law and justice?
 
The problem is that, regardless of what is right and wrong and the legalities, should the police, the same police who killed his son (not criminally responsible, but did pull the trigger) arrest the stepfather, you might as well start handing out the lighter fluid and just write off Ferguson.

What other laws should be ignored if their enforcement may rile up the small percentage of criminals in the area? If it's OK not to enforce the law as written then is the reverse true? Should the state have skipped the GJ and simply charged, and jailed, Wilson (regardless of having sufficient evidence to convict) just to calm things down?

What you propose seems to be the exact opposite of equal protection of the law and a return to mob rule. The problem, of course, is that you seem to wish to appease a violent minority (those prone to riot, loot and burn) to protect society rather than apply the law as written.
 
Grieving fathers get convicted all the time. Someone committing a what you think to be a crime against you, does not give you a free pass to break the law yourself.



I didn't say he had a right to do anything, just saying I wouldn't necessarily convict him.
 
What do you think should give someone a 'free pass to break the law' ?

Fill us in.

Where are these free passes handed out? :roll:

No free passes should be handed out... ever. The death of this country will be political correctness. The pundits saying that convicting a man that has committed a crime will only create more havoc, is only legitimizing the burning of cities as a legitimate way to protest. I think we should go after every person involved without any compassion... If it causes more people to be upset and burn down buildings... we should convict them as well... throw them all in jail...
 
Saying you're sorry doesn't bring back the businesses that were burned down.

Personally I think that he should be prosecuted as he most certainly did incite the crowd to violence as is evidenced by his words and the fact that buildings did get burned down. I also think that everyone that lied in their witness statements should be charged with perjury. I'd like to get them for incitement also since its their lies that got this crap started in the first place. Though I know that legally speaking they hold no accountability on that particular issue as all this violence was JUST a side effect that fed a much larger problem.

That said, prosecuting him would just incite more violence so I can understand why the state wouldn't charge him...even if its wrong not to do so.

Did he actually light a fire?
 


He wasn't his step father, but just the thug his mother was shacking up with.
And it wasn't an immediate reaction as they were told before it was made public.







What grieving father?
He was not a step dad. He was his mother's thug boyfriend who help the mother assault and steal from her son's grandmother on his fathers side.
Grieving? Surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreee! 90 days later. Not.
It wasn't an immediate reaction as they were informed prior to the public being notified.





Anyways, the whole potion of the video wasn't made available earlier.

They have intent if they want to pursue the charges.

@ 00:16 he can clearly be heard saying;
“if I get up there, I’m going to start a riot”



Just going by what I heard, if he wasn't related then I guess that changes things a lot.
 
I didn't say he had a right to do anything, just saying I wouldn't necessarily convict him.
I would... They have been complaining about the right to be equal... then they should be treated equally. If they incite a riot, they should be convicted of that crime as anyone else would be.
 
Did he actually light a fire?

Kind of like asking... did the person who told the other person to assassinate someone, pull the trigger... Well if they dident pull the trigger but simply ordered the assassination, they should not be held accountable.
 
If I stood infront of a crowd of white people and said to burn this bitch down after the OJ trail.. I would be convicted in a court of law for inciting a riot if people went and burned down a bunch of buildings.
 
Back
Top Bottom