• 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!

Protests over Missouri teen's death turn violent[W:647,807]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hatuey said:
And the reason is still unknown so there is no justification for shooting.



And the witnesses are saying the cop attacked Michael Brown. If as a result the cop was hit back, and he shot to defend himself - it's not justified. You don't get to attack someone, the kill them if you're losing the fight.
Click to expand...

People are too quick to dismiss the EYEWITNESS accounts of what happened. In their eyes, since other black people rioted and looted, all black people in the area are incapable of telling the truth. Meanwhile, the officer had a swollen face, so obviously Mr. Brown drug the officer away from his squad car until he was shot the proper amount of times. In fact, the local police did such a perfect job that the Governor gave them tonight off.

Get with the program. :lol:
 
Hatuey said:
Translation: From now on if you reach your destination and decide to walk down the street as millions do everyday, cops are justified in mistreating you and shooting you if you refuse to be mistreated.
Click to expand...

You'll have to at least read some non biased accounts of what we know thus far before you carry on embarrassing yourself. After you do, have a friend who understands court decisions and precedent to explain the decision to you. Have them repeat it until you understand. Then you can come back and apologize.
 
Wiggen said:
If the police force was more representative of the population as a whole, they'd undoubtedly have less reason to protest. My God, this isn't rocket science we're talking about here. Cops generally have an 'us against them' mentality, and when the cops are white and 'them' are black, you have a recipe for stuff like this.
Click to expand...

Why would you think black cops would treat black criminals any different than white cops do?

Would a female cop go easier on female suspects?
 
clownboy said:
Once again, yes, Johnson's attorney said that early on, and the press reported it. Of course Johnson had already released a full accounting to the press. And we haven't heard from the police who they have and have not interviewed. Have attorneys ever lied to the police and the press? Oh, but you're sure that's not happening here, right?
Click to expand...

You're making up excuses. My statement remains. THEY HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO THE WITNESSES. The account released to the press was done after it was made a fact that the police refused to speak to him. You're not really good at this reading stuff are you?

And no, you've proven the whole brain is off the table for you here. When the release of information is deemed to put the subject and/or their family in imminent danger, police don't release the name. That's known by everyone apparently BUT you.
Click to expand...

Bull****. Suspects get their names released regardless of the situation. The exception being when they're minors.

Your links don't show there was any foot dragging or delay in the investigation.
Click to expand...

You're not even reading them are you? They refused to identify witnesses, refused to open a case on possible civil rights violation, gave the officer paid leave etc. All perks of being in a police union.
 
clownboy said:
Once again, yes, Johnson's attorney said that early on, and the press reported it. Of course Johnson had already released a full accounting to the press. And we haven't heard from the police who they have and have not interviewed. Have attorneys ever lied to the police and the press? Oh, but you're sure that's not happening here, right?

And no, you've proven the whole brain is off the table for you here. When the release of information is deemed to put the subject and/or their family in imminent danger, police don't release the name. That's known by everyone apparently BUT you.

Your links don't show there was any foot dragging or delay in the investigation.

That last little gem applies directly to you.
Click to expand...

The police aren't giving any information besides "swollen face". They won't say how many times he was shot. How does that protect the officer and his family?
 
clownboy said:
You'll have to at least read some non biased accounts of what we know thus far before you carry on embarrassing yourself. After you do, have a friend who understands court decisions and precedent to explain the decision to you. Have them repeat it until you understand. Then you can come back and apologize.
Click to expand...

Tell us again that there was only one witness and you don't have a right to defend yourself from a cop who is assaulting you. Please do?
 
Thorgasm said:
People are too quick to dismiss the EYEWITNESS accounts of what happened. In their eyes, since other black people rioted and looted, all black people in the area are incapable of telling the truth. Meanwhile, the officer had a swollen face, so obviously Mr. Brown drug the officer away from his squad car until he was shot the proper amount of times. In fact, the local police did such a perfect job that the Governor gave them tonight off.

Get with the program. :lol:
Click to expand...

There are only two accounts available, the ONE witness, Johnson, and the officer who we have not heard from and won't until the investigation has concluded.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
So basically you're saying you want more situations like what happened with the Bank of America Robbery in LA 20 years ago then huh?
Click to expand...

I remember watching that live when it was happening. It seemed like a movie, a bad movie but a movie nonetheless. It was also close to where i grew up. It was so weird recognizing so many landmarks that were getting shot up for real.
 
clownboy said:
There are only two accounts available, the ONE witness, Johnson, and the officer who we have not heard from and won't until the investigation has concluded.
Click to expand...

There was 2 girls on CNN last night who who witnessed it. Those are just the ones who have been on TV. It is certainly possible others witnessed it as well.
 
clownboy said:
There are only two accounts available, the ONE witness, Johnson, and the officer who we have not heard from and won't until the investigation has concluded.
Click to expand...

Also, in most shootings, the police tell their side right away to show justification and to prevent public outrage.
 
Thorgasm said:
There was 2 girls on CNN last night who who witnessed it. Those are just the ones who have been on TV. It is certainly possible others witnessed it as well.
Click to expand...

He keeps lying about it like it makes a difference.

Michael Brown shooting eyewitnesses detail how 'he did nothing wrong' | Mail Online

Eyewitnesses Tiffany Mitchell and Piaget Crenshaw said on Wednesday that the police officer tried to pull Michael Brown into his patrol vehicle before a shot was fired
Both women confirmed earlier reports that the teen had run from police and then turned around with his hands up - but shots continued to be fired
The 18-year-old died after being shot up to eight times on a street in Ferguson, Missouri on Saturday
Police claim that Brown assaulted the police officer and tried to grab his gun - a version of events that has been totally contradicted by eyewitnesses

Read more: Michael Brown shooting eyewitnesses detail how 'he did nothing wrong' | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Click to expand...

Exclusive: Witness claims he saw Michael Brown being shot | FOX2now.com

A witness spoke exclusively with Fox2 News about what he saw when a Ferguson police officer shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown last Saturday at Canfield Green Apartments. The man who does not want to be identified, says Brown was not armed and had his hands in the air, as if surrendering, when the officer opened fire striking him several times. He also says Brown appeared to be quiet and shy and talked with him about Jesus.
Click to expand...

Witness Says Missouri Teen's Hands Were Up When Cop Shot Him - ABC News

"I saw him turn around with his arms up in the air and they shot him in his face and chest and he went down unarmed," Piaget Crenshaw said.
Click to expand...
 
Hatuey said:
Tell us again that there was only one witness and you don't have a right to defend yourself from a cop who is assaulting you. Please do?
Click to expand...

I don't need to I've already said something like it before you decided to reword and reframe what I said.

Edit: Okay, I'll give you that, today they are reporting that two other witnesses have come forward, both well away from the scene.

However, that does not make your lame reading of the decision you posted any more accurate.
 
Wiggen said:
They do if they are convinced that they are living under police occupation, with no other resort. If they watch their young men being shot down in the street for no apparent reason. If they see a police force that in no way is representative of them. Frustration and anger can make people do things they might not ordinarily do.
Click to expand...

So you are on the record as defending rioting and destruction of property because somebody doesn't think they are treated fairly.

Again what percentage of the people rioting do you think care about the kid that got shot as opposed to the percentage that want free stuff?
 
Thorgasm said:
There was 2 girls on CNN last night who who witnessed it. Those are just the ones who have been on TV. It is certainly possible others witnessed it as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I finally saw that reported and fessed up to it. I don't watch the TV news.
 
Hatuey said:
Hey, he's the one that made the argument. He can't tell one black person from another even if they are... oh you know.. different people. Now back in your hole until you decide to debate me on Nazis.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't liar. Quote me.
 
upsideguy said:
I don't know. What was the % in 1968? A riot is a riot. It starts with civil unrest and degenerates from there. My point stands, there is an underlying racial tension in this country that seems to be getting markably worse. The unintended consequences of an Obama impeachment will be to ignite these tensions; which will lead to all of our major cities being "ignited".
Click to expand...

We are not talking about 1968, we are talking about today.

My question is relevant because posters onthis board are convinced this riot has something to do with the kid that got shot and not people that want free stuff.

What would you say, maybe 5% even know what they are rioting about?
 
Hatuey said:
Ridiculous details? Like...

1. The police didn't talk to witnesses
2. The name of the officer in question wasn't released
3. They only looked into the matter when a big fuss was made

Right. Ridiculous details. All of which would have been standard procedure if someone had killed a cop.
Click to expand...

The FBI interviewed the witnesses.

The cop's name is being witheld for obvious reasons.
 
Thorgasm said:
The police aren't giving any information besides "swollen face". They won't say how many times he was shot. How does that protect the officer and his family?
Click to expand...

That was an answer to Hautey as to why they aren't giving out the name of the officer. I know, it's getting difficult to keep up with the thread. Type a response and there's already two new thread pages waiting.
 
apdst said:
The FBI interviewed the witnesses.

The cop's name is being witheld for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

Some folks are having a difficult time figuring out the obvious reasons. :roll:
 
apdst said:
The FBI interviewed the witnesses.
Click to expand...

On a possible civil rights violation/police misconduct case. Not the killing of Michael Brown itself. Are you being disingenuous?
 
clownboy said:
I don't need to I've already said something like it before you decided to reword and reframe what I said.

Edit: Okay, I'll give you that, today they are reporting that two other witnesses have come forward, both well away from the scene.
Click to expand...

:doh- I've never really tasted crow. How does it taste?

However, that does not make your lame reading of the decision you posted any more accurate.
Click to expand...

Do you or do you not have a right to defend yourself from a police officer? Is jaywalking something which causes a threat to the community to the point where an arrest and/or humiliation of being put in a police car was necessary? No.

Can't honestly say I'm good at judging faces from photos no matter what color the subject is
Click to expand...

Yep, you can't tell black people apart. Even if they are completely different shades.
 
lizzie said:
It's because in our society, we have been made to feel guilty if someone is lacking in anything, no matter the reason for that being the case, and there has been a push for the past few decades to "equalize" the socioeconomic status of the masses, and make people who succeed feel guilty for doing so. That is how they justify it. It isn't "fair" that some people have more than others, so in their minds, looting is just people who have been unfairly treated, getting what is rightfully theirs. It's disgusting.
Click to expand...

That reminds me of a book I read about a Mexican cartel. A few members went to rob a house of a very well known business owner. We all know his eye glasses stores. One guy asked the other guy why they were robbing his house. The other guy answered that because the property was inside Mexico, that made the property theirs as well. Any property this rich guy has, belongs to everybody so they are just liberating it.

It's scary not knowing who is outside your door ready to take what you have because they think like this.
 
Hatuey said:
:doh- I've never really tasted crow. How does it taste?
Click to expand...

Awful, but you're lying if you deny being used to it by now. You've gotten it wrong enough in this thread to have had your fill by now. At least ONE of us admits they were in error when it's shown to them.

Hatuey said:
Do you or do you not have a right to defend yourself from a police officer? Is jaywalking something which causes a threat to the community to the point where an arrest and/or humiliation of being put in a police car was necessary? No.
Click to expand...

The answer to your first question, which has been answered before, is yes, UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT AREN'T TRUE HERE (from what we know and the witness reports). As for the rest, reduction of the facts and events that have been reported isn't making your case.

Hatuey said:
:Yep, you can't tell black people apart. Even if they are completely different shades.
Click to expand...

Try reading for comprehension and quit lying.
 
Last edited:
Mason66 said:
That reminds me of a book I read about a Mexican cartel. A few members went to rob a house of a very well known business owner. We all know his eye glasses stores. One guy asked the other guy why they were robbing his house. The other guy answered that because the property was inside Mexico, that made the property theirs as well. Any property this rich guy has, belongs to everybody so they are just liberating it.

It's scary not knowing who is outside your door ready to take what you have because they think like this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had a little taste of it myself, just a few days ago, when someone decided that my work equipment was theirs as well as mine, when they took it from my car during the night. They are just fortunate that I didn't know they were here. I have no tolerance for thieves, because they are self-deceptive liars too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom