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

Excon said:

Oh Gawd! Pretty much nothing has been confirmed. It is all pretty much just what's been reported.
The Officer shot through the door. Reported. Do you have anything that refutes that?
Going for the Officers gun/attacking reported.
You don't want to believe what has been reported, fine, then you really have nothing to discuss.

Click to expand...

I can ask you similar questions. Do you want to believe what is reported? Because YOU KNOW that what is reported doesn't mean it is true. Look at what MSNBC did with the audio in the Trayvon case. Or ANY details from mass shootings. Just because it is reported doesn't mean it is fact.

What I want to know are FACTS. How many witnesses? There is no dash cam footage (I found that out earlier). How many shots fired? Because you can't make a claim one way or the other in this case until you know the facts. At any rate...you have to admit that shooting someone who is unarmed warrants VERY close scrutiny.

:doh
While all facts have not been reported, this is pretty much fact.
Not confirmed by LE, sure? Not confirmed, by what is known? Nonsense.

This from four days ago.

The slain teenager and a friend were “accused of stealing gum from the store or some sort of cigarettes,” the alderman said.

Protests, looting in streets after teen Michael Brown is fatally shot by police | WTVR.com​

So deal with the facts.

Click to expand...

Is this confirmed? Is it him? If so...fine. He is a criminal. Doesn't give law enforcement the grounds to kill him though.

And I am giving you that it certainly does APPEAR to be him. But unless confirmed it is irrelevant, and even if 100% confirmed it is still not that important. All it means is that he is a dead criminal. My ONLY concern is that the shooting is justified. You can't have cops shooting unarmed people and NOT investigate them.

Spare everybody you getting personal.
It is uncalled for.

Click to expand...

You missed the point. I was asking if you really think that it matters if he is a crip? Wannabees flash gang signs all the time. It is that BS get rich or die trying culture that is so glamorized in the inner city. Just look at a few ghetto kids facebooks. It is hilarious in a sad and pathetic kind of way. Flashing gang signs does not make one a gangsta. It just makes one...as you correctly stated...a dumb SOB.

:naughty
18 year old adult.
Flashing crip sign.
It is far more likely that he knows the unwritten rules and isn't flashing because he is a wannabe.

But you are ignoring that I do make for exception.

Click to expand...

I am not ignoring it. I am merely stating that gang signs do NOT make one a gangbanger. All we know is he flashed gang signs in a few pictures. That also doesn't mean he should be shot. It has no bearing on the case.

s

Pretending makes one a punk, he engaged ion actions that made him a thug.

Click to expand...

Engaging in petty BS crimes doesn't make one a thug. It makes one petty BS...or a punk. Doesn't make this kid a hardcore gangbanger. At best you got him on stealing gum...real hardcore.

But Trayvon. Starting a fight? He wasnt a gang member. He was a punk 17 year old who wanted to try and be bobby badass. He stole jewlery (allegedly). His crimes were nothing more than petty BS crimes too. That doesn't make him a thug. It made him a punk. Tell me you don't think you could have kicked Trayvons ass? He was a punk kid. He needed an ass kicking, but he picked the wrong guy and got shot.

See. There is no commonality here.
As far as I am concerned, pretending is pretending. Engaging in actual actions is the determining factor.

Click to expand...

Sure if his actions are home invasions and gangbanging dope slinging kind of crimes. But neither one of these people were doing anything but petty BS crimes. Do you call someone who steals things a thug? Or a thief?

Yes, with no facts to support such defense and actual facts against such defense.

Click to expand...

Sorry. That was a typo on my part. It was meant to state I'm not defending the kid. I think that might make the next few sentences more clear. Like I said...all I give a crap about is whether or not this cop did the right thing. Because you know we have plenty of MORON cops in this country.

And if this kid reached in and tried to grab the cops gun...I would PREFER him to be dead.

But if this cop panicked and shot an unarmed gum stealing punk...rather than tasing him and arresting him...he shouldn't be protected.

Texmex said:

What made your ignorant statement even more rich was it was at the beginning of your tirade about how important education is to the upper class. You closed mentioning it was that way with you. Next time you equate yourself as being superior, at least reread your posting.

Click to expand...

What made your CHILDISH statement even more irrelevant is the fact you chose to focus on a obvious typo rather than address the context of the post.

You just wasted bandwidth with that little example of petty nonsense.

But it's nothing new for you.

stonewall50 said:

One thing to consider is that a cop shouldn't be shooting someone dead over a robbery. At least if said person is unarmed. It is his job to arrest the guy for it. If he isn't capable of that...he has no business being a cop. So it really doesn't matter if this kid robbed the store or not.

What matters is the circumstances around the shooting. Did he attack the cop? If so...grounds to kill him.

Was he at a distance and unarmed? Then we gotta talk about how and why he got shot.

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll go along with that....There are reports that Brown was going for the cops gun in a struggle, but if that struggle was broken off, then the shooting stops....I am finding myself with more questions right now than answers.

Luftwaffe said:

*cracks knuckles*

Vandalism? Looting? Breaking into stores?

Get out the cuffs, fine these bastards, lock em up.

There is no need to be interested in why looting is their preferred method of protesting, there is only the need to put these people back in their places for being criminals.

Click to expand...

When this occurs, I think it should always be met with stiff forced. Bring in thousands of officers, even the national guard immediately. The only way to stop such protests is to make it futile to start one. I am not talking about peacefull protests, but protests that spiral into violence and looting.

Capster78 said:

When this occurs, I think it should always be met with stiff forced. Bring in thousands of officers, even the national guard immediately. The only way to stop such protests is to make it futile to start one. I am not talking about peacefull protests, but protests that spiral into violence and looting.

Click to expand...

Too much money, just equip all of the police officers within the state and send as much are needed to stop violence.

But yes, I agree with you in that any violent protest must be stopped immediately.

stonewall50 said:

I can ask you similar questions. Do you want to believe what is reported? Because YOU KNOW that what is reported doesn't mean it is true. Look at what MSNBC did with the audio in the Trayvon case. Or ANY details from mass shootings. Just because it is reported doesn't mean it is fact.

Click to expand...

Holy ****! What is it that you did not understand about the following statement?
I mean really. Had you understood it, none of your statements or questions would have been made.
We know what has been reported, and of that, what sounds plausible and what doesn't.
His cohorts account doesn't sound plausible at all. It sounds contrived.

stonewall50 said:

Is this confirmed? Is it him? If so...fine. He is a criminal. Doesn't give law enforcement the grounds to kill him though.

Click to expand...

No one said it was reason to. You are arguing against what no one said.

stonewall50 said:

My ONLY concern is that the shooting is justified. You can't have cops shooting unarmed people and NOT investigate them.

Click to expand...

Your assertion of not being investigated is absurd.

stonewall50 said:

You missed the point. I was asking if you really think that it matters if he is a crip?

Click to expand...

Oy vey. I never said he had. I proffered an example of one who flashes a crip sign when they are not can get them killed. The same holds true for flashing a blood's sign.
And no, you weren't asking.

stonewall50 said:

Wannabees flash gang signs all the time. It is that BS get rich or die trying culture that is so glamorized in the inner city. Just look at a few ghetto kids facebooks. It is hilarious in a sad and pathetic kind of way. Flashing gang signs does not make one a gangsta. It just makes one...as you correctly stated...a dumb SOB.

Click to expand...

There are those who think they are flashing sign and are not.
This is a specific. Coupled with were he lives it may or may not be real. Assuming it isn't makes about as much sense as assuming he is.
Fact remains he was flashing sign. And coupled with his criminal behavior in the store. Yeah, he is a thug.

stonewall50 said:

I am not ignoring it. I am merely stating that gang signs do NOT make one a gangbanger. All we know is he flashed gang signs in a few pictures. That also doesn't mean he should be shot. It has no bearing on the case.

Click to expand...

You are arguing that which has not been argued. Your failure for not paying attention.

stonewall50 said:

Engaging in petty BS crimes doesn't make one a thug. It makes one petty BS...or a punk. Doesn't make this kid a hardcore gangbanger. At best you got him on stealing gum...real hardcore.

Click to expand...

Again more nonsense.
He was a thug.
As evidenced by his criminal activity in the video.

stonewall50 said:

But Trayvon. Starting a fight? He wasnt a gang member. He was a punk 17 year old who wanted to try and be bobby badass. He stole jewlery (allegedly). His crimes were nothing more than petty BS crimes too. That doesn't make him a thug. It made him a punk. Tell me you don't think you could have kicked Trayvons ass? He was a punk kid. He needed an ass kicking, but he picked the wrong guy and got shot.

Click to expand...

And again, pretending is a punk. Not pretending by engaging in actual activities makes one a thug.
They were both thugs by their own actions.

stonewall50 said:

Sure if his actions are home invasions and gangbanging dope slinging kind of crimes. But neither one of these people were doing anything but petty BS crimes. Do you call someone who steals things a thug? Or a thief?

Click to expand...

Petty bs crimes?
:naughty
Not!

Thorgasm said:

Please be honest. I am not justifying the rioting and looting. Your insistence that I am is intellectually dishonest.

Click to expand...

Any criticism of police excess equates to excuse and justification of the criminal behaviour of some protesters, which means the senators, the AG, the former Minneapolis police chief and a HOST of others critical of the police excess are also excusing and justifying criminal behaviour. Your right, it is intellectual dishonesty.

Luftwaffe said:

Too much money, just equip all of the police officers within the state and send as much are needed to stop violence.

But yes, I agree with you in that any violent protest must be stopped immediately.

Click to expand...

I think it is well worth it. This seems to be the new way these animals protest anytime someone is shot by a white officer. So anytime a shooting like this occurs, all officers and national guard folks should be put on high alert.. Then when protests start, they should be deployed and strictly told not to interveine or retaliate any action from protesters unless they start to become violent. Then it should be crushed immediately and with decisive force. Until this happens, these types of protests will continue to occur because we are lending legitimacy to them by not acting on them.

JoeTrumps said:

As usual the facts come out, it turns out liberals have been defending a thug. and now we have to listen to them try to rationalize why they are still not WRONG on this issue, and that WE are all still racists.

ah liberals. never change

Click to expand...

They've been criticising police excess, not defending Brown. Focus, nothing criminal is being defended.

Montecresto said:

They've been criticising police excess, not defending Brown. Focus, nothing criminal is being defended.

Click to expand...

Eh just let it go, this guy has his mind set, we liberals are out to destroy the world simply because we are liberal.

CanadaJohn said:

No more intellectually dishonest than your attempts to paint myself, and others, as racists because we call out black youth burning and looting in Ferguson, Missouri. You dishonestly try to discount those views by claiming we taint all blacks as such.

I'll take no lessons on intellectual honesty from a rookie in the field.

Click to expand...

We're all calling out burning and looting in the city. It's criminal, A and 2 it damages the efforts of the peaceful protesters that want police excess addressed. Care to talk about police excess? Probably not, because you're all good with the militarisation of the police.

apdst said:

In the interest of fairness, has it been confirmed that that's Brown in the video?

Click to expand...

They wouldnt have released that video in the news conference if they werent sure IMO. The liability would be disastrous.

tres borrachos said:

The whole damn thing is odd. Nobody has any clue what really happened from what I can see, which is why rush to judgments against either the cop or the dead man are both wrong.

Click to expand...

True, but the concern with law enforcement goes beyond the initial encounter to the days following that has others in law enforcement upset as well as legislators and a good many Americans who don't want our cops equipped like, looking like and acting like SF's in Iraq!

CanadaJohn said:

I don't have the answers, but it seems that the first time the police confronted the two young men, they told them to get off the street and walk on the sidewalk. When the police car pulled away, the young men kept walking in the street so the police car stopped and the Brown came up to the passenger side of the police car and was conferring with the officer in that seat. The officer either pulled his gun out for some reason or the gun was visible to Brown and it seems there was a struggle for the gun and the gun went off in the car. After the gun went off, Brown started to run away at which point the officer shot at him, wounding him, and supposedly Brown turned around to surrender and the officer kept shooting at him until he was on the ground.

There are no "facts" established at this point, but that appears to be the police "story". We'll know more when the autopsy results are disclosed, stating where Brown was hit and from what direction. If the story as presented above, or something similar, ends up being true, Brown is hardly an innocent murdered by a police officer but potentially a person who attempted to disarm and potentially murder a police officer. If the reports of the alleged "strong arm" robbery are correct, perhaps that information came over the police radio at the time Brown was at the police car talking with the officer. If so, Brown may have been trying to escape arrest.

It's all speculation, but that's one possible scenario that makes sense to me. An officer simply murdering Brown in the middle of the day in the middle of a populated street makes little sense to me.

Click to expand...

It's very possible indeed that after the initial contact where the cops told them to get out of the street, they received word about and descriptions of the suspects in the store robbery. Maybe that put the cops on alert...maybe that's why one was drawing?

That was one of my early thoughts.

It's all speculation of course.

Lursa said:

It's very possible indeed that after the initial contact where the cops told them to get out of the street, they received word about and descriptions of the suspects in the store robbery. Maybe that put the cops on alert...maybe that's why one was drawing?

That was one of my early thoughts.

It's all speculation of course.

Click to expand...

It is speculation at this point, but some things ring truer than others when common sense is all you have to go by.

apdst said:

Not much bigotry in that notion.

Then, white folks wouldn't want be policed by black cops.

Click to expand...

True...but shouldnt people be allowed to discover such things (their own bigotry) for themselves? Because sometimes, just words dont mean much.

Lursa said:

True...but shouldnt people be allowed to discover such things (their own bigotry) for themselves? Because sometimes, just words dont mean much.

Click to expand...

Discrimination is illegal and rightfully so

Montecresto said:

Certainly. I'm all about law and order, I can't stand it when these idiots ruin perfect opportunities for the public to stand up and say hell no to police excess by destroying and stealing private or public property, and I have no sympathy for these folk. But setting that aside, I do not want to see our police, the same guys we all interact with in various ways on a daily basis looking and behaving like our military, and every inch we cede will be an inch lost. As I said earlier, if a situation exceeds the limitations of law enforcement to respond adequately, then bring in the NG, and as soon as the situation is secure, put them back away.

Click to expand...

Do you really want us to wait for the NG to put a unit together to respond to school shooting? And what about a bank robberies? My point is that it takes a lot of time and prep work to bring in the NG, and they wouldn't be of any help in those cases. Or how about when you have a hostage crisis or you need to carry our a drug raid. (Side note: I'm all for legalization, but as long as the laws are they way they are, someone has to carry them out is all I'm saying). Do you really want to stretch the resources of the NG carrying out these duties?

Face it, there's a need in this country today for a rapid reaction police force that can meet an opposing force with equal or greater force. And there are some lines that aren't getting crossed by the way, but are not being as highlighted. There is no police force in the country that uses offensive style hand grenades (fragmentation, incendiary, etc.), no one carries rocket launchers, and they don't drive around in tanks armed with massive cannons. So, calling it a "militarization" is going a little far.

apdst said:

Discrimination is illegal and rightfully so

Click to expand...

I just asked for them to consider what the options *would* mean. Choosing no cops wouldnt be discrimination, nor would be providing their own. I forget the middle option but it might have been discriminatory, but as I said, it was meant to be hypothetical, not functional.

Hamster Buddha said:

Do you really want us to wait for the NG to put a unit together to respond to school shooting? And what about a bank robberies? My point is that it takes a lot of time and prep work to bring in the NG, and they wouldn't be of any help in those cases. Or how about when you have a hostage crisis or you need to carry our a drug raid. (Side note: I'm all for legalization, but as long as the laws are they way they are, someone has to carry them out is all I'm saying). Do you really want to stretch the resources of the NG carrying out these duties?

Face it, there's a need in this country today for a rapid reaction police force that can meet an opposing force with equal or greater force. And there are some lines that aren't getting crossed by the way, but are not being as highlighted. There is no police force in the country that uses offensive style hand grenades (fragmentation, incendiary, etc.), no one carries rocket launchers, and they don't drive around in tanks armed with massive cannons. So, calling it a "militarization" is going a little far.

Click to expand...

There's no justification for the militarisation of the local police. We have SWAT for school shootings and bank robberies and hostage situations. This incident went on for days, while the NG could have been there in 6 hours.

As to the rest of your post, cede an inch then a foot, next your talking about the things that your dismissing, hell no. I support the legislation to DEMILITARISE our local police departments.

Thorgasm said:

Economic disparity still exists and is not getting better.

Click to expand...

Throwing money at it isn't working either.

Montecresto said:

There's no justification for the militarisation of the local police. We have SWAT for school shootings and bank robberies and hostage situations. This incident went on for days, while the NG could have been there in 6 hours.

As to the rest of your post, cede an inch then a foot, next your talking about the things that your dismissing, hell no. I support the legislation to DEMILITARISE our local police departments.

Click to expand...

Hmm, I would of thought that you would consider SWAT teams as part of that militarization. I guess not then...

So what exactly are you talking about when you say "militarization" if you aren't referring to swat teams? Is there specific gear they are using you don't think they should have? Because everything I've seen, I would expect SWAT to have.

Mason66 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I think the most surprising thing out of that whole incident was that the only people who died were the bank robbers. I'll never understand how that many, high powered rifle rounds could be flying and no one get killed.

Montecresto said:

There's no justification for the militarisation of the local police. We have SWAT for school shootings and bank robberies and hostage situations. This incident went on for days, while the NG could have been there in 6 hours.

As to the rest of your post, cede an inch then a foot, next your talking about the things that your dismissing, hell no. I support the legislation to DEMILITARISE our local police departments.

Click to expand...

I'm still trying figure out how you demilitarize the cops.

apdst said:

I'm still trying figure out how you demilitarize the cops.

Click to expand...

Give the military equipment back to the DoD or scrap it.

I'll bet nobody has kept records, though.