I understand where you're coming from rgambs. Talking about you joining militias I find dismissive of the point you're actually trying to make. I haven't felt myself being worked up over Michael Brown in particular because of some of the points that the others are making about his specific actions (though I do still think it was an unjustified shooting... I just think it wasn't AS unjustified as a lot of the other police killings that have made the news, and especially the ones that have NOT made the major news.... there are so many that don't hit CNN or Fox that are WAY worse than the big stories we've been seeing). For the record, I am not anti-cop at all. I very much respect and appreciate good cops. I'm just anti-agro-cop and anti-killer-cop and anti-abuse-of-power-cop.
Yeah, Muskman doesn't debate, but he does add flavor so I don't bother him with cogent responses anymore. I am by no means anti-cop, I am very thankful they are around to protect innocent people. I am anti-letcopsdoastheypleasebecausethisnthat though lol
I understand where you're coming from rgambs. Talking about you joining militias I find dismissive of the point you're actually trying to make. I haven't felt myself being worked up over Michael Brown in particular because of some of the points that the others are making about his specific actions (though I do still think it was an unjustified shooting... I just think it wasn't AS unjustified as a lot of the other police killings that have made the news, and especially the ones that have NOT made the major news.... there are so many that don't hit CNN or Fox that are WAY worse than the big stories we've been seeing). For the record, I am not anti-cop at all. I very much respect and appreciate good cops. I'm just anti-agro-cop and anti-killer-cop and anti-abuse-of-power-cop.
Yeah, Muskman doesn't debate, but he does add flavor so I don't bother him with cogent responses anymore. I am by no means anti-cop, I am very thankful they are around to protect innocent people. I am anti-letcopsdoastheypleasebecausethisnthat though lol
Lol, yeah me too.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think rgambs is just pissed that the police have that authory and I understand that, I also believe every person has the right to protect them selfs and thier family......even if they are police officers, at the end of the day a cop is just a guy with family and bills just like the rest of us.. but have the balls to do a job that is dangerous,a danger to them selfs and thier families, not everybody can be a cop and not just anybody should be a cop, he did what he had to do.
Godfather.
Fuckin A Godfather!!!
Hey Rgambs, serious question...ever consider joining a militia? Lots of like minded people I have come across over the years in them that share many of your thoughts ...
Hahaha a pacifist militia man, that's a funny thought.
What thoughts are those? The ones pertaining to the constitution?
Have you ever considered moving to China? Lots of like minded people over there in charge of things that share your ideas.
More like your thoughts on government.
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
I think rgambs is just pissed that the police have that authory and I understand that, I also believe every person has the right to protect them selfs and thier family......even if they are police officers, at the end of the day a cop is just a guy with family and bills just like the rest of us.. but have the balls to do a job that is dangerous,a danger to them selfs and thier families, not everybody can be a cop and not just anybody should be a cop, he did what he had to do.
Godfather.
Fuckin A Godfather!!!
Hey Rgambs, serious question...ever consider joining a militia? Lots of like minded people I have come across over the years in them that share many of your thoughts ...
Hahaha a pacifist militia man, that's a funny thought.
What thoughts are those? The ones pertaining to the constitution?
Have you ever considered moving to China? Lots of like minded people over there in charge of things that share your ideas.
More like your thoughts on government.
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
It's not about convincing people or changing minds, it's just about trying to make good, rational points and hoping that open-minded participants will take them into consideration.
Do you not agree that government should be accountable to the people? Are you arguing that police are not agents of the government that should also be held accountable?
I think rgambs is just pissed that the police have that authory and I understand that, I also believe every person has the right to protect them selfs and thier family......even if they are police officers, at the end of the day a cop is just a guy with family and bills just like the rest of us.. but have the balls to do a job that is dangerous,a danger to them selfs and thier families, not everybody can be a cop and not just anybody should be a cop, he did what he had to do.
Godfather.
Fuckin A Godfather!!!
Hey Rgambs, serious question...ever consider joining a militia? Lots of like minded people I have come across over the years in them that share many of your thoughts ...
Hahaha a pacifist militia man, that's a funny thought.
What thoughts are those? The ones pertaining to the constitution?
Have you ever considered moving to China? Lots of like minded people over there in charge of things that share your ideas.
More like your thoughts on government.
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
It's not about convincing people or changing minds, it's just about trying to make good, rational points and hoping that open-minded participants will take them into consideration.
Do you not agree that government should be accountable to the people? Are you arguing that police are not agents of the government that should also be held accountable?
I would agree with those last two questions; however, I'd qualify that by saying 'only in cases where they should be held accountable.'
It was clearly established that Wilson was acting within the parameters we afford police to do their job, but this wasn't enough for some people. In page 85 of this long running thread, you still have people thinking Brown was a victim here as opposed to a belligerent, confrontational, and violent young man who had just blatantly stole from a convenience store, ignored modest requests from an officer to get out of the middle of the street, and assaulted a police officer prior to being shot.
The Rice and Thomas threads are tiny in comparison because people are not suggesting those officers performed well- they acknowledge the brutality and share in the outrage. This thread goes on and on because some refuse to relent on the initial position they formulated when they bought (hook, line, and sinker) 'white cop kills unarmed black child known to all as a gentle giant'.
I think rgambs is just pissed that the police have that authory and I understand that, I also believe every person has the right to protect them selfs and thier family......even if they are police officers, at the end of the day a cop is just a guy with family and bills just like the rest of us.. but have the balls to do a job that is dangerous,a danger to them selfs and thier families, not everybody can be a cop and not just anybody should be a cop, he did what he had to do.
Godfather.
Fuckin A Godfather!!!
Hey Rgambs, serious question...ever consider joining a militia? Lots of like minded people I have come across over the years in them that share many of your thoughts ...
Hahaha a pacifist militia man, that's a funny thought.
What thoughts are those? The ones pertaining to the constitution?
Have you ever considered moving to China? Lots of like minded people over there in charge of things that share your ideas.
More like your thoughts on government.
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
I have definitely seen people modify their view because of discussions here. But indon't think the main purpose of the Train is to try and change people's minds, is it?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think rgambs is just pissed that the police have that authory and I understand that, I also believe every person has the right to protect them selfs and thier family......even if they are police officers, at the end of the day a cop is just a guy with family and bills just like the rest of us.. but have the balls to do a job that is dangerous,a danger to them selfs and thier families, not everybody can be a cop and not just anybody should be a cop, he did what he had to do.
Godfather.
Fuckin A Godfather!!!
Hey Rgambs, serious question...ever consider joining a militia? Lots of like minded people I have come across over the years in them that share many of your thoughts ...
Hahaha a pacifist militia man, that's a funny thought.
What thoughts are those? The ones pertaining to the constitution?
Have you ever considered moving to China? Lots of like minded people over there in charge of things that share your ideas.
More like your thoughts on government.
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
It's not about convincing people or changing minds, it's just about trying to make good, rational points and hoping that open-minded participants will take them into consideration.
Do you not agree that government should be accountable to the people? Are you arguing that police are not agents of the government that should also be held accountable?
I would agree with those last two questions; however, I'd qualify that by saying 'only in cases where they should be held accountable.'
It was clearly established that Wilson was acting within the parameters we afford police to do their job, but this wasn't enough for some people. In page 85 of this long running thread, you still have people thinking Brown was a victim here as opposed to a belligerent, confrontational, and violent young man who had just blatantly stole from a convenience store, ignored modest requests from an officer to get out of the middle of the street, and assaulted a police officer prior to being shot.
The Rice and Thomas threads are tiny in comparison because people are not suggesting those officers performed well- they acknowledge the brutality and share in the outrage. This thread goes on and on because some refuse to relent on the initial position they formulated when they bought (hook, line, and sinker) 'white cop kills unarmed black child known to all as a gentle giant'.
That's the second time this debate should have ended.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
if you brush up against a cop they can charge you. i witnessed in my anti iraq war protest days a cop spraying someone and when they tried to run away from the cop they brushed against the cop. the kid got tackled and arrested for assaulting the cop. bullshit charge and i tried to tell the cops that. they threatened to arrest me for impeding a police officer or some bullshit.
seriously, it was like watching a referree from the WWE get bumped into by a wrestler and they get "knocked out" for a few minutes.
i don't think assaulting a cop should be a capital offense. but darren wilson chose to execute this kid.
Darren Wilson wasn't playing judge and executioner. He wasn't executing brown. He was defending himself. Legally defending himself.
Can you seriously say that any other cop wouldn't have done the same thing?
one man's righteous cop is another man's murderer.
how many times did he shoot him again?
i can't speak for any cops. but given wilson's statements to the media recently, he murdered that kid. surprised he did not sprinkle some crack on his body for good measure.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
we also have laws and law enforcement to protect us from those of us will inflect harm on us so if a person choses to live aginst the law then they have to accept what comes with it and he knew the laws well enough to know what he was doing was wrong and you can't tell me he was not aware of the possible outcome, I'm sure he thought he could bully his way out of anything but he was wrong and paid the ultamate price.... that's very blunt but very true.
Godfather.
He knew it was wrong, and it's one of the most idiotic things a person can do, but that isn't the same thing as deserving of being killed.
You cant give Police the authority to shoot people and expect them not to shoot someone when their life is in danger. What's idiotic is thinking someone can reach into a police car and start punching a cop and think your not going to get shot. What the hell are we still debating this for? There is a reason darren wilson isn't facing criminal charges. He didn't break any laws. Unlike brown. Who broke several in the moments leading up to him getting shot.
how was wilson's life in danger when wilson had a gun and brown had just his hands?
advantage cop.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
You seem to be advocating for lawlessness and rule of will. Very odd. The Constitution you referenced created a framework for laws. We have laws in place for a reason. If one chooses to break those laws there are consequences. If one chooses to assault anyone who has a weapon, they should, just out of common sense, expect to feel the impact of that weapon. If one chooses to assault a law enforcement officer, feeling the sting of a bullet doesn't seem an unreasonable or unexpected outcome. I really can't understand what you're advocating, other than neutering laws, and absolving bad behavior. And throwing out Nazi references is a sure sign that this thread may have reached an impasse. Nobody is advocating for the cops to violate illegal search and seizure. Brown was at the very least jaywalking and creating a nuisance in the street. Nobody is advocating for the supression of free speech - I don't even know what you're referencing here. Nobody is advocating for cruel and unusual punishment. Brown taking the bullet had nothing to do with administered punishment. Brown caused Wilson to fear for his safety, which led to the initial struggle in the car, and Brown was clearly a threat to public safety after he resisted arrest and started fleeing. You are way off base in your analysis. I usually see your points even when I sometimes disagree with them, but this post of yours seems to be way out in left field.
This post is in the broader context of the policing discussions that have been occuring on these boards; in which people have absolutely advocated and defended unreasonable search and seizure by saying police shouldn't need a reason to search and seize, regardless of the legality of their motives; suppression and punishment of free speech in defiance of police authority; and are now advocating for cruel and unusual punishment and due process by stating that those who assault police deserve to be killed.
I don't know where you see me advocating lawlessness, people who break the law MUST face consequences, but it should be under the due process of llaw.. I understand that safety of the officer and the public is the number one priority. I have stated plenty of times that assaulting an officer is stupid and getting shot is the likely outcome. Many of the arguments have been disargreements on what is the appropriate use of discretion in use of force, and that is fine, but many of the arguments have also features opinions not on the discretion of force, but on the very need of discretion in use of force in the first place! That is troubling and is absolutely reminiscent of the societies that have tolerated authoritarian and totalitarian regimes.
Thanks for the clarification. I was assuming a narrower context as it related to the Michael Brown thread, which is where I had a disconnect with what you were saying. I am a big proponent of fighting for our 4th amendment freedoms, and am with you on most of that. I am opposed to cops stopping and searching without cause, and am opposed to our current, and the past administrations' use of the patriot act to circumvent our Constitutional rights. So we're not far off. We disagree about what it means when some of us say Michael Brown got what he deserved. I do not see any violation of his due process (that is something he forfeited when he attacked a police officer), or see cruel and unusual punishment in his shooting. Again, that shooting was not punishment, it was consequence of the attack. It was the culmination of a highly charged chain of events, and Brown himself had a large role in the course that chain of events took. I see the shooting as a consequence of Brown's actions, and you see it as cruel and unusual punishment, somehow absolving Brown of his role. At any time he had the choice to comply, which would/should have secured his right to due process, and kept him free from cruel and unusual punishment. He determined, by his willingness to break our social contract, that he had no use for those things, and thought he was above them.
But my thoughts here are specifically about Michael Brown. In general, as I said, I am very much a proponent of liberty and constitutional protections. I am a proponent of rule of law. I am a proponent of people being able to do whatever they like as long as they don't stomp on the rights of others. I am neither pro- nor anti-police. They serve a function, and if they do it properly, society benefits from their service. If they don't, we all lose. In this specific case, since it is the Michael Brown thread, I was responding to the narrow context of this thread and place the preponderance of the responsibility for the outcome on Brown himself.
Spot on accurate. This is where the Michael Brown debate ends.
Yes,very well done Jeff.The sun must be out in Seattle today! Spot on.
Gambsy,we all are kinda in the boat here with our thinking with the exception of when the force should be administered,right?
by contrast, wilson determined the outcome when he shot him.
nobody deserves to be killed for disobeying a cop. especially when the cop rolls up to you with a chip on his shoulder.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
You seem to be advocating for lawlessness and rule of will. Very odd. The Constitution you referenced created a framework for laws. We have laws in place for a reason. If one chooses to break those laws there are consequences. If one chooses to assault anyone who has a weapon, they should, just out of common sense, expect to feel the impact of that weapon. If one chooses to assault a law enforcement officer, feeling the sting of a bullet doesn't seem an unreasonable or unexpected outcome. I really can't understand what you're advocating, other than neutering laws, and absolving bad behavior. And throwing out Nazi references is a sure sign that this thread may have reached an impasse. Nobody is advocating for the cops to violate illegal search and seizure. Brown was at the very least jaywalking and creating a nuisance in the street. Nobody is advocating for the supression of free speech - I don't even know what you're referencing here. Nobody is advocating for cruel and unusual punishment. Brown taking the bullet had nothing to do with administered punishment. Brown caused Wilson to fear for his safety, which led to the initial struggle in the car, and Brown was clearly a threat to public safety after he resisted arrest and started fleeing. You are way off base in your analysis. I usually see your points even when I sometimes disagree with them, but this post of yours seems to be way out in left field.
This post is in the broader context of the policing discussions that have been occuring on these boards; in which people have absolutely advocated and defended unreasonable search and seizure by saying police shouldn't need a reason to search and seize, regardless of the legality of their motives; suppression and punishment of free speech in defiance of police authority; and are now advocating for cruel and unusual punishment and due process by stating that those who assault police deserve to be killed.
I don't know where you see me advocating lawlessness, people who break the law MUST face consequences, but it should be under the due process of llaw.. I understand that safety of the officer and the public is the number one priority. I have stated plenty of times that assaulting an officer is stupid and getting shot is the likely outcome. Many of the arguments have been disargreements on what is the appropriate use of discretion in use of force, and that is fine, but many of the arguments have also features opinions not on the discretion of force, but on the very need of discretion in use of force in the first place! That is troubling and is absolutely reminiscent of the societies that have tolerated authoritarian and totalitarian regimes.
Thanks for the clarification. I was assuming a narrower context as it related to the Michael Brown thread, which is where I had a disconnect with what you were saying. I am a big proponent of fighting for our 4th amendment freedoms, and am with you on most of that. I am opposed to cops stopping and searching without cause, and am opposed to our current, and the past administrations' use of the patriot act to circumvent our Constitutional rights. So we're not far off. We disagree about what it means when some of us say Michael Brown got what he deserved. I do not see any violation of his due process (that is something he forfeited when he attacked a police officer), or see cruel and unusual punishment in his shooting. Again, that shooting was not punishment, it was consequence of the attack. It was the culmination of a highly charged chain of events, and Brown himself had a large role in the course that chain of events took. I see the shooting as a consequence of Brown's actions, and you see it as cruel and unusual punishment, somehow absolving Brown of his role. At any time he had the choice to comply, which would/should have secured his right to due process, and kept him free from cruel and unusual punishment. He determined, by his willingness to break our social contract, that he had no use for those things, and thought he was above them.
But my thoughts here are specifically about Michael Brown. In general, as I said, I am very much a proponent of liberty and constitutional protections. I am a proponent of rule of law. I am a proponent of people being able to do whatever they like as long as they don't stomp on the rights of others. I am neither pro- nor anti-police. They serve a function, and if they do it properly, society benefits from their service. If they don't, we all lose. In this specific case, since it is the Michael Brown thread, I was responding to the narrow context of this thread and place the preponderance of the responsibility for the outcome on Brown himself.
Spot on accurate. This is where the Michael Brown debate ends.
Yes,very well done Jeff.The sun must be out in Seattle today! Spot on.
Gambsy,we all are kinda in the boat here with our thinking with the exception of when the force should be administered,right?
by contrast, wilson determined the outcome when he shot him.
nobody deserves to be killed for disobeying a cop. especially when the cop rolls up to you with a chip on his shoulder.
Toss in punching an officer and trying to grab their gun and we would be talking about something different though- like this incident.
Not to mention the fact that when we are talking about having a 'chip on your shoulder'... Brown had a rather large one himself- evidenced by his actions right up to getting himself shot. Wilson's chip is your manifestation- presumably because he didn't ignore Brown's refusal to comply with really basic demands and he didn't walk away after getting assaulted.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
we also have laws and law enforcement to protect us from those of us will inflect harm on us so if a person choses to live aginst the law then they have to accept what comes with it and he knew the laws well enough to know what he was doing was wrong and you can't tell me he was not aware of the possible outcome, I'm sure he thought he could bully his way out of anything but he was wrong and paid the ultamate price.... that's very blunt but very true.
Godfather.
He knew it was wrong, and it's one of the most idiotic things a person can do, but that isn't the same thing as deserving of being killed.
You cant give Police the authority to shoot people and expect them not to shoot someone when their life is in danger. What's idiotic is thinking someone can reach into a police car and start punching a cop and think your not going to get shot. What the hell are we still debating this for? There is a reason darren wilson isn't facing criminal charges. He didn't break any laws. Unlike brown. Who broke several in the moments leading up to him getting shot.
how was wilson's life in danger when wilson had a gun and brown had just his hands?
advantage cop.
How about when brown was reaching for Wilson's gun while brown was punching wilson?
I have definitely seen people modify their view because of discussions here. But indon't think the main purpose of the Train is to try and change people's minds, is it?
I'm one of those who've shifted, re-thought, opened myself - granted, best I can in some realms - to other perspectives from many here. I think that's the point of this place. Put yourself out there, allow (welcome, really) others to do the same.
Opinions may not necessarily change in the end, but more often than not I've learned something valuable in the process.
So was it conclusive that Brown was reaching for Wilson's gun? Or that he charged Wilson? I must have missed that. I remember that that was Wilson's story of how it went down. Also from what I remember there were many witnesses saying different things. From Brown running away....to turning around with his hands up....to him stepping towards Wilson, or charging. My understanding was that they determined that there was not enough evidence to prosecute Wilson for murder. A very different bar than if he was right about what he did.
So was it conclusive that Brown was reaching for Wilson's gun? Or that he charged Wilson? I must have missed that. I remember that that was Wilson's story of how it went down. Also from what I remember there were many witnesses saying different things. From Brown running away....to turning around with his hands up....to him stepping towards Wilson, or charging. My understanding was that they determined that there was not enough evidence to prosecute Wilson for murder. A very different bar than if he was right about what he did.
As with most situations... there are conflicting reports as to exactly what happened that make it difficult (for us anyways) to know precisely how things transpired. People can believe what they want, but they need to interpret the information they are fed from various sources and take into account the credibility of those sources when formulating their opinions. Consider the two people in question and what we do know of them that day and event:
1. Fresh after lumping out a store owner inside his store, stealing some crap from the store, walking down the middle of the street, essentially telling an officer to 'go f**k themselves' after receiving a modest request to get out of the middle of the street, and engaging the officer in a physical confrontation... is it likely Brown went for the officer's gun while engaged in that conflict?
2. On duty, directing a young man to get out of the middle of the street, and finding himself in a physical conflict after doing so... is it likely Wilson made up some finer details to cover an overreaction?
There is a level of likelihood in both scenarios, however given what transpired, I think I'll side with Wilson in this one. The official story doesn't sound like much of a stretch given what happened prior to the incident.
It's reasonable to question what happened, but I think it's a demonstration of a heightened anti-police/ anti-establishment attitude to persist with condemning Wilson in this case after considering everything. A person may still harbour a level of uncertainty, but at a very minimum, Wilson deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Interestingly, some of the same people that have hung Wilson beseech others for rushing to judgement on others before due process occurs.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
if you brush up against a cop they can charge you. i witnessed in my anti iraq war protest days a cop spraying someone and when they tried to run away from the cop they brushed against the cop. the kid got tackled and arrested for assaulting the cop. bullshit charge and i tried to tell the cops that. they threatened to arrest me for impeding a police officer or some bullshit.
seriously, it was like watching a referree from the WWE get bumped into by a wrestler and they get "knocked out" for a few minutes.
i don't think assaulting a cop should be a capital offense. but darren wilson chose to execute this kid.
Darren Wilson wasn't playing judge and executioner. He wasn't executing brown. He was defending himself. Legally defending himself.
Can you seriously say that any other cop wouldn't have done the same thing?
one man's righteous cop is another man's murderer.
how many times did he shoot him again?
i can't speak for any cops. but given wilson's statements to the media recently, he murdered that kid. surprised he did not sprinkle some crack on his body for good measure.
Seriously Rod? You really don't want to admit this kid was the problem that was the catalyst.Thats mind blowing.
did someone actually compare policing in Alaska to the inner cities of America? wow.
Actually no. That was drawn from follow up post. Read my initial post. Was comparing difference in police confrontation strategies from show to those demonstrated by recent high profile cases. They do though deal with drugs and guns.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
we also have laws and law enforcement to protect us from those of us will inflect harm on us so if a person choses to live aginst the law then they have to accept what comes with it and he knew the laws well enough to know what he was doing was wrong and you can't tell me he was not aware of the possible outcome, I'm sure he thought he could bully his way out of anything but he was wrong and paid the ultamate price.... that's very blunt but very true.
Godfather.
He knew it was wrong, and it's one of the most idiotic things a person can do, but that isn't the same thing as deserving of being killed.
You cant give Police the authority to shoot people and expect them not to shoot someone when their life is in danger. What's idiotic is thinking someone can reach into a police car and start punching a cop and think your not going to get shot. What the hell are we still debating this for? There is a reason darren wilson isn't facing criminal charges. He didn't break any laws. Unlike brown. Who broke several in the moments leading up to him getting shot.
how was wilson's life in danger when wilson had a gun and brown had just his hands?
advantage cop.
How about when brown was reaching for Wilson's gun while brown was punching wilson?
Was there not separation between Wilson and Brown? Wilson in a car with a gun. Brown needed to be brought to justice. Not shot.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
we also have laws and law enforcement to protect us from those of us will inflect harm on us so if a person choses to live aginst the law then they have to accept what comes with it and he knew the laws well enough to know what he was doing was wrong and you can't tell me he was not aware of the possible outcome, I'm sure he thought he could bully his way out of anything but he was wrong and paid the ultamate price.... that's very blunt but very true.
Godfather.
He knew it was wrong, and it's one of the most idiotic things a person can do, but that isn't the same thing as deserving of being killed.
You cant give Police the authority to shoot people and expect them not to shoot someone when their life is in danger. What's idiotic is thinking someone can reach into a police car and start punching a cop and think your not going to get shot. What the hell are we still debating this for? There is a reason darren wilson isn't facing criminal charges. He didn't break any laws. Unlike brown. Who broke several in the moments leading up to him getting shot.
how was wilson's life in danger when wilson had a gun and brown had just his hands?
advantage cop.
How about when brown was reaching for Wilson's gun while brown was punching wilson?
Was there not separation between Wilson and Brown? Wilson in a car with a gun. Brown needed to be brought to justice. Not shot.
He got what he deserved. Sorry if that is too harsh for some. Stop fighting with the police and your chances of not being shot increase dramatically. This conversation is basically over. Those thinking that Brown should not have been shot are just being stubborn at this point. The whole "hands up, don't shoot" has been proven wrong. The fact is that Brown was shot and killed because he chose to fight a cop. He got what he had coming.
There are 81 pages in this thread. Not a chance I flip through them to show that. But at one point or another over the past year, I have read every post in this thread. So I am 100% positive I could find posts defending Brown and his actions. And for the record, I consider someone saying he didn't deserve to be shot defending his actions. He assaulted a cop. If you think he doesn't deserve to be shot, you're defending his actions.
That sounds batshit crazy. Of course assaulting a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do, and is likely to lead to getting shot, but you think assaulting a cop makes someone deserve to be shot? That's nuts.
Yes
Opinions like that are the hallmark of places like North Korea, USSR, Maoist China, Nazi Germany. This is America and we have a Constitution, it's supposed to protect us against unreasonable search and seizure, state supression of free speech, and cruel and unusual punishment, all of which are being advocated by those defending police actions.
we also have laws and law enforcement to protect us from those of us will inflect harm on us so if a person choses to live aginst the law then they have to accept what comes with it and he knew the laws well enough to know what he was doing was wrong and you can't tell me he was not aware of the possible outcome, I'm sure he thought he could bully his way out of anything but he was wrong and paid the ultamate price.... that's very blunt but very true.
Godfather.
He knew it was wrong, and it's one of the most idiotic things a person can do, but that isn't the same thing as deserving of being killed.
You cant give Police the authority to shoot people and expect them not to shoot someone when their life is in danger. What's idiotic is thinking someone can reach into a police car and start punching a cop and think your not going to get shot. What the hell are we still debating this for? There is a reason darren wilson isn't facing criminal charges. He didn't break any laws. Unlike brown. Who broke several in the moments leading up to him getting shot.
how was wilson's life in danger when wilson had a gun and brown had just his hands?
advantage cop.
How about when brown was reaching for Wilson's gun while brown was punching wilson?
Was there not separation between Wilson and Brown? Wilson in a car with a gun. Brown needed to be brought to justice. Not shot.
He got what he deserved. Sorry if that is too harsh for some. Stop fighting with the police and your chances of not being shot increase dramatically. This conversation is basically over. Those thinking that Brown should not have been shot are just being stubborn at this point. The whole "hands up, don't shoot" has been proven wrong. The fact is that Brown was shot and killed because he chose to fight a cop. He got what he had coming.
This is, I think, the third time you've said words to the effect that "this conversation is over" or "this debate should be over".
Others obviously disagree. If you feel you have nothing else to say, then just take a deep breath and walk away from the thread. If you can't do that, then you have too much invested in needing to be right and convincing everyone else of your opinion.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
This was another eyeopening segment from this American life.
Nikole Hannah-Jones reports on a school district that accidentally stumbled on an integration program in recent years. It's the Normandy School District in Normandy, Missouri. Normandy is on the border of Ferguson, Missouri, and the district includes the high school that Michael Brown attended.
This is really ridiculous. We should protest more whenever someone robs a store and attacks a cop. I consider those who are protesting and supporting lawlessness to be on the same level as those Westboro baptist church waco's
I would imagine that if someone robbed a store and attacked a cop and no charges resulted that there would be some protesting.
Agreed, but still dont understand why people are protesting in support of a criminal and criticizing the police officer who did what he was trained to do. Its not a race issue, but those who are out there yelling with their hands in the air are making it into one.
White cop/Black kid....definitely a race issue
Death isn't the usual result of jaywalking and/or stealing cigars. A lot of outrage exists at how the grand jury process was handled. There are definitely some strange things that happened.
Amen!
To the Rudy Giuliani regurgitators, black on black crime goes punished. Cop on black crime not so much.
only from the mouth of an ignorant white supremacist racist! appalling
Comments
I am by no means anti-cop, I am very thankful they are around to protect innocent people.
I am anti-letcopsdoastheypleasebecausethisnthat though lol
Funny you should say that about China, it looks like I am going there next year...paid for by your tax $. I need to start to my research on surf and fishing.
As far as debating, does anyone ever convince anyone of anything one here? Why bother, I just do....benchwarmers debate if you ask me, but I am very simple and try to stick w/ stuff I know.
Do you not agree that government should be accountable to the people?
Are you arguing that police are not agents of the government that should also be held accountable?
It was clearly established that Wilson was acting within the parameters we afford police to do their job, but this wasn't enough for some people. In page 85 of this long running thread, you still have people thinking Brown was a victim here as opposed to a belligerent, confrontational, and violent young man who had just blatantly stole from a convenience store, ignored modest requests from an officer to get out of the middle of the street, and assaulted a police officer prior to being shot.
The Rice and Thomas threads are tiny in comparison because people are not suggesting those officers performed well- they acknowledge the brutality and share in the outrage. This thread goes on and on because some refuse to relent on the initial position they formulated when they bought (hook, line, and sinker) 'white cop kills unarmed black child known to all as a gentle giant'.
how many times did he shoot him again?
i can't speak for any cops. but given wilson's statements to the media recently, he murdered that kid. surprised he did not sprinkle some crack on his body for good measure.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
advantage cop.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
nobody deserves to be killed for disobeying a cop. especially when the cop rolls up to you with a chip on his shoulder.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Not to mention the fact that when we are talking about having a 'chip on your shoulder'... Brown had a rather large one himself- evidenced by his actions right up to getting himself shot. Wilson's chip is your manifestation- presumably because he didn't ignore Brown's refusal to comply with really basic demands and he didn't walk away after getting assaulted.
Opinions may not necessarily change in the end, but more often than not I've learned something valuable in the process.
1. Fresh after lumping out a store owner inside his store, stealing some crap from the store, walking down the middle of the street, essentially telling an officer to 'go f**k themselves' after receiving a modest request to get out of the middle of the street, and engaging the officer in a physical confrontation... is it likely Brown went for the officer's gun while engaged in that conflict?
2. On duty, directing a young man to get out of the middle of the street, and finding himself in a physical conflict after doing so... is it likely Wilson made up some finer details to cover an overreaction?
There is a level of likelihood in both scenarios, however given what transpired, I think I'll side with Wilson in this one. The official story doesn't sound like much of a stretch given what happened prior to the incident.
It's reasonable to question what happened, but I think it's a demonstration of a heightened anti-police/ anti-establishment attitude to persist with condemning Wilson in this case after considering everything. A person may still harbour a level of uncertainty, but at a very minimum, Wilson deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Interestingly, some of the same people that have hung Wilson beseech others for rushing to judgement on others before due process occurs.
Others obviously disagree. If you feel you have nothing else to say, then just take a deep breath and walk away from the thread. If you can't do that, then you have too much invested in needing to be right and convincing everyone else of your opinion.
Nikole Hannah-Jones reports on a school district that accidentally stumbled on an integration program in recent years. It's the Normandy School District in Normandy, Missouri. Normandy is on the border of Ferguson, Missouri, and the district includes the high school that Michael Brown attended.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/562/the-problem-we-all-live-with?act=1#play
Edit: Sarcasm