# Ferguson Decision



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

I just overheard Wolf Blitzer on CNN say that the grand jury has reached a decision and it will be made public in a little while.

This is where the rubber will meet the road...

TRellis


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

I sometimes wonder if these pinheads in the media actually think before they speak...

Case in point...

There was just a discussion on CNN about the possible charges that the police officer faces. The discussion then turned to what might happen if he is not indicted. They obviously spoke about the possibilities of violence, blah, blah, blah. 

Then it was mentioned that if he is not indicted, *he could then be charged with "civil rights violations". *

We have all heard this many times over the last few months, but my problem with this is either he violated someone's civil rights or he did not. It should not be held over his head as a possibility in the event that he is not indicted locally.

Many people in the Ferguson area have complained that the local grand jury process has taken too long, yet they have not complained about the federal civil rights violation investigation which has taken just as long and also not come to a conclusion.

Or am I missing something where the feds cannot file charges until the possibility of local charges have been depleted? Is it a "professional courtesy" type thing or a "payback" kinda thing because he wasn't charged locally?

Trellis

ETA: Now they are saying the announcement will take place in early evening. I guess Al and Jesse could not get an earlier flight to St. Louis. 

And now outrage expressed by the Brown family attorney because they have not been given an "agreed upon" earlier notification. :facepalm:


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

I just heard the decision was going to be known at 9 P.M. tonight.

Why in the world would that make ANY sense :facepalm: , There is a conspiracy brewing on this deal..


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

Reporting now says they expect decision to be made public at 9 pm Eastern, 8 pm Ferguson

Why in the world would you want to do that at night when shaky emotions would be at peak and fueled by who knows what? 

Just seems it would have made better sense to plan an early morning announcement.

Trellis, NO they don't think before they speak. Heard on the radio CommieNewsNetwork did a poll already of what public BELIEVES outcome should be. :shrug: Since a total of NONE of the public have seen evidence, why poll their opinion? Of course, their job is to sensationalize and exploit.

At this point, I don't even know if it makes much difference. The media (MOST media) has done everything they can to encourage the highest level of reaction to be mustered. 

.........Buncha parasite puss suckin worm ........:grumble:

Naw, sorry that is insulting to both puss and worms.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

partndn said:


> Reporting now says they expect decision to be made public at 9 pm Eastern, 8 pm Ferguson
> 
> Why in the world would you want to do that at night when shaky emotions would be at peak and fueled by who knows what?



Al's and Jesse's flights were delayed? 

You know that you cannot have a really good riot without the kings of muckraking!!!

TRellis


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)

Have followed this case very closely and really hope they don't decide to go after this officer JUST to prevent all hell from breaking lose. Stay safe if we have any members in the area!


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

What time do the Liquor stores close in Ferguson??:buds:


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

fixitguy said:


> What time do the Liquor stores close in Ferguson??:buds:


*********************
usually isn't an option, unless you're packing enough heat and willing to use it!


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

I just heard a news bit on the radio, concern about riots not only in Ferguson but nation wide. Nation wide? That's new to me.


----------



## lindamarie (Jul 9, 2013)

trulytricia....there's a group already gathered in union square new york


----------



## Litlbits (Jan 6, 2014)

Just my thoughts on the reasons to announce decision at 8:00pm CT are that it allows most everyone to get home from work, reduces the chance of traffic Rush hour gridlock , gives law enforcement time to get in place, national guard time to set up and establish communication command center in south St Louis and get in position in Ferguson and Clayton.

Concrete barriers and fencing have been moved into place in Clayton and other target areas. Schools announced closings for any activities that were scheduled for tonight and are closed all day tomorrow. 

75 protesters are already at Chambers Rd and West Florissant near the airport and are blocking traffic. God help us all. This is not going to be good.


----------



## Litlbits (Jan 6, 2014)

Yes, protests scheduled in New York, Boston, Chicago and LA just to name a few.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

trulytricia said:


> I just heard a news bit on the radio, concern about riots not only in Ferguson but nation wide. Nation wide? That's new to me.


The news is hyping this a lot. I'd wager very little will happen nationwide and far less in Ferguson than predicted. I know some trouble makers will act up but they are scum and always looking for a reason to take to the streets.


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

Hope you are right poppy. Thought of people rioting all over really sounds organized.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

No indictment....

I hope that Ferguson is still standing tomorrow.

Trellis

Al & Jesse... That is your cue!!!


----------



## wendle (Feb 22, 2006)

Link?


----------



## DAVID In Wisconsin (Dec 3, 2002)

I am sure that Al & Jessie will be there to encourage burning, looting and rioting.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

wendle said:


> Link?


No link...

Live on TV...

TRellis


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

one of many links

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/uncertainty-fuels-speculation-ferguson-decision-27127432


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

DAVID In Wisconsin said:


> I am sure that Al & Jessie will be there to encourage burning, looting and rioting.


And getting their loot explicitly the high price liquor.


----------



## FireMaker (Apr 3, 2014)

With the state coming back with no bill, the Feds will complete their "investigation" and charge Ofc. Wilson with a civil rights violation. Typical. Then there is the civil suit agn the agency as well as the officer. Only need preponderance of proof, beyond all reasonable doubt not requiem red in the civil action.


----------



## wendle (Feb 22, 2006)

Found it


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

the emperor is about to speak??


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

FireMaker said:


> With the state coming back with no bill, the Feds will complete their "investigation" and charge Ofc. Wilson with a civil rights violation. Typical. Then there is the civil suit agn the agency as well as the officer. Only need preponderance of proof, beyond all reasonable doubt not requiem red in the civil action.


I doubt it. The Feds haven't yet charged Zimmerman in the Florida shooting. They usually just let it slide rather than say they decided not to prosecute.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

partndn said:


> the emporer is about to speak??


That would be puke face, the lieing fraud.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

I can't imagine what that fool thinks he could add..

I know what _I _think he will add...... feces. lots of it.

the reporters there who asked the prosecutor questions make me vomit as much as o'fuhrer


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

Ahh YES!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Darn, Criminal Minds isn't on. CSI-I'm yours, I don't want to vomit my fried chicken ,scalpoed taters and broclli with cheeze. Good night.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

Well.......it's started - gunfire, and then tear gas after some tried 
to overturn a police vehicle and I'll be frank and state that the 'trigger'
that set it off (whether premeditated or not....who can say),
but as soon as BARRY started to talk......it began!!! Coincidence?

I think not.


Can anyone ever remember a time when a prior president
happened to take a "personal" interest in what happened 
to a private citizen somewhere in the nation that he didn't 
have a personal relationship with? This usurper-in-chief has 
done it multiple times; the beer fest with the police sgt and
the angry black professor.....the Trayvon Martin case and
now Michael Brown. His opening statement was to the effect
that we are a nation of laws, yet only a couple days prior,
apparently decided that applied to the rest of the nation, but
not him; he chose to "make his own law" by an act of E.O. 
and to grant amnesty to millions of illegals. 
I have to think that he wants to have this break out into a 
national disaster in order for him to achieve other goals that he has in mind......probably martial law?


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

I'm wondering what's up with the fireworks in the split screen that I'm seeing, while ding dong rambles endlessly

"and uh.. a uh. communities of color 

uh....... uh...... aren't just making these things up. uh.........

uh....


uh....... "

guess what doofus.. the issue of color will NEVER go away, because you can't stop BRINGING UP COLOR!!!!!!!!


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I was watching CBS when they came on with the special report. The speaker (chief of police or something) was giving all the details about the shooting and how it all went down. Got to the part just before Wilson and Brown came in contact when the news interrupted and said, "there you just heard it, no indictment of officer Darren Wilson". No, you didn't just hear it. They interrupted the interpretation of the incident. Really ticked me off because I hadn't heard the whole story and the findings were not to be released until the end of the statement.

I almost laughed when 0bama talked about laws and following the law.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Sort of anti-climactic, isn't it?

As many here predicted, those "eye witnesses" whose claims to the media Brown was shot down like a dog in the streets, turned out to be bogus. They're the ones who should be brought up on charges of inciting the riots. Their lies are at the base of this whole situation. Specifically Brown's accomplice in the quick mart robbery.


----------



## thestartupman (Jul 25, 2010)

I assume that all these criminals, that are damaging property will be charged with hate crimes?


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

thestartupman said:


> I assume that all these criminals, that are damaging property will be charged with hate crimes?


:hysterical:


Wouldn't that be somethin'!!! 

Oh my...


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

partndn said:


> I'm wondering what's up with the fireworks in the split screen that I'm seeing, while ding dong rambles endlessly
> 
> "and uh.. a uh. communities of color
> 
> ...


Those are teargas canisters being fired!


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

copperkid3 said:


> Well.......it's started - gunfire, and then tear gas after some tried
> to overturn a police vehicle and I'll be frank and state that the 'trigger'
> that set it off (whether premeditated or not....who can say),
> but as soon as BARRY started to talk......it began!!! Coincidence?
> ...


Are you insinuating that what he said was code for - "Let the games begin!!!" 

How sad, but predictable. I wonder what all of those individuals that were insulted because the LEO's were preparing for violence think now since the LEO's were right. Are they going they going to admit that they were wrong?

TRellis


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

Yeah, finally the blow hard stopped and i see that's tear gas.

At least looks like they have better plan than last time. I truly hope nobody gets hurt.. and that biz don't get all messed up.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

I am not proud that I have been watching CNN the last fifteen minutes. Seems to me the media tried to make it more than it was...everyone was positioned for a major drama.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

If you were listening to the prosecutor's statements, did you notice how many times he mentioned Epic Smoldering poo? I mean.. Eric Holder?

I was wondering if that was intentional, to emphasize that Holder was consulted with and in agreement with the procedures they had followed in this process.

It certainly drove home the point that Holder was fully aware of every step they took. And I kinda thought there was a hidden msg there.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

TRellis said:


> Are you insinuating that what he said was code for - *"Let the games begin!!!" *
> 
> How sad, but predictable. I wonder what all of those individuals that were insulted because the LEO's
> were preparing for violence think now since the LEO's were right. Are they going they going to admit that they were wrong?
> ...


**********************
I'm saying that the prior 'meeting' that he had with some of the 
organizers of the "protests" that were planned .....included the
timing of when it would start. Can't be any simpler than to 
say: "When I start my talk about the decision.....*LET THE GAMES BEGIN!*!!"

ETA: There are at least (2) St. Louis county police vehicles on fire now.


----------



## partndn (Jun 18, 2009)

A councilwoman in Ferguson just gave a fantastic example of what's wrong with that town on Hannity.

Wow.


----------



## CajunSunshine (Apr 24, 2007)

TRellis said:


> I just overheard Wolf Blitzer on CNN say that the grand jury has reached a decision and it will be made public in a little while.
> 
> This is where the rubber will meet the road...
> 
> TRellis


Here is what the rubber hitting the road sounds like. I posted the links to the action from the ground in the Current Events forum:

One of the links is the St. Louis County police scanner...they are having a rough time of it.

http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/sp...s-etc-re-ferguson-protesters.html#post7296699


.


----------



## CajunSunshine (Apr 24, 2007)

trulytricia said:


> I just heard a news bit on the radio, concern about riots not only in Ferguson but nation wide. Nation wide? That's new to me.


Yes, nationwide...as in protests have been organized in over 100 cities. See posts #9 and #10 in this thread in our Current Events forum:

http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/sp...een-fergusons-cops-supporters-re-verdict.html



.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

No one seems to mention that if that kid just surrendered to the police, he would still be alive.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Well, there's no better way to demonstrate that you're good people who are being persecuted by a brutal police department than by looting and burning your town! :facepalm:


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

Now there is a store on fire; reports of looting and breaking windows, 
throwing bricks. Some people have been injured from the thrown items.

Interstate 44 in St. Louis (both east & westbound) are being blocked 
by crowds numbering in the hundreds; traffic cannot get thru.

Police are now set up on the scene and it looks like the protesters will be moved out shortly.

Expect more violence.....


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

willow_girl said:


> Well, there's no better way to demonstrate that you're good people who are being persecuted by a brutal police department than by looting and burning your town! :facepalm:



I think to myself.........are people REALLY that  stupid?
And yeah, they really are.

And they call folks who want to live in the mountains off grid "crazy".
Sheesh.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

DS & family live in Ballwin, a western suburb and will be coming here maybe by now...certainly hope they have safe travel...I'd think they could go W. then turn S to get to the interstate...


----------



## Ridge_Runner (Dec 13, 2008)

copperkid3 said:


> Well.......it's started - gunfire, and then tear gas after some tried
> to overturn a police vehicle and I'll be frank and state that the 'trigger'
> that set it off (whether premeditated or not....who can say),
> but as soon as BARRY started to talk......it began!!! Coincidence?
> ...


 
You have hit the nail on the head. Obama has two more years to unleash his evil hoping to destroy this country and declare marshall law....making him king. God help us.


----------



## Ridge_Runner (Dec 13, 2008)

copperkid3 said:


> Well.......it's started - gunfire, and then tear gas after some tried
> to overturn a police vehicle and I'll be frank and state that the 'trigger'
> that set it off (whether premeditated or not....who can say),
> but as soon as BARRY started to talk......it began!!! Coincidence?
> ...


 
You have hit the nail on the head. Obama has two more years to unleash his evil hoping to destroy this country and declare marshall law....making him king. God help us.


----------



## tweber (Oct 13, 2014)

The only store not looted was a pay-less shoe store................... They were having a sale on WORK BOOTS!!!!!!! LOL


----------



## SteveD(TX) (May 14, 2002)

tweber said:


> The only store not looted was a pay-less shoe store................... They were having a sale on WORK BOOTS!!!!!!! LOL


The way I heard it, was that the Pay-Less store WAS looted. And the work boots were the only things NOT taken.


----------



## SteveD(TX) (May 14, 2002)

Marshal law and shooting looters on site MIGHT work.


----------



## scooter (Mar 31, 2008)

A good way to disperse the rioter's is to fly over and drop job application pamphlets. 
These rioters that have been down there this whole time don't have jobs, so we are probably supporting them, so that tells me that the taxpayers are also paying for them to riot, loot and destroy everything they get a chance to torch.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

This is just a drop in the bucket. Wait til the day comes when the welfare checks and food stamps dont show up in the mail !!!


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

Even most animals know not to poo where they eat and sleep, some people not so much....:hammer:


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

After declaring a state of emergency days ago, and moving National Guard troops into ready positions, our stalwart Governor and local authorities left them twiddling their thumbs while 25+ businesses burned to the ground.

Oh, did I mention the Governor and all the local authorities are democrats? Can't upset your base by enforcing the law.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

I can't help but think that next year the insurance rates for businesses will see a huge increase in the Ferguson area. It's going to put more strain on the local store owners and result in further economic deterioration for the community. This in turn will fuel more debate over why a community such as Ferguson is so poor while others are doing better.

One major contributing cause is happening at this moment.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

Nate_in_IN said:


> I can't help but think that next year the insurance rates for businesses will see a huge increase in the Ferguson area. It's going to put more strain on the local store owners and result in further economic deterioration for the community. This in turn will fuel more debate over why a community such as Ferguson is so poor while others are doing better.
> 
> One major contributing cause is happening at this moment.


 This is where I get so frustrated. There are reasons there are no gas stations in certain areas of my city. Maybe civic and community duty should be taught in the early years.


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)

Loved how Nobama used his entire press conference to blame law enforcement. This moron stoops to new lows every time he's on tv....I now expect him to send White House officials and investigators to EVERY officer involved shooting death and by that I mean send them to support the thug of course! Just like the Trayvon case the WH gets involved before they know the facts and end up siding with the thug.


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)




----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Ozarks Tom said:


> After declaring a state of emergency days ago, and moving National Guard troops into ready positions, our stalwart Governor and local authorities left them twiddling their thumbs while 25+ businesses burned to the ground.
> 
> Oh, did I mention the Governor and all the local authorities are democrats? Can't upset your base by enforcing the law.


What I cant figure out is why not wait til this morning to tell what the grand jury results were. There would have been 25 businesses open with owners and employees there to defend their livelyhood ?


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

Taking a lead from the famously effective "Spooky" campaign, modify same aircraft to use similar equipment to deliver golf balls. Talk about a quick and decisive looter control device. :thumb:

After two or three rounds of looters seeing Spooky lazily circling overhead I do believe the streets would empty quickly.


----------



## hippygirl (Apr 3, 2010)

Hoosier Cowboy said:


>


I have NEVER understood the mentality of those who destroy their communities in the wake of some event/announcement with which they disagree...never.

Now if "I" were POd enough and soooo full of "righteous indignation" that I felt the only way to alleviate my anguish would be to go out and destroy something, I might target the SOURCE of my anger, not the community in general. 

So why aren't they attacking the police station or the courthouse? I'll tell you why...THEY ARE ALL COWARDS. They know if they arrived en masse at the police station or courthouse and started their carp, they would probably be met with equal/greater force and some would surely die.

They "think" they're slick and all that rot, but any onlooker with half a brain knows they're using the "event du jour" merely as an excuse to do as they please...and, for the most part, they're getting away with it.


----------



## countryfied2011 (Jul 5, 2011)

Hoosier Cowboy said:


>


it is funny how things get around, that actual picture was from shoe store looting during NBA Championship in 2009. 

http://www.sneakerfiles.com/2009/06/15/shoe-store-looted-during-los-angeles-lakers-riots/

I told DH last night the biggest problem in this country is the media(social or otherwise) everything gets so distorted including eye witness accounts

eta for some reason the link is not working anymore...but just do a google image search and you find the picture everywhere and used in all type of media


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

countryfied2011 said:


> it is funny how things get around, that actual picture was from shoe store looting during NBA Championship in 2009.
> 
> http://www.sneakerfiles.com/2009/06/15/shoe-store-looted-during-los-angeles-lakers-riots/
> 
> I told DH last night the biggest problem in this country is the media(social or otherwise) everything gets so distorted including eye witness accounts


It does not change the interpretation. I read that 60 or so buildings burned down.

Basically people with no sweat invested in what they get have no respect for those who do work. They get stuck in childhood where things magically appear for you and you never question how they got there. You just use them. And a temper tantrum gets attention you want.


----------



## countryfied2011 (Jul 5, 2011)

And the more we talk about it or watch it on tv the more it is glorified....jmho

I also believe there are numerous groups that are paid to go around the country and keep the fires stirred or burned..


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

As I understand it:

Mike Brown stole items from a store.
It was reported to police.
A policeman attempted to stop and question Mike Brown.
Mike Brown was uncooperative.
Mike Brown assaulted the policeman while he was still in the police car.
Shots were fired inside the car.
Mike Brown's blood was found on the car.
Mike Brown started to run away.
Policeman gave pursuit.
Mike Brown turned around and (it's not perfectly clear here) likely charged the policeman.
Policeman fired shots killing Mike Brown.

I see at least 5 things Mike Brown did that resulted in his death. If he had done 0, 1, 2, 3, or even 4 of them, he would still be alive.

If he hadn't committed robbery/shoplifting, he would still be alive.
If he had obeyed the policeman and stopped, he would still be alive.
If he had not assaulted the policeman, he would still be alive.
If he had not run away, he would still be alive.
If he had not charged the policeman, he would still be alive.

What in the heck is wrong with the media that they can't explain this as simply as that?


----------



## FireMaker (Apr 3, 2014)

Excellent presentation. Media is unable to do the same. They must agitate the dedication so there is more news, longer.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

SteveD(TX) said:


> Marshal law and shooting looters on site MIGHT work.


What might work better is to tell the residents "since you don't want the police to kill people and enforce the law we will only protect the city property." See how long that will work.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

MoonRiver said:


> What in the heck is wrong with the media that they can't explain this as simply as that?


It actually is a logical progress of a wrong start - the media painted themselves into this corner years ago and rather then bite the bullet and get out, they've made it home.

The basic idea is that the police, mostly white, arrest and the courts, also mostly white, convict a much higher percentage of black men than white men. From most media type's perspective, it can not possibly be that this is due to a negative factor of race as they clearly know the history of white racism and no place that black people find themselves is due to anything else. That is the assumption.

Now to the result of taking this idea re: masses and apply it to individuals. It is due to racism that Brown behaved like he did, which is similar to many black youths. And since the mass is not responsible and the *********** system is, then Brown must also be not responsible and the victim of the *********** system.

And there it is- the media dare not say otherwise as screams of "blaming the victim" and "you think black people are genetically criminal" arise. They can not get to what applies to most may not apply to the individual. They can not say that this black man was wrong without thinking this endangers the basic premise that white racism is the sole reason for everything.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

where I want to said:


> The basic idea is that the police, mostly white, arrest and the courts, also mostly white, convict a much higher percentage of black men than white men. From most media type's perspective, it can not possibly be that this is due to a negative factor of race as they clearly know the history of white racism and no place that black people find themselves is due to anything else. That is the assumption.


Yes, it's a general frustration with a system they believe is inherently unfair. While it's difficult to justify violence and looting, I think their belief that the system is unfair is sincere.

It didn't help matters any that they let the defense take part in the grand jury proceeding. It's not a level playing field, and they know it.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> It didn't help matters any that they let the defense take part in the grand jury proceeding. It's not a level playing field, and they know it.


Yes-that pesky part of the law that says a man's entitled to representation. Inconvenient to be bothered with that when you need his testimony and he won't show up without one.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

where I want to said:


> Yes-that pesky part of the law that says a man's entitled to representation. Inconvenient to be bothered with that when you need his testimony and he won't show up without one.


No, you are not entitled to be heard at all during a grand jury proceeding.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> No, you are not entitled to be heard at all during a grand jury proceeding.


He was not the one entitled to a hearing- the grand jury was the one entitled to ask for witnesses. Or I suppose the prosecutor could ask him to come.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

where I want to said:


> Or I suppose the prosecutor could ask him to come.


Which was the case, even after the prosecutor conferred with the Attorney General Eric Holder.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> Yes, it's a general frustration with a system they believe is inherently unfair. While it's *difficult* to justify violence and looting, I think their belief that the system is unfair is sincere.
> 
> It didn't help matters any that they let the defense take part in the grand jury proceeding. It's not a level playing field, and they know it.


It's not difficult, it's impossible. There is no justification. 

I have been angry and outraged, so angry if I had a gun in my hand "in the moment" I might be writing this from prison today. But never did it cross my mind to go steal from others and destroy the property of people who have nothing to do with my issue that I'm angry about. 

That the actual protestors didn't pack up their tent and go home last night when the trouble started, so the fires could be put out and some criminals rounded up, is about as selfish an act as you could ever want to see. So full of arrogance and misguided self-rightousness, it was sickening. 

If it would not have been for all the attention and the race issue, the case would have never gone before a grand jury in the first place. The prosecutor would have declined it, period. But to set aside any perception of "insider trading" or discrimination, the case was put before the grand jury. All that time spent examining the incident to the nth degree, and look what happened anyway. 

I feel so sorry for the people who live there and just want to go about their lives.


----------



## Guest123 (Oct 10, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Yes, it's a general frustration with a system they believe is inherently unfair. While it's difficult to justify violence and looting, I think their belief that the system is unfair is sincere.
> 
> It didn't help matters any that they let the defense take part in the grand jury proceeding. It's not a level playing field, and they know it.


People tend to comprehend things and build their beliefs around things that directly benefit them and do not care how it harms others. Kind of like perfectly able bodied people not wanting to work but expect healthcare insurance to be given to them.....


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I wonder if anyone on the grand jury knew about the faking of the extent of Wilson's injuries.
http://www.snopes.com/info/news/wilson.asp


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> I wonder if anyone on the grand jury knew about the faking of the extent of Wilson's injuries.
> http://www.snopes.com/info/news/wilson.asp


LOL, I wonder if a prosecutor has ever used snopes as evidence in a trial!!!

I'm going out on a limb as I have not read the testimony given to the grand jury, but I would be surprised if there wasn't testimony from a doctor who observed and treated Officer Wilsons injuries.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

Don't shoot, but it's OK to loot? What's up with that? :hammer:


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

willow_girl said:


> Don't shoot, but it's OK to loot? What's up with that? :hammer:


I don't think anyone says it's OK to loot.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Danaus29 said:


> I wonder if anyone on the grand jury knew about the faking of the extent of Wilson's injuries.
> http://www.snopes.com/info/news/wilson.asp


Did Wilson fake the extent of his injuries?
Did the police?

Why should the grand jury be told about something posted on a social media site? They would have been working for years if they had to look at all the garbage posted on the Internet.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Why should the grand jury be told about something posted on a social media site? They would have been working for years if they had to look at all the garbage posted on the Internet.


I doubt that the social media postings were used in this case because the prosecutor was on the cop's side. But if a prosecutor was trying to convict you or me and thought a social media post would help his case, you can bet that he would try to introduce it as evidence.


----------



## CajunSunshine (Apr 24, 2007)

hippygirl said:


> I have NEVER understood the mentality of those who destroy their communities in the wake of some event/announcement with which they disagree...never.




They do it because they can.



.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

I just saw the video showing the reaction of Michael Brown's step father. Frustrated or not, it shows the attitudes Michael Brown experienced in his home. I have zero empathy at this point.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

The original story of the extent of the injuries came from a social media site. That photo wasn't even Wilson. Look how it was plastered all over the place as being the truth.

This is the real photo of Wilson's injury.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/darren-wilson-picture-michael-brown-shooting

So now answer this, how did that occur when Wilson was supposedly sitting in his car? 
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/25/justice/ferguson-grand-jury-documents/index.html

I personally don't think the whole true story was ever told. I don't think it ever will be told.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Systems Broke, system's broke....sounds like more Hope and Change garbage. These people can't do anything right except make up lame slogans.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Danaus29 said:


> The original story of the extent of the injuries came from a social media site. That photo wasn't even Wilson. Look how it was plastered all over the place as being the truth.
> 
> This is the real photo of Wilson's injury.
> http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/darren-wilson-picture-michael-brown-shooting
> ...


I heard from one of the coroners , there was a bullet hole in Browns hand from when he attempted to take away the gun from Wilson in his car.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

OK, I'm not positive about these details & I'm probably going to get bashed for this but........I think Wilson should have been indicted.

As best as I can tell, Brown was anywhere from 30' to 100'+ away (again, details are sketchy/confusing) from Wilson when the officer killed him. It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim. 

I'm presuming that Wilson knew Brown was unarmed. Regardless, from what I'm reading, he had time to try to disable Brown before resorting to deadly force.

JMcolor-blindO.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

But think about it, you want to get to someone setting in the driver's side of a car in America, can you do it with your right hand? And can you hit someone on the right side of their face with your right hand?

ETA, no gunpowder residue on Brown:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/u...-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?_r=0


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> Well, there's no better way to demonstrate that you're good people who are being persecuted by a brutal police department than by looting and burning your town! :facepalm:


Well said, Willow.

:thumb:


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

And......I also agree with Brown's parents on the need for body cameras for all LE.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> But think about it, you want to get to someone setting in the driver's side of a car in America, can you do it with your right hand? And can you hit someone on the right side of their face with your right hand?
> 
> ETA, no gunpowder residue on Brown:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/u...-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?_r=0


According to the prosecutor in his statement last night Brown's blood was found on the gun, and there were close range powder burns in the wound on his thumb.

There's no question there were two shots fired within the car, one bullet was found inside the driver's door, the other not found but the casing was in the car.

I doubt the prosecutor would made those statements without verifying evidence, knowing he was releasing all the evidence for public inspection.

If you're right handed, in the heat of the moment you'll use your right hand to land a blow. Maybe not the best angle, but what comes natural, especially if you're left hand is busy trying to pry a gun out of someone's hand.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

Txsteader said:


> OK, I'm not positive about these details & I'm probably going to get bashed for this but........I think Wilson should have been indicted.
> 
> As best as I can tell, Brown was anywhere from 30' to 100'+ away (again, details are sketchy/confusing) from Wilson when the officer killed him. It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim.
> 
> ...


Pleeeeease do not take this as bashing in any way, shape or form.

Have you ever seen cops shoot??? Remember, within the last year or so there was an incident in NY city where two cops fired almost 20 rounds at some guy and never hit him, but did hit several innocent by-standers? Even Darren Wilson fired 12 or so rounds and only hit Brown six or so times. He even allegedly missed him when they were tussling in the car and one of the two rounds fired during the tussle was never recovered so I assume it went through the open window. 

Interesting sidebar: In North Carolina, police officers have to receive a minimum score of 70 out of 100 for both the day shoot and the night shoot. Private security individuals (read as rent-a-cops) have to receive a minimum score of 80 for both day and night shoots. Does that make sense???

I am unsure if Wilson had a taser, but according to media reports concerning the evidence, Wilson was getting his butt kicked and feared for his life. Not many can shoot straight during that state of mind.

The whole Hollywood "shoot to disable" scenario is nothing but a myth. I have known many that were much better shots than I and they nor I would ever try a "shoot to disable" shot. I like living too much to stake my life on a shot like that.

By the by, my score was 98/97.

TRellis


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Txsteader said:


> OK, I'm not positive about these details & I'm probably going to get bashed for this but........I think Wilson should have been indicted.
> 
> As best as I can tell, Brown was anywhere from 30' to 100'+ away (again, details are sketchy/confusing) from Wilson when the officer killed him. It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim.
> 
> ...


I certainly hope no one bashes you for your post. I think that is the sort of well-reasoned, critical thought we should all take with the evidence, now that it is released, in developing our opinions. 

I do see two issues with your reasoning, though. 

First, I think that the distances involved did get muddled up. I heard CNN make the same misunderstanding, when they started that Wilson was 150 ft away from Brown when he shot him. Wilson's testimony was that his final volley was when Brown was 8-10 ft away. Jeffery Toobin jumped all over this (liberal hack that he is), and said that it PROVED that Wilson was lying about the whole thing. 

The forensic evidence showed that the first volley happened 150 ft away from the cruiser, and the final volley happened 25 ft closer (essentially proving that Wilson came back at him). Between the shots in the car, and the first volley, Wilson pursued Brown on foot. 

Doing the math, that means that Brown ran 150 ft from the car in the time it took Wilson to get out and run 115 ft. The first volley happened at that range of 35 ft, then Brown came back toward Wilson 25 ft, and the final volley happened at 10 ft. (Distances approximated, I'm sure). 

The second issue is that disabling, less-than-lethal shots are mostly Hollywood. Of course, there are a couple well-known incidents where a situation was defused by an officer making an intentional disabling shot, but, when you factor in the adrenaline of the situation, and collateral happenings, they basically boil down to trick shots. In all matters of self and public defense, the gun doesn't come out until you're reasonably sure you're going have to use it, and the finger doesn't go on the trigger until it is time to kill the person on the other end of the sights.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

To be clear about what I think, I don't believe that the cop had it in for Brown, or even had it in for black people. I also don't think the shooting was in any way premeditated.

I think this was a case of a very angry cop, angry because Brown struck him. And I get why he was angry. But I also believe that he shot in anger. I don't buy that he shot someone 20 feet away because he was concerned about being punched again.

But I also believe that the justice system was skewed in the cop's favor. Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> I wonder if anyone on the grand jury knew about the faking of the extent of Wilson's injuries.
> http://www.snopes.com/info/news/wilson.asp


The fake pics were not presented to the grand jury. Only the real ones were.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

In the first place, you have to believe without any evidence that the jurors are all morons to take as evidence an agenda ridden website. They actually has the medical records and photographs and that is what they considered.
It is the puff stuff from both pro and anti- indictment advocates that made a big deal of the the severity or lack of severity of the offocer's injuries. 

But the idea that a 290 lb man (teen ager or not) acting irrationally can be stopped from tackling, if that is what happened, by this policeman by restraining him is nonsense. The NFL makes a profession out of trying it. With shoukder pads, helmets and referees. 

And it would be unlikely to be a cool considered successful idea to wait until he arrives to decide to shoot. The fact he charges, if that is truly what happened, is pretty good evidence of the deceased irrational and murderous intent.

The officer is not obligated to risk his life to preserve the one trying to hurt him.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I don't think anyone says it's OK to loot.


The people doing it seem to think it's OK.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.


There have been 4 months of media coverage, 4 months of protests, countless interviews and public speeches, a criminal investigation, an ongoing DOJ investigation and 2 presidential addresses concerning this event. What more would be required for you to say "it was a big deal"?


----------



## CajunSunshine (Apr 24, 2007)

For what it is worth, here are all of the testimonies the Grand Jury heard in the Michael Brown case (no wonder it took the jury so long...).

http://www.stltoday.com/news/multimedia/special/html_47d95368-a8f2-5ae1-9173-6653c15d0f0e.html


.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> But I also believe that the justice system was skewed in the cop's favor. Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.


Really? On what do you base that? The lack of rioting or Sharpton's rallies being unattended by the media or Holder dashing in to assure equality that would be a pipe dream if the deceased were white?

Can't you even imagine that it is possible that the life of one white cop matters too? That asking police to go into places where you would run from deserves extra care in determining liability? That making it his job to handle mean, hostile, and ruthless criminal s makes it a lot more likely that he will find himself in danger? That he is very aware of the risks he takes and has probably seen more ugliness directed at him than you can even think of?


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> To be clear about what I think, I don't believe that the cop had it in for Brown, or even had it in for black people. I also don't think the shooting was in any way premeditated.
> 
> I think this was a case of a very angry cop, angry because Brown struck him. And I get why he was angry. But I also believe that he shot in anger. I don't buy that he shot someone 20 feet away because he was concerned about being punched again.
> 
> But I also believe that the justice system was skewed in the cop's favor. Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.


I applaud your thinking, Nevada, disagree with it as I may. At least you don't buy into the hands-up, on-knees, screaming "you gunna die ******!" execution that the Al Sharptons and Rachael Maddows of the world would have you believe. 

Angry or not, though, when someon who has already tried to kill the officer once (taking the weapon from an armed man can't be taken any other way), and him coming back towards you, 20 ft is no margin of safety. At that distance, you'd be lucky to be able to squeeze your trigger 5 or 6 times in the amount of time it takes the other guy to close the gap. 

Deadly situations always seem to happen very quickly. That is exactly why cops are allowed a little more lee-way in their judgement. It is their job to go out and find trouble and engage it, all day, everyday. The fact that we're not dealing with a questionable shooting bi-hourly in this country is a testament to the fact that MOST cops have strong judgement and character. 

An


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> To be clear about what I think, I don't believe that the cop had it in for Brown, or even had it in for black people. I also don't think the shooting was in any way premeditated.


I agree!!! (and you thought that would never happen) 



> I think this was a case of a very angry cop, angry because Brown struck him. And I get why he was angry. But I also believe that he shot in anger. I don't buy that he shot someone 20 feet away because he was concerned about being punched again.


Angry??? Definitely possible. Scared??? Also very possible. Unfortunately we will never know for certain since we have to take his word for it or not believe him. I can not be sure with having water boarded him into squealing out the truth.  Just kidding!!!



> But I also believe that the justice system was skewed in the cop's favor.


That is also a possibility, but there is presently no way of proving it. I do believe that no matter what the prosecutors did, if Wilson was not indicted there would be no peace. An unfortunate state of affairs, but it seems to be the reality that we live in.




> Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.


I am sorry that you feel that way. Personally, I think *anyone *being shot by a cop is a big deal. But I also understand that it is a very imperfect world and the cops have an extremely tough job. 

There are too many Monday morning quarterbacks in this country that espouse their beliefs about how cops and/or the military should do things without ever having filled those shoes. Too bad.

TRellis


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Txsteader said:


> OK, I'm not positive about these details & I'm probably going to get bashed for this but........I think Wilson should have been indicted.
> 
> As best as I can tell, Brown was anywhere from 30' to 100'+ away (again, details are sketchy/confusing) from Wilson when the officer killed him. It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim.
> 
> ...


Ever see how fast a person in good shape can cover a hundred foot ?
Next all Brown had to do was comply .
If Wilson had just drove away would he of been fired for not doing his job ,what if he had and the bully Brown had killed someone .

And best of all had Wilson been charged for doing his duty I say most Cops would of quit or retired . How many are stupid enough to risk their life for a system that bites them for doing what they are paid to do .


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

TRellis said:


> Unfortunately we will never know for certain since we have to take his word for it or not believe him.


And that's unfortunate, since Brown is dead and can't testify.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

I wonder if it would have made the national news if the cop had been black and the kid white?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I will say this, even if the verdict had gone the other way there would have been protests and riots. Wouldn't have mattered because some people will use any excuse to destroy another's property.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> To be clear about what I think, I don't believe that the cop had it in for Brown, or even had it in for black people. I also don't think the shooting was in any way premeditated.
> 
> I think this was a case of a very angry cop, angry because Brown struck him. And I get why he was angry. But I also believe that he shot in anger. I don't buy that he shot someone 20 feet away because he was concerned about being punched again.
> 
> But I also believe that the justice system was skewed in the cop's favor. *Let's face it, a cop shooting a black kid isn't a big deal in this country.*


Did you type that with a straight face? Black kids getting themselves shot has been two of the biggest deals in this country in recent history. Martin and Brown. 

What's truly not a big deal, apparently, and not worthy of the attention of the self appointed black "leaders" aka race baiters, is when young black men go around killing each other on a daily basis, and killing innocent little children with their overspray bullets. 

http://www.kmbc.com/news/kck-police-investigate-fatal-shooting/29351706

This happened a month ago, the police are still begging for tips and leads, but nobody in the neighborhood knows nuthin. Surprise, surprise. That little girl is who people should be marching in the streets over. Not long before that, a 6 year old little girl named Angel, walking out of a store with her dad, was also shot and killed in a drive by. Now that's messed up. Why doesn't somebody make up a catchy slogan and take to the streets for these slaughtered innocents?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> And that's unfortunate, since Brown is dead and can't testify.


And if he was, and we were even interested, we still would not know unless they both agreed. Sheesh.......


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> Did you type that with a straight face? Black kids getting themselves shot has been two of the biggest deals in this country in recent history. Martin and Brown.


OK, but it's not a big deal to the legal community. It's a sad day when the UN has to ball us out for an unjust legal system.
_
GENEVA (Reuters) - U.S. authorities need to tackle a "deep and festering" mistrust in some sectors of the population and examine how race relations affect law enforcement, the U.N.'s human rights chief said on Tuesday._
http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-rights-chief-faults-u-law-enforcement-151142799.html


----------



## Crisste (Nov 17, 2014)

Danaus29 said:


> I will say this, even if the verdict had gone the other way there would have been protests and riots. Wouldn't have mattered because some people will use any excuse to destroy another's property.


I was on Brown's side of this until I saw the evidence. That, and the video of him robbing that store a few minutes earlier told me everything I needed to know.

Hoodlums are hoodlums no matter where you go, there's a reason they call it "the slums"

I say let them burn Ferguson to the ground and they can live within the ruins.

One less to worry about now.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> OK, but it's not a big deal to the legal community. It's a sad day when the UN has to ball us out for an unjust legal system.
> _
> GENEVA (Reuters) - U.S. authorities need to tackle a "deep and festering" mistrust in some sectors of the population and examine how race relations affect law enforcement, the U.N.'s human rights chief said on Tuesday._
> http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-rights-chief-faults-u-law-enforcement-151142799.html


Sheesh, sheesh and more sheesh- the UN, that bastion of nasty bickering bias....... Look up Prince Zied's personal human rights voting in the UN.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

Having majored in sociology at a liberal arts college I think I have a decent grasp on social issues, institutional racism, etc. I also have many years of family experiences with police anger, revenge, and brutality. It is beyond heart breaking when I see my family members or their mug shots after an "arrest". I cry, I get angry, I want to hurt someone. But I know in my heart, my family members have chosen the life they live...the thug or criminal life has consequences. Right or wrong, there is high risk of being beaten or killed by the police. You will not see the law abiding family members making a public spectacle of ourselves. 

We are white, we live in the suburbs, but I have beat into my children's heads...whatever the officer says, you shut your mouth and comply. Shut up and get home. Right or wrong, I do not want my sons, "dead right".


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

KentuckyDreamer said:


> Having majored in sociology at a liberal arts college I think I have a decent grasp on social issues, institutional racism, etc. I also have many years of family experiences with police anger, revenge, and brutality. It is beyond heart breaking when I see my family members or their mug shots after an "arrest". I cry, I get angry, I want to hurt someone. But I know in my heart, my family members have chosen the life they live...the thug or criminal life has consequences. Right or wrong, there is high risk of being beaten or killed by the police. You will not see the law abiding family members making a public spectacle of ourselves.
> 
> We are white, we live in the suburbs, but I have beat into my children's heads...whatever the officer says, you shut your mouth and comply. Shut up and get home. Right or wrong, I do not want my sons, "dead right".


That's good advice, but it in no way excuses police misconduct. It's a serious problem everywhere. Las Vegas is no exception.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

KentuckyDreamer said:


> Having majored in sociology at a liberal arts college I think I have a decent grasp on social issues, institutional racism, etc. I also have many years of family experiences with police anger, revenge, and brutality. It is beyond heart breaking when I see my family members or their mug shots after an "arrest". I cry, I get angry, I want to hurt someone. But I know in my heart, my family members have chosen the life they live...the thug or criminal life has consequences. Right or wrong, there is high risk of being beaten or killed by the police. You will not see the law abiding family members making a public spectacle of ourselves.
> 
> We are white, we live in the suburbs, but I have beat into my children's heads...whatever the officer says, you shut your mouth and comply. Shut up and get home. Right or wrong, I do not want my sons, "dead right".


 Yep :thumb: Then should they of been mistreated you can hire lawyers or raise cain to high heaven :thumb:


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

Txsteader said:


> OK, I'm not positive about these details & I'm probably going to get bashed for this but........I think Wilson should have been indicted.
> 
> As best as I can tell, Brown was anywhere from 30' to 100'+ away (again, details are sketchy/confusing) from Wilson when the officer killed him. It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim.
> 
> ...


Our sheriff did a demonstration of how a man with a knife could stab a man with a gun, before the man with a gun could shoot, with in 25feet. You would not have time to shoot someone and just hurt them, then shoot again if he doesn't stop. I have always been told never to raise a gun and aim it unless I was shooting to kill. This kid made his own problems and thought he could bully his way to whatever he wanted. The cops have a right to go home at night, if you don't want to get shot don't threaten an officer. It's that simple.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> And that's unfortunate, since Brown is dead and can't testify.


Can you explain how Brown's blood and DNA (not from his blood) found their way onto the gun that killed him and prevented him from testifying?

TRellis


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Molly Mckee said:


> I wonder if it would have made the national news if the cop had been black and the kid white?


There is a case like that in Utah getting a (very) little attention right now, but it's only because of the Ferguson thing that it's even gotten any national coverage...and obviously much less than Michael Brown. How many people have heard of Dillon Taylor? Has the president made any speeches about him? Has Eric Holder gotten involved? Not that I've heard about.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

TRellis said:


> Can you explain how Brown's blood and DNA (not from his blood) found their way onto the gun that killed him and prevented him from testifying?
> 
> TRellis


There's strong evidence that Brown was out of line when he was by Wilson's car, and I believe that Wilson was assaulted by Brown.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> OK, but it's not a big deal to the legal community. It's a sad day when the UN has to ball us out for an unjust legal system.
> _
> GENEVA (Reuters) - U.S. authorities need to tackle a "deep and festering" mistrust in some sectors of the population and examine how race relations affect law enforcement, the U.N.'s human rights chief said on Tuesday._
> http://news.yahoo.com/u-n-rights-chief-faults-u-law-enforcement-151142799.html



The UN just likes pokin' the bear. How many true atrocities do they ignore or gloss over? In spite of the fact the US has enacted laws to protect the rights of blacks and other minorities, laws with real teeth in them, and that our society in general has made remarkable strides forward in acceptance and race relations in a relatively short period of time, there is still a very vocal minority who apparently believe all the problems of all unsuccessful black people are the result of a vast conspiracy amongst all the white people in the US. (They suspect the Asians are in on it, too!) This is apparently who the UN is listening to. And I couldn't care less what the UN says......Frankly, my dear......


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Molly Mckee said:


> I wonder if it would have made the national news if the cop had been black and the kid white?


NONE of those make the news.
If you look up the stats, there really is not many cases like this one at all.
And it seems to me w/injuries the cop suffered, he could only see out of one eye, which I'd think would make it hard to know how far away Brown was.


----------



## tiffnzacsmom (Jan 26, 2006)

Nothing will be changed until there is trust and there will be no trust as long as there is an us vs them mentality. Complete police transparency would be a good step as will increasing good will in communities. Fear is a powerful motivator and if people are afraid of the law and the law is afraid of the people we will have issues.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

jtbrandt said:


> There is a case like that in Utah getting a (very) little attention right now, but it's only because of the Ferguson thing that it's even gotten any national coverage...and obviously much less than Michael Brown. How many people have heard of Dillon Taylor? Has the president made any speeches about him? Has Eric Holder gotten involved? Not that I've heard about.


I for one had never heard of the Dillon Taylor incident and feel that the present administration should not have gotten involved just like it should not have gotten involved in the Michael Brown incident.

But I have to admit.... I do not know if I would have been able to not pull the trigger on that kid either.

I have just read several stories about the incident and watched the video several times. The police were called because someone was brandishing a gun and the descriptions of three individuals is given. The cop identifies three individuals according to the descriptions and follows them to a 7-11 and then waits outside until back-up arrives. Three guys exit and the cops yell for them to raise their hands. Two do so, but the third does not. He turns around and starts walking away with his hands under the front of his shirt whiles the cops screams for him to put his hands in the air. The guy yells back "No fool!" as he continues to walk away. After another 50' or so and several more commands to put his hands up the guy turns around and pulls his hand out from under his shirt seemingly as if he is drawing a gun and catches two in the chest.

The guy was either really, really beyond stupid or he knew what the reaction would be to his actions. A report of a gun. A very uncooperative individual. And he takes actions and makes movements that would cause almost anyone to believe that he was carrying and possibly wielding a gun.

I am sorry, but I feel that he brought it onto himself.

I am so glad that I am not a cop.

Trellis

ETA: And I also do not think it should be investigated because of the race of either individual involved.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

I mostly agree. The one good thing that will probably come out of this is more cops wearing body-cams. If Darren Wilson had been wearing one like the cop that shot Dillon Taylor, then this case would be just as clear cut as that one. In reality it is just as clear cut, but the absence of video proof allows one side to ignore most of the evidence.

Also interesting about that case is that the cop didn't face a grand jury...some people think every case where someone is shot should go to a grand jury. Wilson probably wouldn't have if there had been no race agitators involved (or if he had video proof that it happened like he said).


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

TRellis said:


> The guy was either really, really beyond stupid or he knew what the reaction would be to his actions. A report of a gun. A very uncooperative individual. And he takes actions and makes movements that would cause almost anyone to believe that he was carrying and possibly wielding a gun.
> 
> I am sorry, but I feel that he brought it onto himself.


I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> There's strong evidence that Brown was out of line when he was by Wilson's car, and I believe that Wilson was assaulted by Brown.


And you do not think saying he was "out of line" is maybe white-washing things a little?

TRellis


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all.


Unfortunately we will never know. Just like that rocket scientist Dillon Taylor that would not do what the cops ordered like his brother and cousin did and made out like he was pulling a gun.

Interesting how his brother and cousin obeyed the cop's commands and they are still alive.

TRellis


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, *but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all*.


I don't know about that. What caused him to push the store clerk? What prompted him to walk down the middle of the road? What made him tell Wilson that he was too much of a  to shoot? 

Sounds to me like Brown was simply being arrogant and defiant that day, that nobody had done anything to him to provoke his aggressive behavior.


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Nevada said:


> I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all.


 Thug mentality.Live like a thug,expect to die like a thug. Same thing with little Travon. NO "RSPECT" FOR THE LAW. Some can't even spell respect much less knows what it means..


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Nevada said:


> I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all.


May of been drugs or he was just a over confident bully :thumb: Gunna show the man. :facepalm: Here we call it letting your bulldog mouth overload your bird dog but :thumb:


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Nevada said:


> That's good advice, but it in no way excuses police misconduct. It's a serious problem everywhere. Las Vegas is no exception.


I bet it's not.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Sawmill Jim said:


> May of been drugs or he was just a over confident bully :thumb: Gunna show the man. :facepalm: Here we call it letting your bulldog mouth overload your bird dog but :thumb:


He could be Obama's son. A lieing, , affermative action,race baiting, socipathic, narrisssicitic, melagomaniac,cocky,community aggitator, druggie ,looser. Except Obama isn't black, but hey, he's a victum, so "black" works for that anyhoo/ho.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> The UN just likes pokin' the bear. ... And I couldn't care less what the UN says......Frankly, my dear......


I think that the (scary) point that so many miss is that the UN _is_ us. 
The UN has become the puppet of the segment of the US that wishes to see us become the chair in a one-world government. 

The first step in transferring the power of the US to a world power is to cede our sovereignty. The mode of achieving this first step is to self-deprecate to the point that the common international and domestic view develops into one where the US simply can't be trusted with the immense power that it wields. The natural result is to then hand that power over to a "responsible" world-ruling body.

When the "UN" admonishes the US, it is basically the Obama/Jarret/Soros' saying that they don't agree with what the US is.

Oh, and, of course, neither does Nevada.


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

People in Minnesota just run over protesters....Ouch. It was cold out today

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...n-protesters-blocking-traffic-in-minneapolis/


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Interesting article from Politico:

Protests Won Civil Rights. Riots Set Them Back


> n the wake of the grand jury&#8217;s decision in Ferguson, Missouri, it&#8217;s worth remembering an ambivalent reality of American history: Demonstrations&#8211;even those that turned violent&#8211;have generally advanced the legislative and political cause of civil rights, while riots have more typically resulted in a backlash that retarded it.
> Not quite 50 years ago, after a California highway patrolman arrested a 21-year-old unemployed black man suspected of drunken driving, and his mother rushed into the street in protest, the Watts section of Los Angeles exploded in six days of violence that killed 34 people, injured more than 1,000 and caused more than $40 million in property damage.


And apparently Michael Brown's stepfather has had a change of heart about those peaceful protests. Last night, he called for protesters to burn the place (paraphrased nicely) down.

And so they did.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

Nevada said:


> There's strong evidence
> *that Brown was out of line* when he was by Wilson's car, and I believe that Wilson was assaulted by Brown.


********************************************
is *THAT* what they call it now when you go to striking a 
police officer in the head and face with your fists and 
trying to steal his weapon??? 

I really had no idea.....:yuck:


ETA: Nope....not going to turn the sarcasm off; 
it *REALLY* needs to stay for a comment like that!!!:facepalm:


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

I don't mean to DeRail this thread but in to day's world, a officer needs to defend Him/Her self. The Meth and other drugs make people strong, and like super man strong. I have a customer that is a medic in MPLS, he has told me stories of drug users ripping the back boards apart to get loose. Here is a story local to me, the girl had a weapon and refused to drop it. BOOM she's gone. (and no riots) 
You have v30sec to a few minutes to control the situation as a cop. 
http://chippewa.com/dunnconnect/new...cle_c0484a95-ad37-5659-aa1e-98acdf2356ab.html


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

jtbrandt said:


> I mostly agree. The one good thing that will probably come out of this is more cops wearing body-cams. If Darren Wilson had been wearing one like the cop that shot Dillon Taylor, then this case would be just as clear cut as that one. In reality it is just as clear cut, but the absence of video proof allows one side to ignore most of the evidence.
> 
> Also interesting about that case is that the cop didn't face a grand jury...some people think every case where someone is shot should go to a grand jury. Wilson probably wouldn't have if there had been no race agitators involved (or if he had video proof that it happened like he said).


Now who would you bleleve your lying eyes or what everybody said even if they were not their? Body cams only see what if in front of the camera.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Old Vet said:


> Now who would you bleleve your lying eyes or what everybody said even if they were not their? Body cams only see what if in front of the camera.


At least there's only one version of the video instead of twenty versions of eyewitness accounts.


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)




----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

Molly Mckee said:


> I wonder if it would have made the national news if the cop had been black and the kid white?


No, it wouldn't have been in the news at all. And it is very sad that people have tried to turn this into a race issue rather than a simple police mistake/brutality issue. Police are humans. They make mistakes. And in very rare instances does race have anything to do with it.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

The criminal made lots of mistakes, he paid the price, unfortunately his actions have made many people lives more difficult. I hope the people of this city don't expect the rest of us to help them rebuild what they destroyed. Maybe they can ban together and from work groups to clean up the mess, and rebuild brick by brick what they tore down.... ya right.:hammer:


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)

Only in America can a low life thug rob a store, then attack and try to kill a police officer and have the President of The United States send White House officials to his funeral and publicly put down the police officer. This is America these days gang!


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

Txsteader said:


> It seems to me that Wilson could have attempted to disable him, shot him in the leg or shoulder, in order to stop his advance. If that failed, _then_ he takes deadly aim.


Life is not Hollywood. You don't see many "one shot stops", those are pure luck. There are two ways to stop someone. You can hit their central nervous system, basically the head or spine, or they can bleed out. It often takes several minutes for someone to bleed out. Meanwhile, they're beating you to death on a Missouri street. You basically aim for center mass, pray you hit meat and keep firing until they stop their advance. People who raise hell about how many times someone was shot are misinformed. Once a weapon is involved, it is ALWAYS deadly aim whether someone actually dies or not. There is no aiming at a "leg or shoulder". You also have to consider being in an urban area, if you aim somewhere other than the largest possible target and you miss, you could hit an innocent bystander. Once you make a decision to attack a police officer, you're taking your life in your hands and YOU made that decision.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

TRellis said:


> The whole Hollywood "shoot to disable" scenario is nothing but a myth. I have known many that were much better shots than I and they nor I would ever try a "shoot to disable" shot. I like living too much to stake my life on a shot like that.


Should have read the whole thread before I posted.  I agree with this post 100%.


----------



## Guest (Nov 26, 2014)

Whites are the minority here... And we had a white, drunk, stoned, college kid get shot by a LEO here about three months ago - still no rioting or looting or arson has occurred yet.

I have my baseball bat and am patiently waiting for it to begin so I can go get some free liquor and car parts! Oh, and a perm kit.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

KentuckyDreamer said:


> We are white, we live in the suburbs, but I have beat into my children's heads...whatever the officer says, you shut your mouth and comply. Shut up and get home. Right or wrong, I do not want my sons, "dead right".


I tell my kids this ALL the time. You do whatever a police officer tells you. Whether he's a good cop or a bad cop, you are NOT going to win that confrontation. We'll deal with the situation after the fact, not out on the street.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I'm wondering what got into Brown to make him want to assault Wilson. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but I also doubt that it happened for no reason at all.


Are you kidding? He just robbed a convenience store by shoving a guy half his size. And if that guy hadn't backed off, Brown would have beat him senseless. Even his little Chihuahua buddy kept referring to him as "Big Mike" to all the cameras. The guy thought he could shove people around any way he wanted because of his size, even police officers. I'm sure that's how he treated everyone when he didn't get his way. Gentle giant, my ass.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

Old Vet said:


> Now who would you bleleve your lying eyes or what everybody said even if they were not their? Body cams only see what if in front of the camera.


Besides, there's a discrepancy every Saturday and Sunday with what *I* see on video and what a replay ref sees on video.  Video evidence is not the end all be all. I too would like to see body cams on every police officer, but there is also the question of who's going to pay for them. These are not cheapy little pen cams like you buy off the internet, I'm sure each one is several hundred dollars. Then there's malfunctions, there's dead batteries, etc. While they *do* seem like a good idea, I could see all kinds of technical snafus coming up in court over jacked up video.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

Sorry for all the posts y'all, I was late to the discussion.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

Hoosier Cowboy said:


> Only in America can a low life thug rob a store, then attack and try to kill a police officer and have the President of The United States send White House officials to his funeral and publicly put down the police officer. This is America these days gang!


Only in America but specifically only with THIS CLOWN, he has the office in name but certainly not in his actions. A real pres. should be standing strong as a leader denouncing the mob actions instead of adding fuel to an obviously mob created situation. 

Next thing you will see is his parents invited on national TV to what used to be the white house (by then burned by supporters of the deceased criminal) to accept his deepest and sincere apologies, then the camera would follow him going off to his office to write another EO that makes it illegal for a police officer to use force to apprehend thugs in predominately black populated communities. New law will be called something like ... "No Brown Down". Then some group will petition for the cigars he stole to go in the National museum alongside his buddies hoodie.:hammer:


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

doingitmyself said:


> The criminal made lots of mistakes, he paid the price, unfortunately his actions have made many people lives more difficult. I hope the people of this city don't expect the rest of us to help them rebuild what they destroyed. Maybe they can ban together and from work groups to clean up the mess, and rebuild brick by brick what they tore down.... ya right.:hammer:


Not everyone who is a resident of Ferguson is a thug. Saw a reporter talking to two young black men outside a small storefront, they were protecting it from looters Monday night. Was it their store? Nope, they just live nearby and were doing what they could to help out. It was reported, although not nearly as widely as the looting, that after the original rioting in August, and again after Monday night, that Ferguson locals showed up morning after to help the store owners clean up.

Ferguson isn't a ghetto. It's a working class community that happens to be black majority. You don't see auto parts stores, mom and pop restaurants and those type businesses in a ghetto. Are there some thugs who live there? You betcha. But not everyone.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I did read something recently that police body cameras reduced police brutality complaints from about 23 a year to 3 a year in one small city. And I thinktgat is probably typical. That police do things wrong sometimes but no where near as often as some people like to think.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

TRellis said:


> Can you explain how Brown's blood and DNA (not from his blood) found their way onto the gun that killed him and prevented him from testifying?
> 
> TRellis


That indicates that he moved forward AFTER being shot, but it's not evidence that he was moving forward BEFORE he was shot.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Nevada said:


> That indicates that he moved forward AFTER being shot, but it's not evidence that he was moving forward BEFORE he was shot.


Browns friend's DNA was also found on the gun. That happened when the 2 of them attacked Brown at the SUV. Browns hat and one sandle was left at the SUV as was Browns friends paracord bracelet. 2 empty rounds also. They both ran,in diffrent directions. Then Brown came back to attack Wilson,one hand in his waist band and the other in a clenched fist. He put his head down and rushed Wilson. He never had his hands in the air.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> That indicates that he moved forward AFTER being shot, but it's not evidence that he was moving forward BEFORE he was shot.


But didn't you insist that the evidence showed he was shot from far enough away that the officer had other options tgan to shoot?


----------



## Hoosier Cowboy (Sep 8, 2014)

MO_cows said:


> Not everyone who is a resident of Ferguson is a thug. Saw a reporter talking to two young black men outside a small storefront, they were protecting it from looters Monday night. Was it their store? Nope, they just live nearby and were doing what they could to help out. It was reported, although not nearly as widely as the looting, that after the original rioting in August, and again after Monday night, that Ferguson locals showed up morning after to help the store owners clean up.
> 
> Ferguson isn't a ghetto. It's a working class community that happens to be black majority. You don't see auto parts stores, mom and pop restaurants and those type businesses in a ghetto. Are there some thugs who live there? You betcha. But not everyone.



I agree...there are 3 real losers in this sad story. 1.) Brown's family, regardless if he brought his death onto himself or not they still lost a child...2.)Officer Wilson, his name and reputation has been dragged thru the mud so much that I doubt he will ever be able to live a "normal" life again or remain a police officer. Factor that in with the death threats to him and his family.....3.) The city of Ferguson, not only did they suffer millions of dollars in damages from the riots but world wide now no one has any respect for the town or it's residents even if most of the rioters weren't from the town. The actions of the protesters have given the town a black eye forever and alot of small business owners lost everything they have due to the idiots.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

where I want to said:


> But didn't you insist that the evidence showed he was shot from far enough away that the officer had other options tgan to shoot?


I'm reading now that Brown was about 125 feet away and advanced approximately 20 feet.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

Hitting a moving person at 120 ft (40 yards) with a hand gun is a very difficult thing to do, bordering on the impossible for most people. I find that distance is hard to believe, those distances surely are incorrect, just from a "is it even possible point of view. Lots of conflicting info. and stats circulating.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

doingitmyself said:


> Hitting a moving person at 120 ft (40 yards) with a hand gun is a very difficult thing to do, bordering on the impossible for most people. I find that distance is hard to believe, those distances surely are incorrect, just from a "is it even possible point of view. Lots of conflicting info. and stats circulating.


I question that testimony. From the clips I saw it looked more like he was closer to 50 feet from the car.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I'm reading now that Brown was about 125 feet away and advanced approximately 20 feet.


125 feet from the CRUISER. 
The spacial difference was made up by Wilson pursuing him. 
The body was that ~50 yards from the car, but the last brass was 8 ft from the body, which, interestingly enough, corresponds exactly with the officer's story. 

Nevada, tell us the truth, are you, Sunny Hostin, and Al Sharpton just sitting around in a Vegas suite playing a game of "Who can deny the evidence?" on the rest of the world? If so, please, for the sake of the law-abiding populace of Ferguson, MO, STOP IT!


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

If at 50 ft and moving towards the officer, it would be possible to get lead on the target and certainly could be hit multiple times by trained personnel. Untrained, not likely, I can believe that, without seeing it.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

I just listened to interview, he said about 8 feet away ,he saw ,,,hit him in the top of the head.IIRC the cororner said there were 2 other shots that entered the top most part of the chest on an angle,showing that he was bent over. Wilson said,the head shot, well it was clear,that was the one that stopped Brown, something like he just fell on his face.


----------



## TRellis (Sep 16, 2013)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> *Nevada, tell us the truth, are you, Sunny Hostin, and Al Sharpton just sitting around in a Vegas suite playing a game of "Who can deny the evidence?" on the rest of the world? * If so, please, for the sake of the law-abiding populace of Ferguson, MO, STOP IT!


Not a slight in any way to Nevada, but that was funny...

I was not expecting that at all and then, BAMM!!!

By the way, Gun Monkey, you owe me not only a new keyboard, but a monitor as well!!! They will never function properly again!

TRellis

By the by, I think we need a spew smilie.


----------



## VHestin (Aug 17, 2011)

I am being lazy and just mainly copying and pasting my post from another message board about this, with a couple additions:

First off, the media portraying this as being over the Grand Jury's decision is CRAP! The rioters just want an excuse. I mean winning or losing a sport game is also an excuse. Secondly, I also think it's B.S. that they are being called 'protestors'. They are not. I once participated in a protest march years ago, and it was peaceful. Yes there was an LEO presence on the march route, but they didn't bother us and we didn't bother them. YOU DON'T 'PROTEST' BEING STEREOTYPED AS THUGS BY ACTING LIKE THUGS! I listened to a live streaming police scanner for St. Louis County, that was all about the rioting, and I couldn't listen for too long, because it was too creepy, it was like actually being there, and riots are not someplace I want to be. And my mother lived through the Watts riots, and some of what I heard over the scanner was exactly what she told me happened back then. I also believe that if Brown had killed Wilson, his family would be doing the same thing they are now, trying to portray him as an innocent victim of the system.

To end this on a light note, last night over the scanner I heard that 5 people were arrested at the library, and I don't think they damaged the building. I think it's because they didn't know what a library was, so they got really confused, giving the cops time to get there and remove them.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

I briefly turned to CNN and they asked a protester in LA why she was marching? Her answer was to stop police brutality and profiling. It wasn't for anything about Michal Brown but what did she know.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

VHestin said:


> First off, the media portraying this as being over the Grand Jury's decision is CRAP! The rioters just want an excuse. I mean winning or losing a sport game is also an excuse. Secondly, I also think it's B.S. that they are being called 'protestors'. They are not. I once participated in a protest march years ago, and it was peaceful. Yes there was an LEO presence on the march route, but they didn't bother us and we didn't bother them. YOU DON'T 'PROTEST' BEING STEREOTYPED AS THUGS BY ACTING LIKE THUGS!


There's a frustration in that these stories come out every now & then but nothing seems to change. We just wait for a while and it happens again. Everyone pretty much expects it. People are just fed up with conditions not improving.

I know what you mean about peaceful vs violent protest, but peaceful protest is too easy to ignore. People really want change, and it shows.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Hoosier Cowboy said:


> Only in America can a low life thug rob a store, then attack and try to kill a police officer and have the President of The United States send White House officials to his funeral and publicly put down the police officer. This is America these days gang!


Post of the decade award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> That indicates that he moved forward AFTER being shot, but it's not evidence that he was moving forward BEFORE he was shot.


So I guess the fatal shot to the top of Brown's head was taken by Wilson standing on a ladder, while Brown was running away with hands in the air...arms shot in the FRONT , NOT inside - if hands were in the air, where would bullets land?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

If you want to really be inclusive about police actions and what they mean, read up on the police actions in the case of Alton Nolan, where he was not killed by police then went on to do horrible, self centered, racist murders.

The Brown case has taken up a huge part of the news media and government action. And, like the Martin case, with bigotry and violence from every side. On the other hand, the Nolan case has raised no such media hue and cry, although much, much, much uglier.

The Brown case should have never been reduced to issues of race to the point where all perspective has been lost. And so misused.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

where I want to said:


> The Brown case should have never been reduced to issues of race to the point where all perspective has been lost. And so misused.


I don't believe that this is racism in the traditional sense, but it's still racism. What I mean is that I don't believe the shooting was racially motivated, and I don't think racism was on the minds of the grand jury when they made the decision to not indict. But racism was still involved.

The fact is that a black kid being killed isn't as big of a deal as it should be, and certainly not as big of a deal as a white kid being killed. It's subtle, but it's still racism.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Nevada said:


> There's a frustration in that these stories come out every now & then but nothing seems to change. We just wait for a while and it happens again. Everyone pretty much expects it. People are just fed up with conditions not improving.
> 
> I know what you mean about peaceful vs violent protest, but peaceful protest is too easy to ignore. People really want change, and it shows.


Wait....those who promised hope and change and controlled the board with gavel in hand lacked the skill, talent and desire to give you the change you wanted.. they lied to you and you they are greedy lazy folks, lining their pockets, enjoying every perk they can and the do not want to give that up in two years.... the need riots they need dumb people buying the bull. To cry out for more power to the president cause they do not understand that it is the choices he has made as to who he puts in charge that is destroying a nation


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> ... But racism was still involved.
> 
> The fact is that a black kid being killed isn't as big of a deal as it should be, and certainly not as big of a deal as a white kid being killed. It's subtle, but it's still racism.


Nevada, can you explain that further, because I genuinely would like to understand what you mean.

I see there being three aspects to determining how "big of a deal" killings can become: the governmental reaction, the public/media reaction, and the personal reaction.

On the governmental side, it seems that all police shootings, and private ones, for that matter, are investigated under the same legal processes and scientific principles. In this case, it went further than it otherwise would have. Had the killing been of a white person, the prosecutor would have unilaterally decided not to bring charges. It was the public/media outrage that forced this to the next level of a grand jury.

Which brings us to the public/media aspect. Clearly, that aspect is actually biased toward making a "bigger deal" of blacks being killed than whites. It is the en-vogue outrage du-joir. 

That leaves the personal aspect. Since thoughts aren't illegal (thanks, Founders), we can't force any change there. But, even if we choose to judge this aspect, if we do so objectively, I think you'll find that the majority race actually tends to be more open to observing the facts than the minority races do. Nearly all black folks sided with Treyvon and Brown, while the whites and "white-Hispanics" were more evenly split on both issues. 

That's not to say that I think blacks are more predisposed to racist thought, but if you consider the way that the public/media aspect is programmed to play out, blacks are being encouraged, some might say coerced, into siding with the story of the guy who looks most like them. 

Many of us are starting to see the bulk of racism in this country as biased-black, despite the onslaught of reporting telling us that us white folks are all a bunch of racists and should hate ourselves for it.

So where is the "bigger deal" that you're seeing when a white person is killed than when a black one is? I'm not trolling you. I'd genuinely like to know how you feel that way. Maybe it will help me understand the thinking of the mind-set that I find myself further and further from, and more and more enraged with every day.


----------



## Crisste (Nov 17, 2014)

If I'm a black guy and I'm being approached by a police officer, I would think that the best way to avoid any chance of being shot is to simply turn your back on the cop. 

I'm pretty sure if a cop shoots you in the back its a ticket straight to prison for the officer.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> Had the killing been of a white person, the prosecutor would have unilaterally decided not to bring charges.


How do you know that? It's the impression of the black community that there may have been charges if the victim had been white.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> The fact is that a black kid being killed isn't as big of a deal as it should be, and certainly not as big of a deal as a white kid being killed. It's subtle, but it's still racism.


You need to relearn the definition of "fact" because what you state as fact is your opinion. You insist on making this racist. I'll reword your opinion to reflect my opinion: 

A criminal kid being killed isn't as big of a deal as liberals want it to be, and certainly not as big of a deal as a law-abiding kid being killed.

I couldn't care less what color the kids are. It's tragic when kids are killed, no matter what color they are, and even if it's a justified killing.


----------



## Crisste (Nov 17, 2014)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> Many of us are starting to see the bulk of racism in this country as biased-black, despite the onslaught of reporting telling us that us white folks are all a bunch of racists and should hate ourselves for it.


All one needs to see that is to examine the amount of political and personal attacks on our black president. 

Never in my years have I ever seen a president attacked with such fervor. I even see it in my personal life with friends who I know are die-hard republicans and I know they're a bit racist even if they won't admit it outright. These people are throwing out accusations and insults as if it was hitler himself in the white house. 

If you're looking for a racism measuring stick, there it is.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> How do you know that? It's the impression of the black community that there may have been charges if the victim had been white.


That impression is probably wrong. Cops shoot white people too. Most of the time they don't face grand juries when they shoot white people, even in cases where they probably should.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> How do you know that? It's the impression of the black community that there may have been charges if the victim had been white.


That's a start. Thank you.

Obviously, we can't know an unknown, but one thing that we *don't know *is that the prosecutor is racist. 

In fact, the bias that we have any evidence of is him being pro-cop. So, had this been a black cop, shooting a white man, we have no reason to assume that he would have viewed the evidence at-hand as any different.

Given the standard practices of investigating and prosecuting cops, and the way that this prosecutor presented to the grand jury, logic tells us that he would have almost assuredly chose not to prosecute based on the evidence. 

Either way, this prosecutor went to the next-higher default-level of deciding if this case should be prosecuted, by putting it in the hands of the grand jury. There was not a whole lot more options within his SOP tool-kit.

So where does the "bigger deal" come from?


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Crisste said:


> All one needs to see that is to examine the amount of political and personal attacks on our black president.
> 
> Never in my years have I ever seen a president attacked with such fervor. I even see it in my personal life with friends who I know are die-hard republicans and I know they're a bit racist even if they won't admit it outright. These people are throwing out accusations and insults as if it was hitler himself in the white house.
> 
> If you're looking for a racism measuring stick, there it is.


No doubt that there are some white folks who criticize this president more vigorously than they would have any other because he is black. But, I believe the preponderance of the criticism he receives is his own doing - he is the most divisive president we've had in a LONG time, maybe ever. 

And for the other side of the coin, look how many people were willing to say openly in "on the street" interviews from 2007-2008, that they would vote for Obama because he was black. That is racist thought. While it may not feel as icky to the person doing it, choosing to support someone because of their color is exactly as racist as choosing not to support someone because of it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> That's a start. Thank you.
> 
> Obviously, we can't know an unknown, but one thing that we *don't know *is that the prosecutor is racist.


I don't know that he's a racist either, but that's not necessarily his decision. Assuming that he would turn a white kid's death over to a grand jury also, I suspect the decision would be different. The invisible racism may cause then to put more value on a white kid than a black kid.

But while the prosecutor might not be racist, he's still biased. He's from a cop family, and his father was killed in the line of duty. He has a reputation of having the policemen's backs. Crump said he requested that the prosecutor recuse himself, but he refused.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I don't know that he's a racist either, but that's not necessarily his decision. *Assuming that he would turn a white kid's death over to a grand jury also, I suspect the decision would be different. The invisible racism may cause then to put more value on a white kid than a black kid*.
> 
> But while the prosecutor might not be racist, he's still biased. He's from a cop family, and his father was killed in the line of duty. He has a reputation of having the policemen's backs. Crump said he requested that the prosecutor recuse himself, but he refused.


I agreed earlier that he is most-likely pro-cop, but that is the case with the majority of prosecutors. Since cops come in both colors, as do criminals, this is not a race-based bias.

(*emphasis mine*)

Describing it as "invisible" doesn't substantiate it all. 

The reason I chose your specific point about it being a "bigger deal" to kill a white person was precisely because it is subjective at its core-concept. Had I asked to discuss the more objective points of hiring-rates or crime-rates, then we could argue it with statistical "facts", most likely finding out that our objective "facts" disagreed with each other, turning the objective debate into a quagmire of subjectively-manipulated facts and statistics.

So, accepting that your "bigger deal" claim is subjective, and neither of us can prove the other wrong, I still would like to understand why/how you, and so many others, think it is a bigger deal when a white person is killed by a cop than a black person.

Either that concept is entirely knee-jerk, feel-good, political-correctness, as many of us feel it is, or there is something to it, like so many of you think. 

On the chance that there really is something to it, I'd like to at least try to understand it - or get you to understand why so many of us don't see it. Either way, I think it's cathartic. 

But..."invisible racism" doesn't cut it. Look back to my points about governmental-reaction, public/media-reaction, and personal-reaction, and give me something worth considering that your point about it being a "bigger deal" has some merit.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> (*emphasis mine*)
> 
> Describing it as "invisible" doesn't substantiate it all.
> 
> ...


You don't have to agree. I'm just telling you what they black community is thinking.


----------



## DAVID In Wisconsin (Dec 3, 2002)

Crisste said:


> All one needs to see that is to examine the amount of political and personal attacks on our black president.
> 
> Never in my years have I ever seen a president attacked with such fervor.


Could be because we have never had a president that attacked the American tax payer with such fervor. I couldn't stand the fraud if he were Lilly white.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> You don't have to agree. I'm just telling you what they black community is thinking.


Understood. I'd just like to understand why they think something that seems so patently wrong to so many of us.

You obviously share that view, so I was hoping you could shed some light on to where it comes from so that I might understand it.

But, if it really is just a matter of invisible racism twisting every possible outcome to work against black people, then I'll move on with my life assuming that it is bunk politics and racism on the part of people who believe it. 

I'm good with that. That's kinda what I figured it was to start with.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Our Black president is a failure. His ways are harmful. He is a liar. His skin colour is Not the reason. Many people who do not like him state factual reasons none of which list his genetics. Sorry to be blunt but it is a false flag to cause those who are easy to feel black guilt.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> But, if it really is just a matter of invisible racism twisting every possible outcome to work against black people, then I'll move on with my life assuming that it is bunk politics and racism on the part of people who believe it.


Interestingly, after posting that I saw an article about invisible racism at CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

There's some science behind it. Studies University of Chicago and MIT have shown that people with common white names (such as Brendon) are twice as likely to be called for a job interview than people with common black names (such as Jamal). NBA call more fouls on black players than white players. There are many other examples in the article.

I wouldn't discard the idea out of hand as bunk before considering evidence to the contrary.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Interestingly, after posting that I saw an article about invisible racism at CNN.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
> 
> ...


Do you have any ideas about solutions to this invisible racism?


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

I'm not dismissing the fact that there is racism out there, "invisible" or otherwise. I live in NC, and meet plenty of white folks that are racists. Heck, we just had a poster from NC openly broadcast that he is a racist on a related thread earlier today. I would argue, though, that the racism is just as thick on the black side as well.

But, the discussion I tried to engage you in was your assertion that it's not a "big deal" when a black person is killed, which is inline with the statements being made publically, in implied counterpoint, that "black lives DO matter".

I think that we all agree (at least those of us who aren't racists) that black lives matter exactly as much as white lives. Too, it seems, to many of us, that as big a deal as could possibly have been made in this case was, and that we are now disproportionately covering black deaths in the media and governmental responses. 

Did we ever hear GWB say that his "son, had he had one, would have looked like" a criminal killed in a justified homicide? Did we have race-riots the last time a white kid was killed by a cop?

So, that is where we get confused when people say that the collective-we don't value black life. It is an indictment of our character, it is offensive, and no one ever seems to be able to back it up. Which is exactly why I was hoping you'd be able to. 

I want to quit being angry about this. I'm tired of being called a racist.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> Do you have any ideas about solutions to this invisible racism?


About all we can do is make people aware of it.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> About all we can do is make people aware of it.


So the solution is to constantly tell everyone they are racist (adj) but not racists (noun)...hmm, that seems like it might backfire.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Nevada said:


> Interestingly, after posting that I saw an article about invisible racism at CNN.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/us/ferguson-racism-or-racial-bias/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
> 
> ...


Anyone who would make a statement like this has NO standing to discuss racism.



> "The more we assume that the problem of racism is limited to the Klan, the birthers, the tea party or to the Republican Party, the less we understand that racial domination is a collective process and we are all in this game."


Insulting and biased. A statement by an idiot. 

Did you know Tea Party members, Rush Limbaugh listeners, and other white Americans donated over $200,000 to an African American woman so she could rebuild her business in Ferguson? (I'm not saying minorities did not donate, just that the vast majority of the donations came from whites.)


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I don't believe that this is racism in the traditional sense, but it's still racism. What I mean is that I don't believe the shooting was racially motivated, and I don't think racism was on the minds of the grand jury when they made the decision to not indict. But racism was still involved.
> 
> The fact is that a black kid being killed isn't as big of a deal as it should be, and certainly not as big of a deal as a white kid being killed. It's subtle, but it's still racism.


When was the last time a white kid was killed by cops & there were protests, riots & city burned down? Tell us! Remember the riots after the OJ verdict?
Yeah, me neither.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> How do you know that? It's the impression of the black community that there may have been charges if the victim had been white.


B/c we can cite a dozen cases of white teens shot by cops in the last several months w/o charges.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Crisste said:


> All one needs to see that is to examine the amount of political and personal attacks on our black president.
> 
> Never in my years have I ever seen a president attacked with such fervor. I even see it in my personal life with friends who I know are die-hard republicans and I know they're a bit racist even if they won't admit it outright. These people are throwing out accusations and insults as if it was hitler himself in the white house.
> 
> If you're looking for a racism measuring stick, there it is.


Really? Are you not yet 18? Where were you when books were PUBLISHED on how to assasinate Bush? Or a MOVIE out about how to assasinate Bush. And the NYT reviewed both. How about all the public hangings I effigy of Bush? Or the burning a in effigy? Where was your outrage?
When there has been that much about this Idiotincharge, come talk to us.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I don't know that he's a racist either, but that's not necessarily his decision. Assuming that he would turn a white kid's death over to a grand jury also, I suspect the decision would be different. The invisible racism may cause then to put more value on a white kid than a black kid.
> 
> But while the prosecutor might not be racist, he's still biased. He's from a cop family, and his father was killed in the line of duty. He has a reputation of having the policemen's backs. Crump said he requested that the prosecutor recuse himself, but he refused.


Seems as he's been an upstanding democrat prosecutor up till now?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Crisste said:


> All one needs to see that is to examine the amount of political and personal attacks on our black president.
> 
> Never in my years have I ever seen a president attacked with such fervor. I even see it in my personal life with friends who I know are die-hard republicans and I know they're a bit racist even if they won't admit it outright. These people are throwing out accusations and insults as if it was hitler himself in the white house.
> 
> If you're looking for a racism measuring stick, there it is.


Not hardly. My first horror at Obama's disregard of the laws of the land was the almost immediate statement from his DOJ that they were not going enforce federal marijuana laws in states with medical marijuana laws. That lead to a free for all here with pot heads thinking they could do anything they wanted. Pot shops, international criminal grows, etc sprung up like weeds. Then the DOJ, a couple of years , saw the mess they created and flew in the troops for military raids all over. Our crime rate spiked and is still a problem- once here the problems never left.
And that was just the first of the messes he made in my personal life. He simply does not care about collateral damage to people he does not care about. With me it's personal.

But if you think people are picking on him, you must have missed the Nixon years and the Carter years and the Johnson years. They all got a full measure of disrespect. 

To say that the treatment he gets is worse because he is black is simply bias speaking. You have to assume what he does is good and therefore the only reason for opposition is because he's black. If on the other hand you find him to be acting dangerously and badly, his being black should not give him a freepass.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

I wouldn't pick on *Crisste since she is only 6 years old. NO way she would remember anything that was before her time even though she studied history. But she only got up to the civil war and she got that wrong also. 
*


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

jtbrandt said:


> Do you have any ideas about solutions to this invisible racism?


A good start would be for blacks to practice invisible crimes.


----------

