These riots were basically inevitable at this point. If the grand jury had indicted and he was found not guilty at trial - riot. If he was found guilty but to a lesser charge - riot. If he was found guilty of the strongest charge but not given the strongest sentence - riot.
it he did keep moving towards the cop and put his hand under his waist band under his shirt I can see where the cop thought he was going for a weapon, especially after Brown had shown himself to be violent and fearless and enraged.
Of all the stinky things in this case, this part really stinks. It just doesn't make sense... He didn't have a gun. The cop was already shooting at him by the time he suspiciously went for the non-weapon.
It's just a little too convenient. Like the cop had a checklist of reasons to shoot someone so hey, let's just tack in one more. "He threatened me, he attacked me, he hit me, I feared for my life, he came back at me and he was reaching for a gun (that he didn't have).
The whole thing has always been suspicious, and this doesn't help.
I'm torn, if I read the testimony and look at the inconsistency of witnesses and if Brown did act as its laid out then this is a fairly clean shoot, it he did keep moving towards the cop and put his hand under his waist band under his shirt I can see where the cop thought he was going for a weapon, especially after Brown had shown himself to be violent and fearless and enraged.
I do think that vest and dashboard cameras have to become a must thing.
I don't think that the Grand Jury got it wrong based on what they were given to work with.
Even if there was an indictment it probably wouldn't have gotten past pre trial and that might had made things just as bad violence wise.
The big loser is that community, the riots didn't hurt the government or the cops. It probably cost people jobs and cash. It certainly will perpetuate the stereotype that some have that black communities are scary and violent places, and that can't help in terms of attracting businesses and money.
I guess that's my issue - they weren't given much to work with by the prosecution. Lots of questions left unanswered that would've been best explored at trial.
Of all the stinky things in this case, this part really stinks. It just doesn't make sense... He didn't have a gun. The cop was already shooting at him by the time he suspiciously went for the non-weapon.
It's just a little too convenient. Like the cop had a checklist of reasons to shoot someone so hey, let's just tack in one more. "He threatened me, he attacked me, he hit me, I feared for my life, he came back at me and he was reaching for a gun (that he didn't have).
The whole thing has always been suspicious, and this doesn't help.
the grand jury aren't mind readers, the cop isn't a mind reader. He had menaced the cop and if I read it right turned around and came back at the cop after he left the vehicle. He made motions to charge and did the hand thing under his shirt. At that point, he gave the police officer little choice. He hadn't searched brown he didn't know if he was armed. It was clear by the testimony that Brown was in a rage and had earlier tried to disarm the police officer.
Based on what the jury heard, the police officer was in the right, and that's why they didn't indict.
By the information given, this would be considered a good shoot. brown sadly was stupid as soon as he attacked the police officer in the car and tried to take the cops gun.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Haha, this thread has really heated up, but I can't help but snicker at Acey just railing against black people incessantly throughout the whole thread, lol.
The Following User Says Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Haha, this thread has really heated up, but I can't help but snicker at Acey just railing against black people incessantly throughout the whole thread, lol.
Especially since he's black himself and he somehow thinks his opinion on the subject means more because of it.
Based on what the jury heard, the police officer was in the right, and that's why they didn't indict.
By the information given, this would be considered a good shoot. brown sadly was stupid as soon as he attacked the police officer in the car and tried to take the cops gun.
He tried to take the cops gun? Oh yeah we are taking the cops word on that and totally ignoring the multiple eye witnesses.
Haha, this thread has really heated up, but I can't help but snicker at Acey just railing against black people incessantly throughout the whole thread, lol.
I'm quite tired of black screwing stuff up for those of us black people that aren't screwups, as the guy in that video I just posted explains much better than I can. I went home to visit my family and more black people killed each other in the two weeks that I was there than Calgary has homicides in an entire year. White people get to call their family back home and everything is hunky dory and I'm here praying my dad's parents at 90 years old don't catch a stray bullet. This is not okay.
Apparently trying to get people to snap into shape makes me ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arya Stark
Especially since he's black himself and he somehow thinks his opinion on the subject means more because of it.
It does. So go away and enjoy your peaceful life and call me when your parents drag you away from a ghetto hellhole because they fear for your life.
The Following User Says Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
the grand jury aren't mind readers, the cop isn't a mind reader. He had menaced the cop and if I read it right turned around and came back at the cop after he left the vehicle. He made motions to charge and did the hand thing under his shirt. At that point, he gave the police officer little choice. He hadn't searched brown he didn't know if he was armed. It was clear by the testimony that Brown was in a rage and had earlier tried to disarm the police officer.
Based on what the jury heard, the police officer was in the right, and that's why they didn't indict.
By the information given, this would be considered a good shoot. brown sadly was stupid as soon as he attacked the police officer in the car and tried to take the cops gun.
He's already shooting at him at that point. The mind-reading business is long over. My point is it doesn't make any sense (and is therefore suspicious that the cop puts it in the story) for the guy to be going for a gun that he doesn't have while he's already in the middle of a deadly confrontation.
But, I don't believe the cops testimony in general, and the whole thing is a crock of ####, so this is probably just nitpicking at the alleged "details".
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
Here is another one since Mike Brown. Again, no media attention, no violence, no burnt towns.
I'm not sure if it happens as often as police killing unarmed black men, but sure it happens all over America.
So two cases in the months since Mike Brown was killed?
Just last week a 12 year old kid with a bb gun was shot by police in Ohio, which btw, is an open carry state. Ohio where another man was shot (a week after Brown was killed) while holding a bb gun he was about to purchase at a Walmart. The guy in Walmart was holding the gun like a cane, not aiming it. Officers just stormed in and shot him dead without asking questions. This isn't a rare occurrence, the reason this issue became such a big deal is because of the prevalence of instances like this.
In Florida, George Zimmerman killed a kid, got off. In the same state, a woman fired a warning shot--hitting no one at all--when her abusive ex was coming toward her. She's now spending 3 years in jail. But she's black, so Stand Your Ground apparently wasn't applicable. Zimmerman killed someone, she did not, but she's the one serving jail time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfotiu
White people definitely deserve a lot of the blame for how things all got this way. But focusing on guys like Wilson is not going to touch any of the root causes. Burning down their own communities is also not going to make things better.
At some point this country needs to address the issue of police regularly using excessive and deadly force. Have to start somewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
What's the seemingly huge fascination with the number of rounds fired? It's not like police procedure is some giant mystery.
Yes, police procedure is very clear.
Shoot first. Shoot a lot. Figure the rest out later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Well I spent two hours reading Dorian Johnson's grand jury testimony, and it's absolutely harrowing. Also, the tone of the cross-examination by some of the jurors pretty much demonstrates that some of them had already made up their minds on the case.
You also have the fact that one of the witnesses in the case made a racist journal post the morning of Brown's shooting, clearly you had at least one witness with a pretty strong bias.
Hey guys, look! Looks like there's a ton of black people in jail relative to their percentage of the total population! Almost as if what nofotiu just said is fact.
Or, just maybe, that increased incarceration rate is due to the fact that most communities are policed and governed by mostly white authorities. Or that perhaps just maybe black people get harsher punishments for the same crimes. Or that maybe, just maybe, systemic racism actually exists and is the main cause for all of these problems--increased black crime, increased black incarceration, etc, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PIMking
Because the riots are because the cop was white and black on black crime is just swept under the rug and they don't seem to care about it.
In order to deal with black crime--mostly gun crime--this country would have to make some attempt to make guns harder to gain access too. But the NRA would never allow that.
And don't even come at me with "legally owned/illegally owned" weapons. Guess what--if you outlaw guns entirely, or heavily restrict their ownership, you could probably limit a whole lot of those illegally owned weapons. Fewer guns means fewer guns getting into the hands of criminals.
Gun crime is massive in this country, and it just keeps getting more prevalent as the NRA pushes for more and more lenient gun laws. That just leads to more weapons being in the hands of people who shouldn't have them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
To some degree, it's a retort to the black people feeling victimized about the crime statistic. The argument is that you don't have much of a leg to stand on if it's the supposed "black on black" crime, i.e. doing it to "yourself" type of thing. Bottom line is that 5% of black people are in jail and less than 1% of white people are, so black people have got a problem whether it's pink on black on green on purple or what.
Yes, black people have a problem--a justice system that arrests them at an increased rate due to the "war on drugs" which sees plenty of black people jailed for minor drug charges--meanwhile white people get a slap on the wrist for the same charges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AcGold
The lesson to be learned is don't act like a thug or a gangster. So much of the black culture is around acting like a thug and it's silly, the people in the black community should start condemning their own for acting like tough gangsters.
The concept of calling the victim in this case--remember that, Brown was the kid who was killed. Brown wasn't the one on trial here, believe it or not. So you have Michael Brown who robbed a store and shoved a clerk and may or may not have fought with an officer.
Michael Brown is dead. Michael Brown was a thug and a criminal and deserved what he got.
Yet when you have a white kid shooting up a theater or a school--somehow the white kid always gets caught alive--unless he turns the gun on himself. When it's a white kid, he was "a loner" he was "troubled" he just "needed help."
When they show pictures of Michael Brown, they used pictures of him looking the part of a thug. When they show pictures of the kid who shot up Newtown they use wholesome school photos. Meanwhile only one of these people murdered anyone, and it wasn't Michael Brown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfotiu
It gets pointed out because out of black-on-black; black-on-white; white-on-white; white-on-black, black-on-black is statistically by far the most common.
I'd imagine a black person living in a middle class suburb is statistically no more likely to commit a crime than a white person in the same area.
White on white crime and black on black crime are likely to happen far more often because this country may not have "segregation" any longer--but the society is set up in a way where whites still live mostly around other whites, and blacks still live mostly around other blacks. And in general, those black communities are underfunded and poorly policed. Leading to lower education, leading to higher crime rates, leading to more hardened, jaded police officers and then leading to increased tension between the community and the officers tasked with protecting said community.
Systemic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
So who are all these black people voting for? Who have they been voting for the past 50 years? Democrats? Republicans? The system wasn't created overnight.
The system wasn't created now, the system has been in place for hundreds of years. Only now there's a black man in the White House, so racists can just point at him and say Racism Is Over!!
Also the GOP is pretty busy making sure it's as difficult as possible for black people to vote at all. And if they do vote, the GOP has gerrymandered the districts to a point where it doesn't matter how people vote--the GOP wins because the districts are effed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acey
In '12...
93% Obama
6% Romney
In '08...
95% Obama
4% McCain
Luckily for the United States, blacks are only 13% of the population.
Romney was an atrocious candidate, and McCain has proven to be completely insane in the years since 08, and he did himself no favors in picking Palin as his running mate.
Also in case you missed it, despite all the ridiculous refusal to work with him, Obama has cut the deficit down dramatically, has unemployment lower than even Reagan managed to get it, and the stock market is hitting record highs. He's not the perfect president--far from it--but I severely doubt that McCain or Romney would've done better.
And really, if you're a low income person of any race, or a woman, or a gay person, or anyone who isn't white, male, Christian and making less than 250K/year--why on earth would you have voted for McCain or Romney? Their policies go completely against your own interests.
The amount of blatant, unbridled racism in this thread is unbelievable to me.
The Following User Says Thank You to wittynickname For This Useful Post:
Romney was an atrocious candidate, and McCain has proven to be completely insane in the years since 08, and he did himself no favors in picking Palin as his running mate.
Also in case you missed it, despite all the ridiculous refusal to work with him, Obama has cut the deficit down dramatically, has unemployment lower than even Reagan managed to get it, and the stock market is hitting record highs. He's not the perfect president--far from it--but I severely doubt that McCain or Romney would've done better.
And really, if you're a low income person of any race, or a woman, or a gay person, or anyone who isn't white, male, Christian and making less than 250K/year--why on earth would you have voted for McCain or Romney? Their policies go completely against your own interests.
The amount of blatant, unbridled racism in this thread is unbelievable to me.
Hmm... agree with you on a lot of this, but Obama has cut the deficit only from the astronomical levels he brought it to. It's still higher than when he started (although not on a per capita basis). He had an extremely tough economic time to take over, but I wouldn't credit him with any kind of deficit or debt reduction.
Yes, black people have a problem--a justice system that arrests them at an increased rate due to the "war on drugs" which sees plenty of black people jailed for minor drug charges--meanwhile white people get a slap on the wrist for the same charges.
You should watch the video I posted. It addresses your concerns. Black people need to be better and not put themselves in a position to face said harsher penalties. Don't commit the crime in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wittynickname
The amount of blatant, unbridled racism in this thread is unbelievable to me.
Sorry you feel that way. Black people need to be better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wittynickname
Romney was an atrocious candidate, and McCain has proven to be completely insane in the years since 08, and he did himself no favors in picking Palin as his running mate.
Good. Great. I didn't address anything about any of the candidates in my post, he asked for the numbers of who black people voted for and I posted it. There was no agenda, aside from pointing out the fact that even if they were competent, it's clear some portion of blacks voted for Obama because he was black, based on the numerous social experiments you've probably seen of black people being told McCain's agenda and agreeing with it because it was presented as Obama's.
The concept of calling the victim in this case--remember that, Brown was the kid who was killed. Brown wasn't the one on trial here, believe it or not. So you have Michael Brown who robbed a store and shoved a clerk and may or may not have fought with an officer.
Michael Brown is dead. Michael Brown was a thug and a criminal and deserved what he got.
Yet when you have a white kid shooting up a theater or a school--somehow the white kid always gets caught alive--unless he turns the gun on himself. When it's a white kid, he was "a loner" he was "troubled" he just "needed help."
When they show pictures of Michael Brown, they used pictures of him looking the part of a thug. When they show pictures of the kid who shot up Newtown they use wholesome school photos. Meanwhile only one of these people murdered anyone, and it wasn't Michael Brown.
You like to bring up red herrings, this is not a school shooting with white kids. I was talking about the race issues and possible solutions. The government clearly is not going to help them so it's up to them to solve their own problems whatever it takes, that's all I was trying to say.
He shouldn't have let the police think of him as a thug. If he was in respectable clothes, hadn't stole anything, hadn't assaulted anyone and acted like someone who works hard instead of a thug and he was still shot the country would absolutely lose their mind even if the actual confrontation went down exactly the same. Don't give them an excuse to look twice. Black people are stereotyped as thugs by the police and buying into that stereotype is dangerous.
The Following User Says Thank You to AcGold For This Useful Post:
He shouldn't have let the police think of him as a thug. If he was in respectable clothes, hadn't stole anything, hadn't assaulted anyone and acted like someone who works hard instead of a thug and he was still shot the country would absolutely lose their mind even if the actual confrontation went down exactly the same. Don't give them an excuse to look twice. Black people are stereotyped as thugs by the police and buying into that stereotype is dangerous.
Interesting, though I still don't see why black-on-black crime is a thing, but white-on-white crime isn't. So the reasoning is that black people really ought not to complain about what their government and its institutions do because black people are disproportionately incarcerated?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nfotiu
It gets pointed out because out of black-on-black; black-on-white; white-on-white; white-on-black, black-on-black is statistically by far the most common. It is interesting for a few reasons. One of them being that whites are not nearly as likely to be victimized by black people as they think they are. Another is that black people living in poor, predominantly black communities, are most likely to commit crimes against other people living in those communities.
Another reason it gets brought up is because when gun control debates heat up, they are often focused on an incident where a white person kills other white people. And then the debate is based on ways to stop similar crimes with with proposed policies based on the overall United states gun violence statistics. But the policies proposed to curb the odd white on white spree killing do nothing address the far more common black on black and domestic hand gun crimes.
If you want to curb violence in the US, then the place to start is to look at policies that can curb the most common type of crime. And to ignore that the most common type is poor black people victimizing other poor black people is not going to help anyone. It should also be noted that this is far more than a skin colour issue. I'd imagine a black person living in a middle class suburb is statistically no more likely to commit a crime than a white person in the same area.
So I'm right then? In this case, the argument against the protestors is that black people as private citizens should first modify other private black citizens' behaviour before any one (black or white or anything else) asks the government to respond to a perceived racialized bias in law enforcement? Is that how black-on-black crime is relevant here?
__________________
The great CP is in dire need of prunes!
"That's because the productive part of society is adverse to giving up all their wealth so you libs can conduct your social experiments. Experience tells us your a bunch of snake oil salesman...Sucks to be you." ~Calgaryborn 12/06/09 keeping it really stupid!
He got shot because he went after the cop. He could have been wearing a tuxedo but if you're going to scuffle with a cop you're chances of getting shot go up.
