Ferguson, Guns, and Cameras

[Latrinsorm]

Missouri is a shall issue state, and is above average in gun owner %, guns per capita, and general gun rights.
The police allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man for walking in the street, prompting protests.
The police are currently firing tear gas and rubber bullets on unarmed peaceful protests, and threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest.

Tell me again about how armed citizens are a bulwark against tyranny. Tell me again how useless cameras are when the police are specifically targeting them rather than going door to door to confiscate guns.

[Warriorbird]

Missouri is a shall issue state, and is above average in gun owner %, guns per capita, and general gun rights.
The police allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man for walking in the street, prompting protests.
The police are currently firing tear gas and rubber bullets on unarmed peaceful protests, and threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest.

Tell me again about how armed citizens are a bulwark against tyranny. Tell me again how useless cameras are when the police are specifically targeting them rather than going door to door to confiscate guns.

The police here would be the ones misapplying the surveillance.

[Latrinsorm]

Bro, really? After everything I've ever said about government you think I'd install a decentralized, locally autonomous system? Jeez, Louise.

[Back]

Missouri is a shall issue state, and is above average in gun owner %, guns per capita, and general gun rights.
The police allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man for walking in the street, prompting protests.
The police are currently firing tear gas and rubber bullets on unarmed peaceful protests, and threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest.

Tell me again about how armed citizens are a bulwark against tyranny. Tell me again how useless cameras are when the police are specifically targeting them rather than going door to door to confiscate guns.

I'll fully agree. The pen is mightier than the sword.

What a horrible situation. Its serving no one of any color any good. Why those cops are reacting like this is a military uprising is baffling. Especially since one of those cops started this whole ball rolling.

[Ashlander]

Why those cops are reacting like this is a military uprising is baffling.

Might have something to do with the riots and looting and molotov cocktails that were thrown at them.

[AnticorRifling]

Especially since one of those cops started this whole ball rolling.

Back has the facts.

[Back]

Back has the facts.

Yeah, sorry, I'm still not comfortable with shooting unarmed teenagers.

[AnticorRifling]

Yeah, sorry, I'm still not comfortable with shooting unarmed teenagers.

No one said you were... interesting thing to state out of the blue.

[Warriorbird]

Bro, really? After everything I've ever said about government you think I'd install a decentralized, locally autonomous system? Jeez, Louise.

It is what is being installed. A centralized people would have similar problems. I don't really trust Edward Snowden or his former bffs.

[Luntz]

First they said it was reported he had stolen candy from the quick mart that was burned down, it was not a random act of vandalism. After that lie fell apart, they are now saying he wrestled with the cop, which all eyewitness reports refute. From people who knew him, he was a teddy bear type, who wouldn't even go out for football cause "he didn't wanna hit people". Some people keep doing mental gymnastics to justify the shooting of an unarmed teenager, the rest of us see it for what it is. Resistance to fascist police violence is not vandalism or looting, it's a justified reaction by people who know the racist system doesn't and has not worked for them in the past. All these people wanted were some answers and were instead met with a militarized police using force to shut them down. It's bullshit.

[Luntz]

Even if you don't give a shit about black people and could care less about what happened in this individual situation, the fact that a state and local government can repress American citizens with such force should scare any person who isn't intellectually vapid. They've instituted a no fly zone so that news cameras can't see what is going on and are gassing journalists, they are scared the world will see what they are doing. They wouldn't have such fear if they were doing nothing wrong, to invert some bullshit cop logic.

[AnticorRifling]

First they said it was reported he had stolen candy from the quick mart that was burned down, it was not a random act of vandalism. After that lie fell apart, they are now saying he wrestled with the cop, which all eyewitness reports refute. From people who knew him, he was a teddy bear type, who wouldn't even go out for football cause "he didn't wanna hit people". Some people keep doing mental gymnastics to justify the shooting of an unarmed teenager, the rest of us see it for what it is. Resistance to fascist police violence is not vandalism or looting, it's a justified reaction by people who know the racist system doesn't and has not worked for them in the past. All these people wanted were some answers and were instead met with a militarized police using force to shut them down. It's bullshit.

As long as the resistance isn't vandalism and looting...Those shops and shop owners didn't kill the kid. And I agree if that's what happened, and the more I read about it the more it seems that's what happened, it's complete and absolute horseshit and that police force needs purged if they are defending that action.

[AnticorRifling]

Even if you don't give a shit about black people and could care less about what happened in this individual situation, the fact that a state and local government can repress American citizens with such force should scare any person who isn't intellectually vapid. They've instituted a no fly zone so that news cameras can't see what is going on and are gassing journalists, they are scared the world will see what they are doing. They wouldn't have such fear if they were doing nothing wrong, to invert some bullshit cop logic.

Also horseshit to not allow news to report.

[Back]

Sad thing is I already know the end of this story. The shooter gets away with it.

[AnticorRifling]

Sad thing is I already know the end of this story. The shooter gets away with it.

I doubt it. If anything he will be offered up as a sacrifice to ensure the department continues to get away with it, and that's the real problem. There won't be sweeping reform, there will be "He acted against without orders, against intent, etc. so he's the bad guy and he's going away".

[Warriorbird]

I doubt it. If anything he will be offered up as a sacrifice to ensure the department continues to get away with it, and that's the real problem. There won't be sweeping reform, there will be "He acted against without orders, against intent, etc. so he's the bad guy and he's going away".

I think you're correct. The only way that there'll potentially be broader effects is if they violating the freedom of the press stuff gets them.

[Luntz]

Either way, his fellow police officers will view him as the victim and the general civilian population as the enemy, and that's probably the biggest part of the problem right there. Regular ass people are not your enemies and this media narrative of making peaceful protesters out to be a threat is dangerous, to say the least.

[AnticorRifling]

The state needs to step in, they are overstepping their bounds by denying access to information in addition to the other crap they are pulling.

[AnticorRifling]

I think you're correct. The only way that there'll potentially be broader effects is if they violating the freedom of the press stuff gets them.

And I hope it does. You don't shoot the good guys and you don't shoot the journalists, that's not to many rules to follow.

[Luntz]

The State police are part of this police force that has been doing all this, and are actually being pulled back from what I read, because they are making things worse. Federal intervention is what is needed, they need to come in and rip these local PDs a new fucking asshole, they've bungled this thing every step of the way.

[Kembal]

The State police are part of this police force that has been doing all this, and are actually being pulled back from what I read, because they are making things worse. Federal intervention is what is needed, they need to come in and rip these local PDs a new fucking asshole, they've bungled this thing every step of the way.

Think it was the county police that joined in, and are getting pulled back. State and federal now coming in.

Whoever thought it was a good idea for local PDs to get surplus military equipment from the Pentagon needs to be banned from ever working in government again.

[Parkbandit]

I'll fully agree. The pen is mightier than the sword.

What a horrible situation. Its serving no one of any color any good. Why those cops are reacting like this is a military uprising is baffling. Especially since one of those cops started this whole ball rolling.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/23940/dancing-clown-o.gif

[Luntz]

It's possible to be Conservative/Libertarian and "get" it, as evidenced here by Rand Paul. Gotta give him respect for this, I don't see a ton of other Libertarians taking a hard stance on this controversial subject.

"Given these developments, it is almost impossible for many Americans not to feel like their government is targeting them. Given the racial disparities in our criminal justice system, it is impossible for African-Americans not to feel like their government is particularly targeting them…Anyone who thinks that race does not still, even if inadvertently, skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention." http://www.mediaite.com/online/rand-paul-reacts-to-ferguson-demilitarize-the-police-now/

[waywardgs]

Cops shoot a kid, restrict freedom of the press and shut down public dissent? No big whoop. Feds tell a rancher he has to pay his grazing fees? TIME TO OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT! TO ARMS! TO ARMS!!!

[Tenlaar]

So far I've seen the kid was a teddy bear who wouldn't even play football because he didn't want to hit people, and I've seen that he's been charged with armed robbery and assault within the last year. I've seen that the police are targeting peaceful protesters, and I've seen that those peaceful protesters are rioting, looting, and burning. I've seen that media are being targeted and gassed, and I've seen that media are being gassed because they're reporting from in the midst of rioters, looters, and arsonists.

It sure is awesome how anybody who isn't actually standing in St. Louis can just pick which story they prefer and point to a dozen sources that say it's true. Thank you, social media and modern journalism. [/sarcasm]

[Anebriated]

Cant we just dump buckets of ice water on our heads and make this go away?

[waywardgs]

So far I've seen the kid was a teddy bear who wouldn't even play football because he didn't want to hit people, and I've seen that he's been charged with armed robbery and assault within the last year. I've seen that the police are targeting peaceful protesters, and I've seen that those peaceful protesters are rioting, looting, and burning. I've seen that media are being targeted and gassed, and I've seen that media are being gassed because they're reporting from in the midst of rioters, looters, and arsonists.

It sure is awesome how anybody who isn't actually standing in St. Louis can just pick which story they prefer and point to a dozen sources that say it's true. Thank you, social media and modern journalism. [/sarcasm]

I just think it's sad what people decide to get upset about. These unarmed shootings happen all the time. Tea party types scream about the impending police state but don't give two shits when evidence of the police state actually reads it's head- the specifics of this case notwithstanding as we don't know the facts yet. But some rancher's cows are kicked off federal land? Time to gear up for a revolution!

[Parkbandit]

Am I the only one that wants to have the investigation take place and THEN make an opinion on this?

How often do people have to throw out their rush to judgement only to find out how idiotic it is after the actual investigation presents the facts?

[Latrinsorm]

It is what is being installed. A centralized people would have similar problems. I don't really trust Edward Snowden or his former bffs.Do you trust them more than these local police? Or if you like, distrust less. Nobody ever said the federal government was an angel, just that it was better than these local/state assholes and way better than corporations.
I just think it's sad what people decide to get upset about. These unarmed shootings happen all the time. Tea party types scream about the impending police state but don't give two shits when evidence of the police state actually reads it's head- the specifics of this case notwithstanding as we don't know the facts yet. But some rancher's cows are kicked off federal land? Time to gear up for a revolution!That does sound pretty hypocritical. Maybe there's something we're missing, though...

http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2014-04/192276_5_.jpghttp://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2014_33/612491/140811-michael-brown-jms-1713_fd0eddcb0414ffdc4877908e7d7d8b95.330;320;7;70 ;5.jpg

Prove me wrong, Tea Party! :)

[Latrinsorm]

Am I the only one that wants to have the investigation take place and THEN make an opinion on this?

How often do people have to throw out their rush to judgement only to find out how idiotic it is after the actual investigation presents the facts?It is an established fact that Michael Brown was unarmed and shot dead by police.
It is an established fact that the police have forbidden journalists from reporting on the situation in the past day or so.

I'm not sure what more you need exactly.

[Tgo01]

So what's the theory then? The police theory is the kid was resisting arrest or attacked the cop or something like that. Honestly I haven't been keeping up with this story too much.

The eyewitnesses say that's false and that the kid was unarmed and the cop chased after him and shot him.

Okay. With you so far...what I don't understand is why?

The cop was just having a bad day? He's an asshole? He's killed 30 unarmed black teenagers before?

I need something, people. Saying the kid was an innocent teddy bear who didn't want to tackle people in football and was running away from the police when he was shot just doesn't make sense.

[Tgo01]

It is an established fact that the police have forbidden journalists from reporting on the situation in the past day or so.

Is that an established fact? Or is it because the rioters were shooting at helicopters so the police were worried the rioters would shoot at news helicopters?

[Parkbandit]

So what's the theory then? The police theory is the kid was resisting arrest or attacked the cop or something like that. Honestly I haven't been keeping up with this story too much.

The eyewitnesses say that's false and that the kid was unarmed and the cop chased after him and shot him.

Okay. With you so far...what I don't understand is why?

The cop was just having a bad day? He's an asshole? He's killed 30 unarmed black teenagers before?

I need something, people. Saying the kid was an innocent teddy bear who didn't want to tackle people in football and was running away from the police when he was shot just doesn't make sense.

I've heard it ranges from 2 teenagers attacking the cop in his car, struggling for the gun.. to 2 teenagers minding their own business and the cop pulls up, starts to choke one of them without provocation and shot him as he ran away.

Like I said.. how often do people have to look like complete idiots by declaring their opinion of a situation like this, only to find out the actual situation isn't the same as what they thought in their head it should be.

Like every other white (or white hispanic) vs. black confrontation, the human leeches that need the hostility to remain "relevant" are coming out of the woodwork and rushing down to Ferguson to "help".

[Tenlaar]

Wow, I got "suck a dick" rep for a post that did not in any way, shape, or form offer an opinion on the circumstances of the event. That's...interesting.

Suck a dick, you person who has not yet formed an opinion due to wildly differing reports from largely unreliable sources! I sure told you!

[Parkbandit]

Wow, I got "suck a dick" rep for a post that did not in any way, shape, or form offer an opinion on the circumstances of the event. That's...interesting.

Suck a dick, you person who has not yet formed an opinion due to wildly differing reports from largely unreliable sources! I sure told you!

YOU NEED TO TAKE A SIDE AND GET ANGRY!!!

[Velfi]

The police response to the situation is not surprising, there have been articles for years written about the rise of the paramilitary police state that get virtually no attention.

The latest, from The Intercept about the situation: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/14/militarization-u-s-police-dragged-light-horrors-ferguson/

[Luntz]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/08/14/military-veterans-see-deeply-flawed-police-response-in-ferguson/

[Tenlaar]

YOU NEED TO TAKE A SIDE AND GET ANGRY!!!

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1213380/incredible-hulk-o.gif

[Gelston]

Holy fuck SimuCon caused all this shit?

[SpiffyJr]

I live in St. Louis, brb.

[Johnny Five]

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1213380/incredible-hulk-o.gif

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/67425/she-hulk-tf-pt-3-o.gif

[Back]

NT Times on the ground footage. It's fucking nuts.

http://digg.com/video/on-the-ground-footage-of-the-standoff-in-ferguson (http://digg.com/video/on-the-ground-footage-of-the-standoff-in-ferguson)

[Latrinsorm]

Is that an established fact? Or is it because the rioters were shooting at helicopters so the police were worried the rioters would shoot at news helicopters?When a journalist on the ground says he was trying to report on the police (on foot) and they shot tear gas at him, it's an established fact.

[Tgo01]

When a journalist on the ground says he was trying to report on the police (on foot) and they shot tear gas at him, it's an established fact.

Did they fire tear gas at him because he was reporting or because he was in a mob of unruly rioters?

[Tgo01]

So what's the theory then? The police theory is the kid was resisting arrest or attacked the cop or something like that. Honestly I haven't been keeping up with this story too much.

The eyewitnesses say that's false and that the kid was unarmed and the cop chased after him and shot him.

Okay. With you so far...what I don't understand is why?

The cop was just having a bad day? He's an asshole? He's killed 30 unarmed black teenagers before?

I need something, people. Saying the kid was an innocent teddy bear who didn't want to tackle people in football and was running away from the police when he was shot just doesn't make sense.


Thread: Ferguson, Guns, and Cameras

Seems like you should be asking for proof that it was justified to kill him. You know. Except that he was black, so he must have had it coming, right?

Uh? No.

Seems like I asked the question that should be asked.

Whether or not you believe what the police say is irrelevant; that's their story.

All I'm asking for is the story for why witnesses say the cop shot the kid.

Look, I know everyone likes to think the cops are all a bunch of murderous assholes who pull people over on a daily basis just the beat the shit out of them because they looked at them funny, but in reality this is not normal behavior. Cops don't generally chase a kid down and shoot him in the back for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

So I'll ask again...what is the story for why the cops shot the kid for no reason?

[Warriorbird]

Eh. In the Republicans' defense, all three I talked to today have a huge problem with them throwing the reporters in jail, including the school resource officer. I do think it is quite a red flag.

[Ker_Thwap]

This is a tough call, because I don't like paramilitary police, and I don't like blogger/journalists. Rioting and looting your fellow citizens is never appropriate. I say we nuke the entire state.

[Latrinsorm]

Uh? No.

Seems like I asked the question that should be asked.

Whether or not you believe what the police say is irrelevant; that's their story.

All I'm asking for is the story for why witnesses say the cop shot the kid.

Look, I know everyone likes to think the cops are all a bunch of murderous assholes who pull people over on a daily basis just the beat the shit out of them because they looked at them funny, but in reality this is not normal behavior. Cops don't generally chase a kid down and shoot him in the back for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

So I'll ask again...what is the story for why the cops shot the kid for no reason?That's the thing about "generally", look around long enough and you'll find outliers. Like marijuana smokers who aren't psychotic.
Did they fire tear gas at him because he was reporting or because he was in a mob of unruly rioters?According to the journalist:

"They said it suddenly got 'unpeaceful.' I was in the first two rows. Didn't see that shit. Only heard stuff suddenly firing off. they shot tear gas canisters at us. we all ran. I fell and my phone broke. Tweeting from someone else's phone. Jesus Christ. I'm back at hotel. That was the worse thing I've ever seen and been apart of in my life."

(I left the typos in because I can barely type on one of those dang iPhones in ordinary circumstances, let alone after being tear gassed.)

[Tgo01]

That's the thing about "generally", look around long enough and you'll find outliers. Like marijuana smokers who aren't psychotic.

That's fine. That's why I asked for some sort of past behavior similar to this from this particular cop or from this police station. You really aren't doing yourself any favors getting on my bad side. You better watch your ass.


According to the journalist:

"They said it suddenly got 'unpeaceful.' I was in the first two rows. Didn't see that shit. Only heard stuff suddenly firing off. they shot tear gas canisters at us. we all ran. I fell and my phone broke. Tweeting from someone else's phone. Jesus Christ. I'm back at hotel. That was the worse thing I've ever seen and been apart of in my life."

(I left the typos in because I can barely type on one of those dang iPhones in ordinary circumstances, let alone after being tear gassed.)

So uh, who is "us" in that tweet?

"Us" as in a bunch of rioters or "us" as in him and his camera dude? Going by his unnecessary swearing I'm going to go ahead and say he was with the rioters and doesn't give a shit about journalism.

[Laviticas]

I just want to know when they raid the armory, then shit will really be fired up.

[Luntz]

Most conservatives actually fascist when shit hits the fan, in other news water is wet.

[Tgo01]

Did they fire tear gas at him because he was reporting or because he was in a mob of unruly rioters?




Thread: Ferguson, Guns, and Cameras

comments like this show your biased mindset better then anything you can articulate


I'll admit, I laughed.

"You don't automatically take the side against the cops?! You're just a biased racist asshole!"

[Velfi]

That's fine. That's why I asked for some sort of past behavior similar to this from this particular cop or from this police station. You really aren't doing yourself any favors getting on my bad side. You better watch your ass.



So uh, who is "us" in that tweet?

"Us" as in a bunch of rioters or "us" as in him and his camera dude? Going by his unnecessary swearing I'm going to go ahead and say he was with the rioters and doesn't give a shit about journalism.

Perhaps the "us" refers to the majority group of non-violent protestors who many of the journalists have been with while recording or broadcasting. Or, you know, everyone there is a rioter.

[Tgo01]

Perhaps the "us" refers to the majority group of non-violent protestors who many of the journalists have been with while recording or broadcasting. Or, you know, everyone there is a rioter.

So the guy admits he was in the "first two rows" of Lord knows how many "rows" of people that were all "non-violent" protestors and the cops fired tear gas at him because they knew he was a journalist and the journalist (again in the "first two rows") knows nothing was getting out of hand or turning violent.

Alright. Yes. That one tweet has me convinced the cops are firing tear gas on reporters who are just trying to find out the truth.

[Velfi]

So the guy admits he was in the "first two rows" of Lord knows how many "rows" of people that were all "non-violent" protestors and the cops fired tear gas at him because they knew he was a journalist and the journalist (again in the "first two rows") knows nothing was getting out of hand or turning violent.

Alright. Yes. That one tweet has me convinced the cops are firing tear gas on reporters who are just trying to find out the truth.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here, are you saying that because there was a mass of people you are skeptical as to them being non-violent? Or because there were rows of people?

I'm far from the most informed as to every news broadcast or report that's gone out about it, but I've personally seen several videos of large groups of people in ominous rows, marching with their hands raised and saying loudly don't fire at us, followed by tear gas being fired.

It is possible to be in a large group of people, protesting, yet not rioting.

[Velfi]

Similarly, I would ask those who are immediately willing to discredit accounts from reporters or people on the ground: Are you also willing to immediately discredit police statements on the situation? Are you willing to take their word for it in the absence of proof?

[Ker_Thwap]

Most conservatives actually fascist when shit hits the fan, in other news water is wet.

To be fair there are a lot of fascist liberals out there as well.

[Warriorbird]

I don't like it when we're the ones that Godwin. Suffice it to say there are authoritarians and libertarians in both parties. I don't even think most authoritarian types are comfortable with direct violations of the Constitution though.

[Tenlaar]

Similarly, I would ask those who are immediately willing to discredit accounts from reporters or people on the ground: Are you also willing to immediately discredit police statements on the situation? Are you willing to take their word for it in the absence of proof?

There is a difference between discrediting and not automatically believing. I am not willing to take either side's word for it in the absence of proof.

[Tgo01]

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here, are you saying that because there was a mass of people you are skeptical as to them being non-violent? Or because there were rows of people?

Not at all. Latrin originally phrased this reporters were purposefully being targeted by police then he links that tweet as proof. In fact the tweet sounds like the exact opposite of police targeting reporters with tear gas. In a throng of people where the reporter himself describes it as "rows" of people it's hard to believe the cops scanned this large group of people, saw a reporter, and fired tear gas.

It's also telling how the guy admits he was pretty much in the front of the group yet gives the impression that nothing was happening to warrant the tear gas. How does he know what was going on in the back of him? In fact he even alluded to as much because he said he "didn't see that shit." Nothing "seeing that shit" does not give me the impression he was keeping a close eye on everything; it gives me the impression he could have just missed whatever it was that happened.


Similarly, I would ask those who are immediately willing to discredit accounts from reporters or people on the ground: Are you also willing to immediately discredit police statements on the situation? Are you willing to take their word for it in the absence of proof?

I'm not immediately willing to discredit reporters; I merely asked for a reference of what Latrin referred to.

You also have to realize a few things:

A) There ARE riots going on. Reporters have somehow managed to report on this without getting tear gassed.
B) A large group of people is going to make the police nervous with riots going on and with people firing at the police. Doesn't matter if the group "looks" peaceful.
C) Look at the context of these the situation. No riots happened after Trayvon Martin was killed and there were no reports of the police trying to block reporters from doing their jobs there. Here there are riots going on and there are reports of reporters being blocked from doing their jobs. It would stand to reason the cops aren't purposefully firing tear gas at reporters; it makes more sense they are getting caught in the crows of people...especially when they flat out admit they were in the crows of people.

[Warriorbird]

Not at all. Latrin originally phrased this reporters were purposefully being targeted by police then he links that tweet as proof. In fact the tweet sounds like the exact opposite of police targeting reporters with tear gas. In a throng of people where the reporter himself describes it as "rows" of people it's hard to believe the cops scanned this large group of people, saw a reporter, and fired tear gas.

It's also telling how the guy admits he was pretty much in the front of the group yet gives the impression that nothing was happening to warrant the tear gas. How does he know what was going on in the back of him? In fact he even alluded to as much because he said he "didn't see that shit." Nothing "seeing that shit" does not give me the impression he was keeping a close eye on everything; it gives me the impression he could have just missed whatever it was that happened.



I'm not immediately willing to discredit reporters; I merely asked for a reference of what Latrin referred to.

You also have to realize a few things:

A) There ARE riots going on. Reporters have somehow managed to report on this without getting tear gassed.
B) A large group of people is going to make the police nervous with riots going on and with people firing at the police. Doesn't matter if the group "looks" peaceful.
C) Look at the context of these the situation. No riots happened after Trayvon Martin was killed and there were no reports of the police trying to block reporters from doing their jobs there. Here there are riots going on and there are reports of reporters being blocked from doing their jobs. It would stand to reason the cops aren't purposefully firing tear gas at reporters; it makes more sense they are getting caught in the crows of people...especially when they flat out admit they were in the crows of people.

The two highest profile arrested reporters were sitting in a McDonalds and one was taking a photo. Both are from national publications. They are hardly rabble rousers.

[Tgo01]

One of the two highest profile arrested reporters was sitting in a McDonalds taking a photo. Both are from national publications. They are hardly rabble rousers.

Well link me to those stories then. Don't be a Latrin.

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/1381436_10152249699792651_7206789203798321607_n.jp g?oh=a43aa56f779a1c21abb522c4dd995cfa&oe=546CA1AD&__gda__=1416114941_5b3d3a6418b9a061b2e0557521e182f 5

[Warriorbird]

Well link me to those stories then. Don't be a Latrin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-ferguson-washington-post-reporter-wesley-lowery-gives-account-of-his-arrest/2014/08/13/0fe25c0e-2359-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html

Not that you'd do any research for yourself.

[Furryrat]

Might want to add a couple D's in your last line there, before a whole new bucket is opened up.

[waywardgs]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/1381436_10152249699792651_7206789203798321607_n.jp g?oh=a43aa56f779a1c21abb522c4dd995cfa&oe=546CA1AD&__gda__=1416114941_5b3d3a6418b9a061b2e0557521e182f 5

Looks like a guy enjoying his 2nd and 23rd amendment rights and the fruits of his labors.

[Laviticas]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/1381436_10152249699792651_7206789203798321607_n.jp g?oh=a43aa56f779a1c21abb522c4dd995cfa&oe=546CA1AD&__gda__=1416114941_5b3d3a6418b9a061b2e0557521e182f 5

Gangster goes out like a gangster

[Back]

Looks like a guy enjoying his 2nd and 23rd amendment rights and the fruits of his labors.

Exactly. The trolls are out to spread the hate.

[Latrinsorm]

That's fine. That's why I asked for some sort of past behavior similar to this from this particular cop or from this police station. You really aren't doing yourself any favors getting on my bad side. You better watch your ass.

So uh, who is "us" in that tweet?

"Us" as in a bunch of rioters or "us" as in him and his camera dude? Going by his unnecessary swearing I'm going to go ahead and say he was with the rioters and doesn't give a shit about journalism.Necessary? Is it... necessary for him to drink his own urine?

Yes, because it helps clear the tear gas from the throat and sinuses. (I mean, water would probably work too. I'm not a doctor.)
Latrin originally phrased this reporters were purposefully being targeted by police then he links that tweet as proof.Strictly speaking, I said [cameras were being purposefully targeted] and [reporters had tear gas fired upon them]. If you want to mash-up those two statements like the dumb communist quitter you are, I can't stop you, but that doesn't mean I somehow said anything other than I said. I'm not Rush Limbaugh.

[Velfi]

Not at all. Latrin originally phrased this reporters were purposefully being targeted by police then he links that tweet as proof. In fact the tweet sounds like the exact opposite of police targeting reporters with tear gas. In a throng of people where the reporter himself describes it as "rows" of people it's hard to believe the cops scanned this large group of people, saw a reporter, and fired tear gas.

It's also telling how the guy admits he was pretty much in the front of the group yet gives the impression that nothing was happening to warrant the tear gas. How does he know what was going on in the back of him? In fact he even alluded to as much because he said he "didn't see that shit." Nothing "seeing that shit" does not give me the impression he was keeping a close eye on everything; it gives me the impression he could have just missed whatever it was that happened.

I never saw a link to the actual tweet besides Latrinsorm pasting it, I just re-read through again to try and find it. Without that, it's hard to know what the reporter's situation was and I don't really care to search Twitter to find it. My thought would be, if he's in the front of a large group of people, he may not be able to see what's going on in the back, but neither can the cops see through the bodies piled in front of them. The only "unpeaceful" things they would see that I can imagine would be rocks or bottles being thrown, which as someone in the front row, the reporter could have easily seen. According to the pasted tweet, he didn't see anything of that nature.

Again, this is just going on one pasted bit with no actual link or reference or name or anything.


I'm not immediately willing to discredit reporters; I merely asked for a reference of what Latrin referred to.

You also have to realize a few things:

A) There ARE riots going on. Reporters have somehow managed to report on this without getting tear gassed.
B) A large group of people is going to make the police nervous with riots going on and with people firing at the police. Doesn't matter if the group "looks" peaceful.
C) Look at the context of these the situation. No riots happened after Trayvon Martin was killed and there were no reports of the police trying to block reporters from doing their jobs there. Here there are riots going on and there are reports of reporters being blocked from doing their jobs. It would stand to reason the cops aren't purposefully firing tear gas at reporters; it makes more sense they are getting caught in the crows of people...especially when they flat out admit they were in the crows of people.

In any sort of large demonstration, it seems to be almost inevitable that there will be some knuckleheads who take the opportunity to loot and vandalize and be dicks. This does not invalidate the cause of the larger movement as long as it stays true to its peaceful intent, and I don't know that it would ever be possible to completely eliminate that from happening.

If a large group is protesting, even if it makes the authorities nervous, it is not rational to pre-emptively fire on them. This, at least to me, can easily lead to angers flaring up and instigating exactly what is needed to then "justify" the following show of force.

The context of this situation is that murders such as this have happened all over America, and continue to, with the rise of the paramilitary police with absolutely no accountability or anything to hold it in check. As this continues to happen, these protests and demonstrations will likewise increase in intensity and visibility.

The police were absolutely targeting news crews to prevent them from reporting on the situation.

Al-Jazeera America crew being tear gassed and fired upon with rubber bullets: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/al-jazeera-ferguson-tear-gas-journalists_n_5678081.html

National Journal reporters: http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/how-police-are-keeping-journalists-from-doing-their-jobs-in-ferguson-20140814

Ryan Reilly of the HuffPo (who was with Wesley Lowery in the McDonalds): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ryan-reilly-ferguson-arrest_n_5678528.html

[Tgo01]

Not that you'd do any research for yourself.

Damn right.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-ferguson-washington-post-reporter-wesley-lowery-gives-account-of-his-arrest/2014/08/13/0fe25c0e-2359-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html

Wow, really? So not what I was expecting from your description of "The two highest profile arrested reporters were sitting in a McDonalds and one was taking a photo."

Sure sounds like the guy was just itching to be a pain in the ass and get arrested.

"Oh sorry, this way officer? Oh, shit, sorry. Let me just keep recording...oh fuck! Sorry. Sorry. Shit! I dropped my backpack, let me keep recording though..."

Seriously. I wanted to bitch slap him from just reading his antics.

[Laviticas]

Exactly. The trolls are out to spread the hate.

Looks like an ignorant teen, pretending to be a big time drug dealer.

[Tgo01]

If a large group is protesting, even if it makes the authorities nervous, it is not rational to pre-emptively fire on them.

Of course it doesn't give them the right to fire on them for no reason. I'm just saying that perhaps people should stop rioting and looting.

[Warriorbird]

Damn right.



Wow, really? So not what I was expecting from your description of "The two highest profile arrested reporters were sitting in a McDonalds and one was taking a photo."

Sure sounds like the guy was just itching to be a pain in the ass and get arrested.

"Oh sorry, this way officer? Oh, shit, sorry. Let me just keep recording...oh fuck! Sorry. Sorry. Shit! I dropped my backpack, let me keep recording though..."

Seriously. I wanted to bitch slap him from just reading his antics.

You never really got the whole First Amendment bit, did you?

[Tgo01]

You never really got the whole First Amendment bit, did you?

First Amendment...that's the one that gives you the right to do whatever you want whenever you want wherever you want, right?

[Velfi]

Of course it doesn't give them the right to fire on them for no reason. I'm just saying that perhaps people should stop rioting and looting.

I don't disagree with that, nor would I guess that anyone else does.

It's just gonna happen, though. Dummies are gonna be dumb.

[Tgo01]

I don't disagree with that, nor would I guess that anyone else does.

I'm sure the rioters and looters would disagree.

[Willington]

Even if you don't give a shit about black people and could care less about what happened in this individual situation, the fact that a state and local government can repress American citizens with such force should scare any person who isn't intellectually vapid. They've instituted a no fly zone so that news cameras can't see what is going on and are gassing journalists, they are scared the world will see what they are doing. They wouldn't have such fear if they were doing nothing wrong, to invert some bullshit cop logic. .

Luntz post ^^^


Freedom of the press only when the Gov says its ok.

[Warriorbird]

First Amendment...that's the one that gives you the right to do whatever you want whenever you want wherever you want, right?

No, it's the one with the freedom of the press in it. People like to forget about that one a lot, along with assembly.

[Back]

I'm sure the rioters and looters would disagree.

Not everyone there is rioting and looting.

Police are dispersing peaceful protesters with guns aimed at them, tear gas, and some kind of mildly explosive grenades.

Just the fact that the police are pointing live loaded weapons at peaceful protesters is beyond reasonable and all about forceful intimidation and control.

Look at the picture below. The cops are carrying loaded weapons pointed at a protester with his hands up.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/08/140813_POL_FergusonCops2.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg

[Gelston]

The USMC should sue them for stealing cammies.

[Laviticas]

"Mildly explosive grenade" FFS

[Back]

"Mildly explosive grenade" FFS

I don't know what they are called. The look and sound like large fireworks.

[Gelston]

When I did riot training we used stinger ball grenades. They are probably using those.

[Laviticas]

Basically a non-lethal tool. Flash bang

[Tgo01]

Not everyone there is rioting and looting.

Police are dispersing peaceful protesters with guns aimed at them, tear gas, and some kind of mildly explosive grenades.

Just the fact that the police are pointing live loaded weapons at peaceful protesters is beyond reasonable and all about forceful intimidation and control.

Look at the picture below. The cops are carrying loaded weapons pointed at a protester with his hands up.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/08/140813_POL_FergusonCops2.jpg.CROP.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg

Look like paintball guns.

[Gelston]

Not a flash bang at all, it is non lethal. They explode and throw all those balls into people's legs. It hurts.

[Back]

Imagine being one of the community that lives there.

Basically a cop kills an unarmed teenager Michael Brown in the neighborhood he lives in, people who live there go protest, and then cops show up in riot gear with tear gas telling everyone to go home. How fucked up is that? How is that not complete authoritarian control of a population? The cops are saying "we shot your kid but you better not say anything about it".

[Gelston]

Look like paintball guns.

They have paintball guns for fire tear gas balls, but a few of those weapons in there are lethal. They'd be a terrible riot squad if they didn't have lethal resources though. I also can't tell which of the lethal are actually converted to fire rubber bullets.

[Tgo01]

Imagine being one of the community that lives there.

Basically a cop kills an unarmed teenager Michael Brown in the neighborhood he lives in, people who live there go protest, and then cops show up in riot gear with tear gas telling everyone to go home. How fucked up is that? How is that not complete authoritarian control of a population? The cops are saying "we shot your kid but you better not say anything about it".

Back. Just stop.

Tell people to stop rioting and police won't have to resort to these measures.

[Back]

Back. Just stop.

Tell people to stop rioting and police won't have to resort to these measures.

Was the man in the picture rioting?

[Tgo01]

Was the man in the picture rioting?

I have no idea. Was he?

[Gelston]

Also, how dare those fuckers vandalize a USPS drop box. Arrest them all.

[Tgo01]

Also, how dare those fuckers vandalize a USPS drop box. Arrest them all.

That's what I noticed too. I have mail to deliver dammit!

[Gelston]

According to Reuters State law enforcement is in charge now and Ferguson PD is being in charge.

[Laviticas]

Cops could have done nothing, and let the fuckers destroy their neighborhood. That's what I would have done.

[Back]

I have no idea. Was he?

No.

None of this concerns you at all? That the cops can kill someone then suppress the people's protest?

[Gelston]

No.

None of this concerns you at all? That the cops can kill someone then suppress the people's protest?

There are plenty of other pictures showing mass looting and burning stores. We also don't know what was behind that person.

[Tgo01]

No.

Are you basing this on the picture or do you have some other evidence to provide?


None of this concerns you at all? That the cops can kill someone then suppress the people's protest?

Does it concern me that the cops killed someone? Yes.
Do I think the cop pulled up, got out of his car, smacked the kid around for no reason, then chased him down and shot him? I'll admit I'm finding that one far fetched.
Do I think the cops should be "suppressing" the people's protest? Not necessarily.
Do I think the cops should be ready and prepared considering there HAVE been riots going on? Yes.

Seriously Back, why do you think the cops are out there patrolling with loaded weapons? To protect the city and its citizens! You think they are out there to protect themselves? Fuck. They would all be back at the police station playing Wii Golf if that's what they wanted.

[Back]

There are plenty of other pictures showing mass looting and burning stores. We also don't know what was behind that person.

Looting happened the first night after Michael Brown was killed. People were protesting that the police were not giving out any information about the reason for Michael Brown's death. Some bad elements took advantage of the situation but that does not mean everyone there is looting. Far from it.

Here is a timeline of the events.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/ferguson-timeline

[Back]

Seriously Back, why do you think the cops are out there patrolling with loaded weapons? To protect the city and its citizens! You think they are out there to protect themselves? Fuck. They would all be back at the police station playing Wii Golf if that's what they wanted.

You've really got nothing to be so smug about. The intricate web of denial you weave around reality is remarkable.

[Tgo01]

You've really got nothing to be so smug about. The intricate web of denial you weave around reality is remarkable.


Are you basing this on the picture or do you have some other evidence to provide?

Seriously Back, why do you think the cops are out there patrolling with loaded weapons?

Answer these questions please.

[Gelston]

Looting happened the first night after Michael Brown was killed. People were protesting that the police were not giving out any information about the reason for Michael Brown's death. Some bad elements took advantage of the situation but that does not mean everyone there is looting. Far from it.

Here is a timeline of the events.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/ferguson-timeline

I think it gives Law Enforcement a reason to be on edge a lot, perhaps being more prone to use non lethal munitions. I mean, flipped police cars, burned down businesses, vandalism saying "burn down the whole city"...

[Back]

Seriously Back, why do you think the cops are out there patrolling with loaded weapons? To protect the city and its citizens! You think they are out there to protect themselves? Fuck. They would all be back at the police station playing Wii Golf if that's what they wanted.

You have a point. Why are the cops so actively suppressing the protests? Why aren't they releasing the name of the cop who shot and killed Michael Brown? Why are they so quiet about the details? If they did nothing wrong there would be no need for any of this.

To me it seems like they fucked up, are scared, and are implementing a pre-emptive attitude towards the backlash from it.

[Vorpos]

You have a point. Why are the cops so actively suppressing the protests? Why aren't they releasing the name of the cop who shot and killed Michael Brown? Why are they so quiet about the details? If they did nothing wrong there would be no need for any of this.

To me it seems like they fucked up, are scared, and are implementing a pre-emptive attitude towards the backlash from it.

If they fired on a couple World War II vets at a tea party protest you would cheer them on.

[Tgo01]

Why are the cops so actively suppressing the protests?

Yes. Please answer the question.


Why aren't they releasing the name of the cop who shot and killed Michael Brown?

Because he would be dead in 3 seconds?


Why are they so quiet about the details?

How quiet are they being exactly? I thought they gave their account of what happened?


If they did nothing wrong there would be no need for any of this.

Really? You think if the cops did nothing wrong but still shot and killed an unarmed black teenager they would have no need for any of this?

:nutty:

[Back]

Yes. Please answer the question.



Because he would be dead in 3 seconds?



How quiet are they being exactly? I thought they gave their account of what happened?



Really? You think if the cops did nothing wrong but still shot and killed an unarmed black teenager they would have no need for any of this?

:nutty:

New Ferguson Police Commander Ron Johnson Walks With Protesters

The man now leading police in Ferguson, Missouri, walked Thursday night with those protesting the shooting of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown, one day after protesters faced rubber bullets and tear gas from heavily armed officers in riot gear.

"We all want justice. We all want answers," the new commander, Capt. Ron Johnson of the Missouri State Highway Patrol, told The Associated Press.
When it was announced that Johnson would command law enforcement in Ferguson starting Thursday night, he said (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/jay-nixon-ferguson-security_n_5679774.html?utm_hp_ref=politics) "it means a lot to me personally that we break this cycle of violence."

Top half of this pic shows the cops from last night and bottom half is the cops tonight.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvCQxjMCQAIDayw.jpg

[Tgo01]

You know Back, for a man who a couple of months ago said something like "I don't trust videos like this, it's too easy to manipulate videos to make it sound like the person said something they didn't really say" you sure are putting a lot of faith in still shots.

[Back]

You know Back, for a man who a couple of months ago said something like "I don't trust videos like this, it's too easy to manipulate videos to make it sound like the person said something they didn't really say" you sure are putting a lot of faith in still shots.

What are you talking about?

[Tgo01]

What are you talking about?

What are you talking about?

[Latrinsorm]

They have paintball guns for fire tear gas balls, but a few of those weapons in there are lethal. They'd be a terrible riot squad if they didn't have lethal resources though. I also can't tell which of the lethal are actually converted to fire rubber bullets.I hope someone told them which was which.
Top half of this pic shows the cops from last night and bottom half is the cops tonight.BUT THE RIOTZZ

[Back]

What are you talking about?

No, honestly, what topic are you referring to?

[Latrinsorm]

What are you talking about?What arrrre you talking about?

[Back]

I hope someone told them which was which.BUT THE RIOTZZ

And the Bundy Ranch guy with his sights on law enforcement got away.

Where is the uproar over strongarm government right now? Where are the militamen? Where are the patriots?

[Thondalar]

Missouri is a shall issue state, and is above average in gun owner %, guns per capita, and general gun rights.
The police allegedly shot and killed an unarmed man for walking in the street, prompting protests.
The police are currently firing tear gas and rubber bullets on unarmed peaceful protests, and threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest.

Tell me again about how armed citizens are a bulwark against tyranny. Tell me again how useless cameras are when the police are specifically targeting them rather than going door to door to confiscate guns.

I must first admit that I just now noticed this thread, so I apologize if anything I say is already in the last several pages...but what?

What the fuck does an out-of-control government agency shooting unarmed civilians have to do with armed citizens being a bulwark against tyranny? Have you finally lost it?

Also, I never said cameras are useless. I said universal surveillance is useless, and, in fact, dangerous. This is a shining, glorious example.

The underlying theme here, which you yourself give a great argument for in your OP, is that a government not run by the people is a very dangerous thing. "police...threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest." I have no problems at all with the people having cameras...I want more people to have cameras. I want police officers to be on camera 24/7. These people firing on "unarmed peaceful protests" are the same people that would be running your universal surveillance.

[Thondalar]

New Ferguson Police Commander Ron Johnson Walks With Protesters


Top half of this pic shows the cops from last night and bottom half is the cops tonight.

Lol...that police commander was in a ton of shit before this happened, he's using it as a publicity stunt. Also, they had to call in State law enforcement to help quell the riots...top pic shows the initial response from local law enforcement right after it happened, of course they're all geared up and on high alert. Bottom pic shows a couple state troopers standing around that could have been taken anywhere. The fact you think these pictures mean anything is very telling of your inability to grasp reality.

Also, I love your new sig. Too bad your "understanding of these principles" is infantile.

[Thondalar]

Where is the uproar over strongarm government right now? Where are the militamen? Where are the patriots?

Hiding from the ATF until the shit really hits the fan.

[Latrinsorm]

What the fuck does an out-of-control government agency shooting unarmed civilians have to do with armed citizens being a bulwark against tyranny? Have you finally lost it?I'll admit I didn't expect this tack. To be clear, you wouldn't call a government capriciously executing citizens a tyranny? That seems like a pretty clear line to me.
Also, I never said cameras are useless. I said universal surveillance is useless, and, in fact, dangerous. This is a shining, glorious example.Maybe this is me being a physics major (hey WB!), but normally when I'm looking for examples of A causes B the example has to have A. Suppose I say marijuana causes psychosis. It would be pretty odd for me to point at a psychotic who had never used marijuana and say "see? see???". In the same way, there is no universal surveillance in this case, so I'm not sure how you can possibly see this as an example of universal surveillance gone wrong.
The underlying theme here, which you yourself give a great argument for in your OP, is that a government not run by the people is a very dangerous thing. "police...threatening anyone they see filming them with arrest." I have no problems at all with the people having cameras...I want more people to have cameras. I want police officers to be on camera 24/7. These people firing on "unarmed peaceful protests" are the same people that would be running your universal surveillance.First WB, now you... when have I ever argued for localized programs, or even said anything that wasn't absolutely critical of them? It's like you don't even know me anymore. The people running my universal surveillance would be centralized which (not by coincidence) would remove all incentive for them to protect guilty government officials on the ground.

.

Here's the bottom line. At no point have these police attempted to restrict the citizens' Second Amendment rights. They have very frequently (and brazenly) attempted to restrict the citizens' First Amendment rights. They're manifestly not afraid of your guns, and they're manifestly afraid of their behavior being video recorded. It could have been some other way. It could have been that the incredibly well armed American public was a threat that kept the government in line, and it may even have once been the case. But it's not anymore.

You can cling to your gun and it can make you feel safe, but it's no more than a feeling.

[Warriorbird]

The people running my universal surveillance would be centralized which (not by coincidence) would remove all incentive for them to protect guilty government officials on the ground.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha.

[Jeril]

Ah ha ha ha ha ha.

I know, right?

[Latrinsorm]

Ah ha ha ha ha ha.Yeah I mean just look at how the National Guard sided with the governor of Mississippi at Ole Miss. Or how the federal Department of Justice refused to prosecute civil rights violations throughout the same era.

I can't blame you for being cynical, but I have to tell you when you are so in the face of overwhelming evidence it looks more like stubbornness.

[Gelston]

Yeah I mean just look at how the National Guard sided with the governor of Mississippi at Ole Miss. Or how the federal Department of Justice refused to prosecute civil rights violations throughout the same era.

I can't blame you for being cynical, but I have to tell you when you are so in the face of overwhelming evidence it looks more like stubbornness.

Um, the National Guard of a state is under direct control of a state governor until federalized.

[Warriorbird]

Yeah I mean just look at how the National Guard sided with the governor of Mississippi at Ole Miss. Or how the federal Department of Justice refused to prosecute civil rights violations throughout the same era.

I can't blame you for being cynical, but I have to tell you when you are so in the face of overwhelming evidence it looks more like stubbornness.

You're cute when you do this. It'd be even funnier if you tried to grasp the sheer number of cover ups in American history. Covert power is more dangerous than overt by far.

It also wasn't the National Guard at Old Miss, unless that was some sort of odd attempt at a point.

[Thondalar]

I'll admit I didn't expect this tack. To be clear, you wouldn't call a government capriciously executing citizens a tyranny? That seems like a pretty clear line to me.

I do call it that, but it's not on a grand scale. I'm not sure where you're going with this, are you suggesting the citizens of St. Louis should start shooting cops? The idea of an armed populace isn't that you could win a shootout with local cops, but that you could prevent a dictatorship.


Maybe this is me being a physics major (hey WB!), but normally when I'm looking for examples of A causes B the example has to have A. Suppose I say marijuana causes psychosis. It would be pretty odd for me to point at a psychotic who had never used marijuana and say "see? see???". In the same way, there is no universal surveillance in this case, so I'm not sure how you can possibly see this as an example of universal surveillance gone wrong.

I'm using it as an example of potential. If the local government can get away with misusing their power, what makes you think a central government wouldn't? History has proven time and again that it always does, unless it's citizens are vigilant.


First WB, now you... when have I ever argued for localized programs, or even said anything that wasn't absolutely critical of them? It's like you don't even know me anymore. The people running my universal surveillance would be centralized which (not by coincidence) would remove all incentive for them to protect guilty government officials on the ground.

Mmm...and what's their incentive to not protect themselves?


Here's the bottom line. At no point have these police attempted to restrict the citizens' Second Amendment rights. They have very frequently (and brazenly) attempted to restrict the citizens' First Amendment rights. They're manifestly not afraid of your guns, and they're manifestly afraid of their behavior being video recorded.

So many things with this...this may take a while, bear with me. They haven't attempted to restrict the citizens' Second Amendment rights? You know this, how? If any of these rioters openly carried, you don't think the police would have something to say about that? Can you show me any pictures of a guy with an AR-15 slung over his shoulder protesting actively? Anyone openly carrying right there right now would be immediately taken in to custody, if not shot on the scene, and you know it.

Rioting and looting is not a First Amendment right. Peacefully protesting is. These protests are not peaceful, and even if some are, how are the police supposed to know? In a time of uprising, it is the job of the police to quell such uprising, and in that environment, they can't take the chance of a large group of "peaceful" citizens suddenly becoming non-peaceful. Crowds must be dispersed. Right? Right?

They're not afraid of our guns, that's why they're all wearing ballistic body armor. They're not afraid of our guns because they know it's not yet on a national level. They're not afraid of our guns because they can call in the Stormtroopers if it gets to that point. They're afraid of their behavior being recorded because it might influence more people to get their guns, and it would become a situation where they would be afraid of our guns.


It could have been some other way. It could have been that the incredibly well armed American public was a threat that kept the government in line, and it may even have once been the case. But it's not anymore.

I agree with this to some degree, only because the right of the people to be their own militia is so beaten and battered now to the point that it's almost superfluous. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. If a single armed citizen shoots a cop in self defense, the entire world comes crashing down on him or her, because they own the system. Again, the idea of an armed populace isn't to win a shootout with the cops, it's to protect the integrity of the Union.


You can cling to your gun and it can make you feel safe, but it's no more than a feeling.

Life is nothing but feelings.

[Back]

I do call it that, but it's not on a grand scale. I'm not sure where you're going with this, are you suggesting the citizens of St. Louis should start shooting cops? The idea of an armed populace isn't that you could win a shootout with local cops, but that you could prevent a dictatorship.



I'm using it as an example of potential. If the local government can get away with misusing their power, what makes you think a central government wouldn't? History has proven time and again that it always does, unless it's citizens are vigilant.



Mmm...and what's their incentive to not protect themselves?



So many things with this...this may take a while, bear with me. They haven't attempted to restrict the citizens' Second Amendment rights? You know this, how? If any of these rioters openly carried, you don't think the police would have something to say about that? Can you show me any pictures of a guy with an AR-15 slung over his shoulder protesting actively? Anyone openly carrying right there right now would be immediately taken in to custody, if not shot on the scene, and you know it.

Rioting and looting is not a First Amendment right. Peacefully protesting is. These protests are not peaceful, and even if some are, how are the police supposed to know? In a time of uprising, it is the job of the police to quell such uprising, and in that environment, they can't take the chance of a large group of "peaceful" citizens suddenly becoming non-peaceful. Crowds must be dispersed. Right? Right?

They're not afraid of our guns, that's why they're all wearing ballistic body armor. They're not afraid of our guns because they know it's not yet on a national level. They're not afraid of our guns because they can call in the Stormtroopers if it gets to that point. They're afraid of their behavior being recorded because it might influence more people to get their guns, and it would become a situation where they would be afraid of our guns.



I agree with this to some degree, only because the right of the people to be their own militia is so beaten and battered now to the point that it's almost superfluous. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. If a single armed citizen shoots a cop in self defense, the entire world comes crashing down on him or her, because they own the system. Again, the idea of an armed populace isn't to win a shootout with the cops, it's to protect the integrity of the Union.



Life is nothing but feelings.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOROvO2fxTc

[Methais]

So what's the theory then? The police theory is the kid was resisting arrest or attacked the cop or something like that. Honestly I haven't been keeping up with this story too much.

Resisting arrest to police these days usually goes something like...

Cops beat the shit out of / taze / shoot someone.

Cop yells, "STOP RESISTING!"

Cop charges person with some retarded bullshit.

Cop goes on paid vacation while the department investigates itself.

Investigation determines that cop did nothing wrong, even with hard video evidence of the opposite.

I even saw a clip a while back where it literally went like this (after the cop kicked the guy's ass of course):

COP: You're under arrest!
GUY: For what?
COP: For resisting arrest!

http://global3.memecdn.com/im-going-to-protect-and-serve-the-shit-out-of-you_o_1071583.jpg

There's only one appropriate response to all this mess:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrk5QolsraM

[Thondalar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOROvO2fxTc

What? I love penis!

Wait...

[Jeril]

What? I love penis!

Wait...

Tell us something we didn't know.

[Tenlaar]

The underlying theme here, which you yourself give a great argument for in your OP, is that a government not run by the people is a very dangerous thing.

This may derail the topic a bit, and you might think this is a stupid question, but it's something I often wonder to myself when I hear somebody make a statement like this and I just have to ask. If the members of our government are American citizens, and American citizens are "the people," in what sense is the government not run by the people? When you say "run by the people" do you really mean "run by the people that I think should be in charge and in a manner I deem correct?" When somebody is elected to office do they stop counting as part of "the people" to you?

[Thondalar]

This may derail the topic a bit, and you might think this is a stupid question, but it's something I often wonder to myself when I hear somebody make a statement like this and I just have to ask. If the members of our government are American citizens, and American citizens are "the people," in what sense is the government not run by the people? When you say "run by the people" do you really mean "run by the people that I think should be in charge and in a manner I deem correct?" When somebody is elected to office do they stop counting as part of "the people" to you?

It's not a stupid question at all, it's a very good one. In a sense, in our current system, they pretty much do stop counting as part of "the people", because they rarely have the good of "the people" in mind when they make the decisions they do. They are influenced by lobbyists (but wait, that's the people, right?), by corporations (but wait, that's the people, right?), and by their constituents (whoa now, that's certainly the people, right? right?). The good of the Union rarely factors in to their decisions.

If we are to have a successful Union, the needs of the whole must be considered above the desires of the few. This could be interpreted many ways...yourself and Back would probably agree with this notion, but on different grounds. Human nature being what it is, economic equality is a pipe dream that only ends in everyone being poor except the ruling class. The history of mankind has shown this to be true. So government needs to exist only to grant some modicum of order, and till the land that allows the seeds of commerce and equality to grow. It can't force it...it has a long, loooong track record of failing epically at forcing anything besides more force.

Our Senators and our Representatives, and our Justices, and our President, are supposed to be representative of the people. That's the system we've developed...a Representative Republic. The assumption is that you vote for someone to go to Washington and represent you in Government. The rub comes when said person wants to get reelected...if Senator A votes yes on Bill X instead of no, they lose support from PAC B...you might have wanted them to vote yes, but your vote doesn't count as much as the thousands of votes represented by PAC B. The actual issue falls to the wayside. The full ramifications of Bill X become superfluous. Now, Senator A could want to get reelected because he thinks he could do good down the road, and Bill X is just a detour...or he might want to get reelected because he thinks he could have a bid for the presidency and could do more good there, or he might want to get reelected because he's a wormy piece of shit that couldn't hack it as a lawyer but he's got a great smile and being a Senator is a cushy job...who knows. The fact is, they're more interested in getting reelected than making the right choices for the citizens of America. I've come to this conclusion based on the shocking lack of dissertation from elected members of Congress to their constituents on the bills they're voting on. It shows not only a lack of concern for the citizens of the Union as a whole, but a lack of understanding of what their job really is.

I feel better. With that out of the way, I'll get more to what you're really asking, or I assume you're really asking. When I say "run by the people", I mean the people actively take part in keeping our government in check. We, as citizens, have the power to petition and put anything on the ballot to vote. We've become lazy, and just expect things will work out OK. We assume everything is going alright because things like St. Louis aren't in the news every single day, nation-wide...USE the freedom of information act. Check up on your local law enforcement, wash out all the shit under their rug. Be vigilant. Use your first amendment, else we be forced to use the second.

Edit: something I forgot to mention, hopefully it's late enough at night that nobody will reply until I'm done...there is a mentality issue of the "ruling elite". Hitler was a man of the people, knowwhati'msayin? Power corrupts. The reason our system works is because we have the power to check the people in power. If we give that up by complacency, it's effectively the same as having it taken away by force. We rail against the latter, but yet we let the former happen right in front of us.

[Tenlaar]

yourself and Back

I'm going to respond in full when I don't have to be up in five hours, but...man, what did I ever do to deserve that? Harsh, brah. Harsh.

[Thondalar]

I'm going to respond in full when I don't have to be up in five hours, but...man, what did I ever do to deserve that? Harsh, brah. Harsh.

C'mon, brah, take it like it was said...you believe in some childish notion of wealth redistribution....I do apologize for coupling you with Back, though, no (somewhat) soundly-minded person deserves that.

[Thondalar]

You're cute when you do this. It'd be even funnier if you tried to grasp the sheer number of cover ups in American history. Covert power is more dangerous than overt by far.

He can't grasp this, because it doesn't fit into his preconceived notions.


It also wasn't the National Guard at Old Miss, unless that was some sort of odd attempt at a point.

It was a rather odd attempt at a point. It's the same fallacy that he lambasts others for using...in this context, it would be "since the Federal Government did something right once, they're always going to do the right thing".

[Gelston]

He can't grasp this, because it doesn't fit into his preconceived notions.



It was a rather odd attempt at a point. It's the same fallacy that he lambasts others for using...in this context, it would be "since the Federal Government did something right once, they're always going to do the right thing".

Actually, the Mississippi ARNG was at Ole Miss. It started with US Marshals, but they were later forced to Federalize the Miss ARNG and bring in MPs from the Regular Army. This all occurred after the President federalized the Mississippi ARNG, and Federal was only brought in after violence.

And interesting thing about the Ole Miss Riots, the white supremacist/anti-segregation protester's attacked the Commanding General of the deploy army troops' staff car. He, his Deputy CG and a Captain were in there while it was set on fire. They managed to get the door open and crawled to safety, under gunfire. The Army did not return fire. The General later created secret code words that had to be said before the ammo could be issued to platoons, before it could be issued to squads, and before the weapons could be taken to condition 3, and these codes could only be given by the General. They damn sure didn't want to add fuel to the riot fire.

[Parkbandit]

Was the man in the picture rioting?

No, that guy just finished robbing and raping a 90 year old great grandmother at gunpoint, then killed her and was running away when he was caught.

Oh wait.. we have no idea what was happening at that specific moment in time.. and anything we do say we are pulling out of our ass.

Stop being such a packer.

[Parkbandit]

{{crickets}}
{{crickets}}

NOW you know why you should get the facts about the situation before forming your opinion based on projection, speculation and hope.

[Latrinsorm]

I am also going to respond to everyone's questions, but all that needs to be said is in this (http://grantland.com/features/ferguson-missouri-protest-michael-brown-murder-police/) first hand account.
Um, the National Guard of a state is under direct control of a state governor until federalized.
It also wasn't the National Guard at Old Miss, unless that was some sort of odd attempt at a point.September 30th, JFK federalizes (http://millercenter.org/president/speeches/speech-5743) the National Guard and hopes he won't have to (that is, threatens to) send them in.
October 2nd (http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/race/100262race-ra.html), "Federal troops and federalized units of the Mississippi National Guard quelled a 15-hour riot".

I can only imagine that Thondalar has already ripped you two a new one (a new two?) for not knowing history, so I'll leave it at that.
You're cute when you do this. It'd be even funnier if you tried to grasp the sheer number of cover ups in American history. Covert power is more dangerous than overt by far.Ask Michael Brown which is more dangerous. Or ask his family if they'd rather he had been videotaped against his will. I'll wait.
I do call it that, but it's not on a grand scale. I'm not sure where you're going with this, are you suggesting the citizens of St. Louis should start shooting cops? The idea of an armed populace isn't that you could win a shootout with local cops, but that you could prevent a dictatorship.Where's the prevention? Or is it specifically a dictatorship that the 2nd Amendment protects us against, and not tyranny in general? That's not very useful.
I'm using it as an example of potential. If the local government can get away with misusing their power, what makes you think a central government wouldn't? History has proven time and again that it always does, unless it's citizens are vigilant.I think they would, but to a lesser degree and with far less horrible consequences... because history has proven time and again that our federal government is the best system available for protecting our rights. They have the power to annihilate the human race and that's turned out okay.
So many things with this...this may take a while, bear with me. They haven't attempted to restrict the citizens' Second Amendment rights? You know this, how? If any of these rioters openly carried, you don't think the police would have something to say about that?I do think they would have something to say about that, and they haven't said anything, so... I mean, this is pretty simple. If A then B, not B, therefore not A.
In a time of uprising, it is the job of the police to quell such uprising, and in that environment, they can't take the chance of a large group of "peaceful" citizens suddenly becoming non-peaceful. Crowds must be dispersed. Right? Right?Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble. Not only can they take that chance, they are Constitutionally forbidden from doing otherwise. I know I'm the only one here who really respects the Constitution, but you could at least pretend a little harder.
They're not afraid of our guns, that's why they're all wearing ballistic body armor. They're not afraid of our guns because they know it's not yet on a national level. They're not afraid of our guns because they can call in the Stormtroopers if it gets to that point. They're afraid of their behavior being recorded because it might influence more people to get their guns, and it would become a situation where they would be afraid of our guns.Again, this is pretty simple. If you see not A as proof of A there's just no hope for you.
"since the Federal Government did something right once, they're always going to do the right thing".Would you have preferred it if I phrased it "Do you trust them more than these local police? Or if you like, distrust less. Nobody ever said the federal government was an angel, just that it was better than these local/state assholes and way better than corporations."

[Latrinsorm]

{{crickets}}
{{crickets}}

NOW you know why you should get the facts about the situation before forming your opinion based on projection, speculation and hope.I get that grumpy old contrarian is your shtick, but even you can't seriously think an unarmed 18 year old stealing a box of cigars warrants a lethal response, and even you can't seriously think this absolves the police of all guilt for their similarly disproportionate response to the demonstrations that followed.

[Tenlaar]

C'mon, brah, take it like it was said...you believe in some childish notion of wealth redistribution....I do apologize for coupling you with Back, though, no (somewhat) soundly-minded person deserves that.
That's not entirely accurate. I don't believe in wealth redistribution so much as I believe that it never should have been allowed for so much to be gobbled up by so few, and that there is plenty to go around for everybody if people could take greed out of the equation. But that ship has long since sailed and options are limited at this point.


It's not a stupid question at all, it's a very good one. In a sense, in our current system, they pretty much do stop counting as part of "the people", because they rarely have the good of "the people" in mind when they make the decisions they do. They are influenced by lobbyists (but wait, that's the people, right?), by corporations (but wait, that's the people, right?), and by their constituents (whoa now, that's certainly the people, right? right?). The good of the Union rarely factors in to their decisions.
See now, that sounds an awful lot like you want a government "run by the people as long as they are people that I approve of and who agree with me." Who gets to decide what is the best for our country? If somebody fully believes that what they are doing is the best thing for the country but you disagree, do you just automatically win and they aren't working for the good of the union? What is the metric with which this can be measured?


The fact is, they're more interested in getting reelected than making the right choices for the citizens of America. I've come to this conclusion based on the shocking lack of dissertation from elected members of Congress to their constituents on the bills they're voting on. It shows not only a lack of concern for the citizens of the Union as a whole, but a lack of understanding of what their job really is.
Right there with you on this. Money has no business in politics and every elected position should have a single term as far as I'm concerned, not this crap with career politicians spending 30, 40, even almost 60 years in office. I too wish that our system encouraged only those passionate about making a difference to run, try as hard as they can to make things better, and get the hell out of the way for the next guy (or gal!) to do the same.


I feel better. With that out of the way, I'll get more to what you're really asking, or I assume you're really asking. When I say "run by the people", I mean the people actively take part in keeping our government in check. We, as citizens, have the power to petition and put anything on the ballot to vote. We've become lazy, and just expect things will work out OK. We assume everything is going alright because things like St. Louis aren't in the news every single day, nation-wide...USE the freedom of information act. Check up on your local law enforcement, wash out all the shit under their rug. Be vigilant. Use your first amendment, else we be forced to use the second.

Edit: something I forgot to mention, hopefully it's late enough at night that nobody will reply until I'm done...there is a mentality issue of the "ruling elite". Hitler was a man of the people, knowwhati'msayin? Power corrupts. The reason our system works is because we have the power to check the people in power. If we give that up by complacency, it's effectively the same as having it taken away by force. We rail against the latter, but yet we let the former happen right in front of us.
So do you believe that government itself needs to be changed, just the populace that needs to change, or both? I fully agree that the people should be more involved but I understand the overwhelming sense of futility in trying to get something done when you have 320,000,000 or so people that all have differing opinions on what is important, what the government should and should not do, etc.

Interesting story that goes along with the FOIA and checking up on law enforcement. The small town I'm living in in southern Illinois has a little issue with our police force. Not the part where a bunch of cops have been caught running a steroid ring, a different one. There is a notorious local jailhouse lawyer by the name of Raymond Moss (convicted of rape, killed a couple of well liked local guys in a high speed chase, has gotten out of multiple serious charges on technicalities) who has filed FOIA requests for the oaths of office, certifications, and another thing that I can't remember off the top of my head for the town's police officers. You know, the things that are required to be available to the public that actually make a police officer a police officer. The problem? Well...they don't seem to exist. Thus far nothing has been able to be produced but a form letter saying that they are unable to fulfill his request.

[Back]

{{crickets}}
{{crickets}}

NOW you know why you should get the facts about the situation before forming your opinion based on projection, speculation and hope.

What I still know is the Ferguson police department handled this so poorly to the point of causing alarm for all citizens of all colors over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly.

[Tgo01]

What I still know is the Ferguson police department handled this so poorly to the point of causing alarm for all citizens of all colors over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly.

Wait, we're blaming the police response to people rioting and looting and burning the city down?

[Luntz]

Wait, we're blaming the police response to people rioting and looting and burning the city down?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lF2r9eLYlcc/UhwhZVccMrI/AAAAAAAAANw/SvvfOOlNdX4/s1600/crackers-gonna-crack-meme.jpg

It's you. You're the cracker.

[Tenlaar]

What I still know is the Ferguson police department handled this so poorly to the point of causing alarm for all citizens of all colors over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly.

People have the right to peaceful assembly. When part of the assembled groups begin looting and burning it becomes a little more complicated, don't you think?

[Tgo01]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lF2r9eLYlcc/UhwhZVccMrI/AAAAAAAAANw/SvvfOOlNdX4/s1600/crackers-gonna-crack-meme.jpg

It's you. You're the cracker.

Ohh I get it! Because I don't blame the police for people rioting and looting and burning down the city it automatically makes me a racist, redneck cracker!

So clever. Tell me, did you have to build a new shelf for all of your Pulitzer awards or were you able to manage with the shelf capacity you already had?

[Luntz]

No your whole bullshit perspective and bending over backwards to justify violence against black communities makes you a dumb racist cracker, your shitty and obviously biased opinions are just icing on the honky cake.

[Tgo01]

No your whole bullshit perspective and bending over backwards to justify violence against black communities makes you a dumb racist cracker, your shitty and obviously biased opinions are just icing on the honky cake.

You really need to pull your head out of your ass and get over yourself.

When have I ever justified violence against black communities? Don't worry, that's rhetorical because I know all you're going to do is reply with something involving either the word "cracker, "redneck" or "racist." Heck, maybe all three! Go for the gold, Luntz!

[Tenlaar]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvFZ9xgIIAAgCZW.jpg:large

[Luntz]

"Apparently, in an attempt to paint Michael Brown as anything less than innocent, people have been spreading an image of an armed 17-year-old Joda Cain around the web and claiming that it’s Michael Brown.

Joda Cain is accused of murder in my home state of Oregon, and has literally jack shit to do with the Michael Brown murder in Ferguson, Missouri. THESE ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE. Anyone using the above image as “proof” that Michael Brown “deserved” to be shot should be called out for defamation, and promptly thrown down a spiral staircase. "

This is NOT Michael Brown, although it does justify your racist bs so I can see why some of you would be so quick to believe it.

https://38.media.tumblr.com/5fd6711d76d58357a8f3144b535dfe88/tumblr_nab67nlnj31r4amizo1_500.jpg

[Luntz]

bitch please like I'm gonna take your weak and see through conservative rhetoric seriously, you're a fucking joke lolol, if I wanted real political debate I wouldn't come here

[Tgo01]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvFZ9xgIIAAgCZW.jpg:large

Wait, is that the "teddy bear" that didn't want to join the football team because that would require him to come into physical contact with others?

[Wrathbringer]

You really need to pull your head out of your ass and get over yourself.

When have I ever justified violence against black communities? Don't worry, that's rhetorical because I know all you're going to do is reply with something involving either the word "cracker, "redneck" or "racist." Heck, maybe all three! Go for the gold, Luntz!

TG, I'm surprised at you. What you've got to understand is that people with Luntz's perspective are still butthurt over slavery and their inability to get/hold a job or form a cohesive, logical argument. As such, they've no recourse for general discussion other than profanity, insults and the race card. How dare you judge those people. I, on the other hand, recognize their innate biological shortcomings and tendencies toward violence, derp and copulation with multiple partners. They can't help it, and so they should be able to break the law free from molestation, both physical and sexual.

[Tgo01]

bitch please like I'm gonna take your weak and see through conservative rhetoric seriously, you're a fucking joke lolol, if I wanted real political debate I wouldn't come here

So in other words you got nothing and are just making up a bunch of shit.

Gee, who didn't see that coming?

[Jeril]

I think one of the biggest problems with what 'people think is best' is that they aren't thinking about reality and what will benefit everyone as a whole. Their thoughts and focus is on how they think the world should be and what they want to further their personal agendas without regards to how things really are. Take most anti gun people for example, it isn't so much the guns they don't like but the killing and the violence, never mind the fact that if you take away the guns that the killing and violence is still going to be there. It is just easier for most of them to see the guns as the 'problem' because then you can just take away the guns and there won't be any problem.

[Luntz]

Since you're an expert on both analysis of grainy videos and on Michael Brown himself, you tell us mr honky, or do all large black men just inherently deserve to die for looking alike? Your shit is weak, like I said bending over backwards to justify a murder of an unarmed teenager, all because he's perceived as dangerous just for existing. I hope you don't procreate and pass your bs down to your little shithead pale face ugly kids.

[Latrinsorm]

Wait, we're blaming the police response to people rioting and looting and burning the city down?Police don't get to declare total war. They can't (for instance) fire tear gas canisters at your mother because somebody across town robbed a liquor store, and you would be outraged if they did. For some reason you're not outraged when other innocent people are subjected to blatant civil rights violations. Don't you wonder why?

[Ker_Thwap]

Wait, is that the "teddy bear" that didn't want to join the football team because that would require him to come into physical contact with others?

To be fair, his blocking form is just awful.

[Latrinsorm]

Since you're an expert on both analysis of grainy videos and on Michael Brown himself, you tell us mr honky, or do all large black men just inherently deserve to die for looking alike? Your shit is weak, like I said bending over backwards to justify a murder of an unarmed teenager, all because he's perceived as dangerous just for existing. I hope you don't procreate and pass your bs down to your little shithead pale face ugly kids.Hey! Terry may be a shithead ugly pale face, but his wife could be very attractive, so his kids have a good 50/50 shot at not being ugly.

Don't worry Terry, I got your back. <3

[Tgo01]

Since you're an expert on both analysis of grainy videos and on Michael Brown himself, you tell us mr honky, or do all large black men just inherently deserve to die for looking alike? Your shit is weak, like I said bending over backwards to justify a murder of an unarmed teenager, all because he's perceived as dangerous just for existing. I hope you don't procreate and pass your bs down to your little shithead pale face ugly kids.

You're a riot dude.

I'd hate to go through life with so much negativity and hostility. How much Xanax are you on exactly?

[AnticorRifling]

Police don't get to declare total war. They can't (for instance) fire tear gas canisters at your mother because somebody across town robbed a liquor store, and you would be outraged if they did. For some reason you're not outraged when other innocent people are subjected to blatant civil rights violations. Don't you wonder why?

Don't tell me how to feel about my mother.

[Tgo01]

Police don't get to declare total war. They can't (for instance) fire tear gas canisters at your mother because somebody across town robbed a liquor store, and you would be outraged if they did. For some reason you're not outraged when other innocent people are subjected to blatant civil rights violations. Don't you wonder why?

Latrin let me give you some free legal advice.

Read a post. Then read the comments. Then understand what you just read.

That last part is important! If you don't understand what you just read then feel free to read the posts again until you do understand.

THEN reply.

The police are (supposedly) firing tear gas canisters at random and this (supposedly) has people fearing "over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly", according to Back.

A) That's pretty amazing because I'm pretty sure Al Sharpton managed to go down there and rabble rouse.
B) The police aren't doing this for shits and giggles; it's because people are rioting and looting and burning down buildings.
C) Let's pin the blame where the blame deserves to be pinned; on the people causing the problems.
D) ...shut up!

[Latrinsorm]

Don't tell me how to feel about my mother.I wouldn't dream of it. Let's just say I have personal experience with Terry's mother.

In bed.

Because I'm her maid.

In bed.
The police are (supposedly) firing tear gas canisters at random and this (supposedly) has people fearing "over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly", according to Back.No. Wrong. It is a matter of public record that police are firing tear gas canisters into peaceable assemblies. In addition, it is a matter of public record that police are actively infringing on the freedom of the press. People aren't "fearing", they are observing.
That's pretty amazing because I'm pretty sure Al Sharpton managed to go down there and rabble rouse.I never said they weren't shitty at their jobs; that is in fact my main contention.
The police aren't doing this for shits and giggles; it's because people are rioting and looting and burning down buildings.I know that when I see a house on fire my first inclination is to turn the fire hoses on some other non-burning house, destroying everything inside. "Let that be a lesson to the rest of you houses!" I ruggedly declare as an individual.
Let's pin the blame where the blame deserves to be pinned; on the people causing the problems.I am! What's your problem?

[Tgo01]

No. Wrong. It is a matter of public record that police are firing tear gas canisters into peaceable assemblies.

You going to bring up another lame tweet?

[Parkbandit]

What I still know is the Ferguson police department handled this so poorly to the point of causing alarm for all citizens of all colors over their fundamental right to free speech and free assembly.

The clown show continues...

Awesome.

Don't worry though... I found some good news for you:

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188047-by-2025-sexbots-will-be-commonplace-which-is-just-fine-as-well-all-be-unemployed-and-bored-thanks-to-robots-stealing-our-jobs

[Latrinsorm]

You going to bring up another lame tweet?Hey, this thing happened.
You: "Prove it!"
Okay, here is a first person account.
You: "LOL! Whatever."
???

[Tgo01]

Hey, this thing happened.
You: "Prove it!"
Okay, here is a first person account.
You: "LOL! Whatever."
???

Oh oh, we're taking "first person accounts" at face value are we? ARE WE?!

Are the police not people too?

I just destroyed your argument AND your hair! And believe me that last one was no easy feat.

[JackWhisper]

I know. It's so god damned rugged.

[Parkbandit]

Oh oh, we're taking "first person accounts" at face value are we? ARE WE?!

Are the police not people too?

I just destroyed your argument AND your hair! And believe me that last one was no easy feat.

Wasn't the first person account of this incident the one where he said "We was just walking down the street and some cop starting attacking us! We didn't do nothin'!"?

[AnticorRifling]

Video from the convenience store kind of destroys his teddy bear title.

[Ker_Thwap]

Video from the convenience store kind of destroys his teddy bear title.

Do we know the kid was positively identified as the guy from the convenience store?

[Tgo01]

Do we know the kid was positively identified as the guy from the convenience store?

From what I read the police have identified him.

Of course there are people on the internet who say it's bullshit.

There are also people saying they don't trust the video footage because the police can "manipulate" video footage to make anyone look like they are doing anything.

[Ker_Thwap]

From what I read the police have identified him.

Of course there are people on the internet who say it's bullshit.

There are also people saying they don't trust the video footage because the police can "manipulate" video footage to make anyone look like they are doing anything.

Maybe the family will step up and verify that it was their kid robbing the store. That would go a long way to easing the community tensions.

[Latrinsorm]

Maybe the family will step up and verify that it was their kid robbing the store. That would go a long way to easing the community tensions.I don't think anyone of consequence is disputing it's him. The tensions still exist because:
1. Using lethal force on someone who just stole $50 worth of cigars while unarmed is still grotesque.
2. According to the police themselves, the robbery "was not related to the initial contact". This still wasn't a case of hot pursuit, or of imminent threat.
3. Even if Michael Brown had been a mass murderer, it still wouldn't excuse the police behavior related to the community response.

Some people can feel that justice was done if it turns out the victim committed some offense, whether legal or sartorial, and regardless of degree. Take PB for example. The Ferguson community is for the most part not made up of those kind of people. I'm sad to say that the United States is, but the minority is very vocal so this matter isn't going away.

[Tgo01]

1. Using lethal force on someone who just stole $50 worth of cigars while unarmed is still grotesque.

That's not even the reason police gave for the use of lethal force. Stop Latrining up this thread.


2. According to the police themselves, the robbery "was not related to the initial contact". This still wasn't a case of hot pursuit, or of imminent threat.

I actually read the robbery was indeed the reason for initial contact. Source please? NOT TWITTER!

[Kembal]

That's not even the reason police gave for the use of lethal force. Stop Latrining up this thread.



I actually read the robbery was indeed the reason for initial contact. Source please? NOT TWITTER!

Yes, and no.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ferguson-police-officer-not-aware-of-michael-brown-robbery-suspect

Sounds like he wasn't initially stopped for the cigars, but it was noticed by the cop during the stop.

[Tgo01]

Yes, and no.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ferguson-police-officer-not-aware-of-michael-brown-robbery-suspect

Sounds like he wasn't initially stopped for the cigars, but it was noticed by the cop during the stop.

Well isn't that a kick in the pants; the link I saw earlier where it linked the robbery with the cop engaging with Brown has changed to say what that link says.

Figures. Darn 24/7 news cycle!

[Latrinsorm]

That's not even the reason police gave for the use of lethal force. Stop Latrining up this thread.Did you see the word "because" in my post?
I actually read the robbery was indeed the reason for initial contact. Source please?Well I was getting caught up on my Twitter and...
NOT TWITTER!Oh so what, if a guy hits a home run and he's fat it doesn't count? It's got to be PERFECT? What's the point?

[Tgo01]

1. Using lethal force on someone who just stole $50 worth of cigars while unarmed is still grotesque.


Did you see the word "because" in my post?

What's your point then? :/

Does just recently stealing cigars make one immune or something?

[Ker_Thwap]

I'm going to wait until I hear all sides of the story before I decide whether or not the initial shooting was justified.

I don't think anyone believes this was an execution for theft situation.

I would suspect, like in many of these situations, there was some sort of scuffle, adrenalin flowed, fight or flight instincts kicked in, and someone got shot. These chemicals in one's brain don't flick off suddenly, based on the direction the attacker is facing. These chemicals don't care if the 300 pound guy threatening your life is 18, 18.5 or 40. There's a good chance that all parties involved share responsibility for what happened.

You can assign a percentage of blame to each, if it somehow makes you feel better to keep score I suppose. I wasn't there, my life wasn't threatened, I didn't rob a store and scuffle with a cop, I didn't take a stressful job position as a police officer.

[Latrinsorm]

What's your point then? :/

Does just recently stealing cigars make one immune or something?Being unarmed and having committed no serious crime makes one undeserving of being shot.

[Tgo01]

Being unarmed and having committed no serious crime makes one undeserving of being shot.

See now we're back to what I said in my previous post; the cops aren't saying he "committed no serious crime."

It's cool to disagree with the police Latrin, they lie too. But you're sitting here acting like the police came right out and said "Yeah he stole cigars so we shot him. Deal with it."

[Latrinsorm]

See now we're back to what I said in my previous post; the cops aren't saying he "committed no serious crime."

It's cool to disagree with the police Latrin, they lie too. But you're sitting here acting like the police came right out and said "Yeah he stole cigars so we shot him. Deal with it."Prove they didn't. NOT WITH TWITTER.

Ha ha I won, first one to ask for proof wins. :)

[Tgo01]

Prove they didn't. NOT WITH TWITTER.

Ha ha I won, first one to ask for proof wins. :)

:(

[ClydeR]

Actually, the Mississippi ARNG was at Ole Miss. It started with US Marshals, but they were later forced to Federalize the Miss ARNG and bring in MPs from the Regular Army. This all occurred after the President federalized the Mississippi ARNG, and Federal was only brought in after violence.

And interesting thing about the Ole Miss Riots, the white supremacist/anti-segregation protester's attacked the Commanding General of the deploy army troops' staff car. He, his Deputy CG and a Captain were in there while it was set on fire. They managed to get the door open and crawled to safety, under gunfire. The Army did not return fire. The General later created secret code words that had to be said before the ammo could be issued to platoons, before it could be issued to squads, and before the weapons could be taken to condition 3, and these codes could only be given by the General. They damn sure didn't want to add fuel to the riot fire.

That was an interesting and informed post. Is there a website or book that you would recommend to someone who wants to know more?

[Warriorbird]

I am also going to respond to everyone's questions, but all that needs to be said is in this (http://grantland.com/features/ferguson-missouri-protest-michael-brown-murder-police/) first hand account.September 30th, JFK federalizes (http://millercenter.org/president/speeches/speech-5743) the National Guard and hopes he won't have to (that is, threatens to) send them in.
October 2nd (http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/race/100262race-ra.html), "Federal troops and federalized units of the Mississippi National Guard quelled a 15-hour riot".

I can only imagine that Thondalar has already ripped you two a new one (a new two?) for not knowing history, so I'll leave it at that.Ask Michael Brown which is more dangerous. Or ask his family if they'd rather he had been videotaped against his will. I'll wait.Where's the prevention? Or is it specifically a dictatorship that the 2nd Amendment protects us against, and not tyranny in general? That's not very useful.I think they would, but to a lesser degree and with far less horrible consequences... because history has proven time and again that our federal government is the best system available for protecting our rights. They have the power to annihilate the human race and that's turned out okay.I do think they would have something to say about that, and they haven't said anything, so... I mean, this is pretty simple. If A then B, not B, therefore not A.Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble. Not only can they take that chance, they are Constitutionally forbidden from doing otherwise. I know I'm the only one here who really respects the Constitution, but you could at least pretend a little harder.Again, this is pretty simple. If you see not A as proof of A there's just no hope for you.Would you have preferred it if I phrased it "Do you trust them more than these local police? Or if you like, distrust less. Nobody ever said the federal government was an angel, just that it was better than these local/state assholes and way better than corporations."

Note the careful use of the word federalized and Federal troops.

[Latrinsorm]

Note the careful use of the word federalized and Federal troops.I note all careful word usage. Do you agree that the National Guard was involved on the side of good at the behest of the federal government during the Ole Miss fiasco, or not?

[Back]

So what's the theory then? The police theory is the kid was resisting arrest or attacked the cop or something like that. Honestly I haven't been keeping up with this story too much.

The eyewitnesses say that's false and that the kid was unarmed and the cop chased after him and shot him.

Okay. With you so far...what I don't understand is why?

The cop was just having a bad day? He's an asshole? He's killed 30 unarmed black teenagers before?

I need something, people. Saying the kid was an innocent teddy bear who didn't want to tackle people in football and was running away from the police when he was shot just doesn't make sense.


I've heard it ranges from 2 teenagers attacking the cop in his car, struggling for the gun.. to 2 teenagers minding their own business and the cop pulls up, starts to choke one of them without provocation and shot him as he ran away.

Like I said.. how often do people have to look like complete idiots by declaring their opinion of a situation like this, only to find out the actual situation isn't the same as what they thought in their head it should be.

Like every other white (or white hispanic) vs. black confrontation, the human leeches that need the hostility to remain "relevant" are coming out of the woodwork and rushing down to Ferguson to "help".

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsi7nxJvHw1r24lq9o1_250.gif

[Ker_Thwap]

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsi7nxJvHw1r24lq9o1_250.gif

Use your big boy words. What is frustrating you with their statements specifically. Is it that your world is so incredibly black and white that you can't even conceive that someone might have an opinion that differs from yours? The only thing I can see in common between those two statements is that they want more facts before rushing to judgement. That seems a very admirable trait, and I'm not entirely certain it's deserving of Klingon level scorn.

Do you live in a bad neighborhood yourself, do you often find yourself personally at the mercy of a police force running rampant. Does your daily commute home involve running a gamut of angry police officers who shoot at you to get their jollies? Maybe you could share some first hand experiences with the rest of us. Please share with us what kind of fascist forces have twisted your tragic young life, so that you've already judged this situation with such certainty.

[Parkbandit]

Use your big boy words. What is frustrating you with their statements specifically. Is it that your world is so incredibly black and white that you can't even conceive that someone might have an opinion that differs from yours? The only thing I can see in common between those two statements is that they want more facts before rushing to judgement. That seems a very admirable trait, and I'm not entirely certain it's deserving of Klingon level scorn.

Do you live in a bad neighborhood yourself, do you often find yourself personally at the mercy of a police force running rampant. Does your daily commute home involve running a gamut of angry police officers who shoot at you to get their jollies? Maybe you could share some first hand experiences with the rest of us. Please share with us what kind of fascist forces have twisted your tragic young life, so that you've already judged this situation with such certainty.

He prejudged the entire episode to fit into an innocent black child vs. big fat mean white cop little gift box and now that SOME of the truth is coming forward, he's upset because he looks like an idiot (again).

I don't blame him for being upset. How many times has he made himself look foolish on these boards?? He has to be tired of it by now.

[Back]

Unfortunately the looting last night in Ferguson has hurt the message of the protests. Criminal elements took advantage and now the protesters have to suffer the perception that everyone is looting. Not good for Ferguson.

[Luntz]

Unfortunately the looting last night in Ferguson has hurt the message of the protests. Criminal elements took advantage and now the protesters have to suffer the perception that everyone is looting. Not good for Ferguson.

And here we see the ineffectual respectability politics that liberalism has become, when focusing on the reaction to police violence is more important then justice for a child gunned down for being black in America. Way to play into the conservative rhetoric, you're even more of a joke then they are tbh.

[Tgo01]

Unfortunately the looting last night in Ferguson has hurt the message of the protests. Criminal elements took advantage and now the protesters have to suffer the perception that everyone is looting. Not good for Ferguson.


And here we see the ineffectual respectability politics that liberalism has become, when focusing on the reaction to police violence is more important then justice for a child gunned down for being black in America. Way to play into the conservative rhetoric, you're even more of a joke then they are tbh.

Guys guys! When will all this senseless liberal on liberal hate stop!

[Back]

And here we see the ineffectual respectability politics that liberalism has become, when focusing on the reaction to police violence is more important then justice for a child gunned down for being black in America. Way to play into the conservative rhetoric, you're even more of a joke then they are tbh.

I still don't think the police handled the situation properly from the beginning and I still don't think Michael Brown's death was justified. My opinion there has not changed. But rioting and looting the community is unacceptable. Unfortunately it hurts everyone and drowns out the very valid message of the protests.

[Parkbandit]

I still don't think the police handled the situation properly from the beginning and I still don't think Michael Brown's death was justified. My opinion there has not changed.

You are basing your opinion on the very few facts and stories to come out and your predetermined notion that the kid is innocent and the cop is guilty of shooting an innocent child. That may turn out to actually be the case, but what would have had to take place for the officer's actions to be justified? What if Michael Brown actually did attack the cop and tried to take his gun?



But rioting and looting the community is unacceptable. Unfortunately it hurts everyone and drowns out the very valid message of the protests.

The message is based upon a gentle giant who wouldn't play football because he didn't want to hurt anyone who was suddenly attacked by police and shot down for no reason at all. If that is what actually happened, you are right.. It's an important message.

[Ker_Thwap]

The gentle giant story reminded me of an old Sean of the Thread post. So, there I was minding my own business .... then suddenly, I was in jail.

It's not easy being this jaded.

[Warriorbird]

Do note that the police chief said he wasn't approached related to that incident.

[Dendum]

I have been reading some of the editorials on this incident, one was by a british lady who pointed out the difference between American Citizen-Cop relations and other countries, I have been in a few other countries, some in the middle east perhaps had even worse citizen-dictatorstrongmen relations but she was correct that in a lot of other 1st world countries you don't cringe as much when you see a cop car, or see an uniformed officer walking your way.

On the flip side, being a cop in the United States probably feels a lot more dangerous than being one in Japan does....

Not sure the current state of affairs is working here in everyone's best interest.

[Jeril]

I have been reading some of the editorials on this incident, one was by a british lady who pointed out the difference between American Citizen-Cop relations and other countries, I have been in a few other countries, some in the middle east perhaps had even worse citizen-dictatorstrongmen relations but she was correct that in a lot of other 1st world countries you don't cringe as much when you see a cop car, or see an uniformed officer walking your way.

On the flip side, being a cop in the United States probably feels a lot more dangerous than being one in Japan does....

Not sure the current state of affairs is working here in everyone's best interest.


It isn't, but the people in power like it that way.

[Tgo01]

Uh-oh... (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168698-eyewitness-recalls-important-detail-background-video-mins-ferguson-shooting/)


A previously unnoticed detail in a background conversion of a video taken minutes after the Ferguson shooting could change the course of the investigation into Mike Brown’s death.

The original video poster appears sympathetic to the narrative that Mike Brown was shot unarmed with his hands in the air. But he unknowingly picks up conversation between a man who saw the altercation and another neighbor.

An approximate transcription of the background conversation, as related by the “Conservative Treehouse” blog:
@6:28/6:29 of video
#1 How’d he get from there to there?
#2 Because he ran, the police was still in the truck – cause he was like over the truck
{crosstalk}
#2 But him and the police was both in the truck, then he ran – the police got out and ran after him
{crosstalk}
#2 Then the next thing I know he doubled back toward him cus - the police had his gun drawn already on him –
#1. Oh, the police got his gun
#2 The police kept dumpin on him, and I’m thinking the police kept missing – he like – be like – but he kept coming toward him
{crosstalk}
#2 Police fired shots – the next thing I know – the police was missing
#1 The Police?
#2 The Police shot him
#1 Police?
#2 The next thing I know … I’m thinking … the dude started running … (garbled something about “he took it from him”)

This is terribly important because if Mike Brown had been shot, and he advanced towards the cop instead of surrendering, it would substantiate the narrative that the policeman shot in self-defense due to the fact that he was being threatened with severe bodily harm.

This corroborates an account of the event given by a friend of Officer Darren Wilson:

Well, then Michael takes off and gets to be about 35 feet away. And, Darren’s first protocol is to pursue. So, he stands up and yells, “Freeze!” Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something.”

It’s far too unlikely that these two accounts are similar accidentally, having been from such disparate sources. The seeming witness in the background conversation is speaking with detail about the tragic shooting, and in a manner that runs contrary to the widespread version. Those who watch the video need to judge for themselves if the witness sounds reliable (but he would seemingly have nothing to gain by telling such a story.)

A third piece of the puzzle would be the toxicology report. If there happens to be anything found that might explain how Mike Brown might have been shot and kept advancing toward the officer, then the defense becomes even more believable. Unless someone is emotionally invested in an alternative narrative to the extent that one might ignore plain facts.

We shall see.

[Back]

Protesters Say Ferguson Feels Like Gaza, Palestinians Tweet Back Advice


Scenes of police crushing protests in Ferguson (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/ferguson-protests-police-response_n_5677741.html), a suburb of St. Louis, Missouri where an unarmed black teenager was shot on Saturday, have prompted outrage in the U.S. and shock around the world.


As the streets of Ferguson filled with tear gas and heavily-armed SWAT teams moved in, some protesters said Ferguson feels like the war-torn Gaza Strip. Some chanted "Gaza Strip" as they faced the lines of police, L.A. Times reporter Matt Pearce wrote on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mattdpearce/statuses/499400566397607936). "We are being occupied,” one commented to the Daily Beast (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/12/michael-brown-s-hometown-is-under-occupation.html). “Will we as a people rise up like the people of Gaza?"


Palestinians in Gaza -- where fighting between militants and the Israeli army is on pause (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/14/gaza-peace-talks_n_5677939.html) after weeks of violence left more than 1,900 dead -- and around the world have expressed their solidarity with the protesters in Ferguson.


Some people even offered advice to the Ferguson protesters on how to deal with tear gas inhalation, and other riot control methods.


Some took the advice as confirmation that Ferguson is akin to an international war zone. "You know things are out of control in Ferguson, MO, when people in Gaza are tweeting advice on how to cope," wrote one Twitter user (https://twitter.com/Roaming_Kiwi/status/499736755570880514).


However, others urged caution about any comparisons between the police violence in Missouri and the devastating war in the Gaza Strip.


The Palestinians tweeting advice referred to the response of Israeli military and police forces to protests in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, not airstrikes in Gaza. Others noted that issues of police force, accountability and race in Ferguson are part of America's own troubled history.

Click the top link to see some of the tweets.

[Tgo01]

Protesters in Ferguson feel like...holy shit.

I knew people were stupid but this is all kinds of new levels of stupid.

[Latrinsorm]

This is terribly important because if Mike Brown had been shot, and he advanced towards the cop instead of surrendering, it would substantiate the narrative that the policeman shot in self-defense due to the fact that he was being threatened with severe bodily harm.So you're saying that after the police shot him once unprovoked, he moved towards the police and all further shots were self-defense? That's really your argument? Really? Really???

[Tgo01]

So you're saying that after the police shot him once unprovoked, he moved towards the police and all further shots were self-defense? That's really your argument? Really? Really???

Where was the word "unprovoked" in that article?

[Latrinsorm]

I take it back, Terry was right. An unarmed black man running away from a police truck (not sure how a truck got into it but it is Missouri) is clearly a provocation for lethal force.

[Tgo01]

I take it back, Terry was right. An unarmed black man running away from a police truck (not sure how a truck got into it but it is Missouri) is clearly a provocation for lethal force.

Where in the article did it say the cops fired at him as he was running away?

It's like you're not even trying in this thread, Latrin :(

Hey, if you want to say that audio recording is bullshit because...well because you don't like it then okay. But you keep throwing these narratives into the mix that weren't discussed in this article or the audio recording.

[Thondalar]

I don't understand why we even have a system of law anymore, when the court of public opinion settles these cases almost immediately. I mean, legal trials and investigations take time we simply don't have in our busy lives these days.

[Thondalar]

See now, that sounds an awful lot like you want a government "run by the people as long as they are people that I approve of and who agree with me." Who gets to decide what is the best for our country? If somebody fully believes that what they are doing is the best thing for the country but you disagree, do you just automatically win and they aren't working for the good of the union? What is the metric with which this can be measured?

All of this goes back to the basics of my political views. It shouldn't matter who is "in charge", because the rules for their actions should be so restrictive that they couldn't fuck up if they wanted to. Anyone who abridges the established freedoms of the People is an enemy of The People. The people who sit in Washington all year coming up with new laws are enemies of The People. The idea here is for the government to be restricted and the people to be free...we've slowly worked our way into an opposite scenario.


So do you believe that government itself needs to be changed, just the populace that needs to change, or both? I fully agree that the people should be more involved but I understand the overwhelming sense of futility in trying to get something done when you have 320,000,000 or so people that all have differing opinions on what is important, what the government should and should not do, etc.

Both, for different reasons. The government needs to change in the sense that it needs to get back to it's roots, and stop trying to run everyone's lives. The people need to change in the sense that they need to stop depending on Nanny Sam to solve all of their problems for them, and take more personal responsibility for their actions. It starts on the local level. How many here have been to a town council meeting?


Interesting story that goes along with the FOIA and checking up on law enforcement. The small town I'm living in in southern Illinois has a little issue with our police force. Not the part where a bunch of cops have been caught running a steroid ring, a different one. There is a notorious local jailhouse lawyer by the name of Raymond Moss (convicted of rape, killed a couple of well liked local guys in a high speed chase, has gotten out of multiple serious charges on technicalities) who has filed FOIA requests for the oaths of office, certifications, and another thing that I can't remember off the top of my head for the town's police officers. You know, the things that are required to be available to the public that actually make a police officer a police officer. The problem? Well...they don't seem to exist. Thus far nothing has been able to be produced but a form letter saying that they are unable to fulfill his request.

I firmly believe that corruption is quite rampant in government agencies on all levels. I used to think I was just paranoid, until I worked for one.

[Thondalar]

And here we see the ineffectual respectability politics that liberalism has become, when focusing on the reaction to police violence is more important then justice for a child gunned down for being black in America. Way to play into the conservative rhetoric, you're even more of a joke then they are tbh.

Do you have some evidence he was shot for being black? You sound like someone who has all the details. You should fill us in.

[Astray]

I'm waiting for Judge Dredd to pop out from behind the police and start blowing people away for unlawful assembly.

[Latrinsorm]

Where in the article did it say the cops fired at him as he was running away?Did I say as he was running away? Or, if you like, did I say as he was running away? Or did I say that the act of running away was provocation, which does not necessarily indicate the state he was in at the instant the shots were fired?

[Tgo01]

Did I say as he was running away? Or, if you like, did I say as he was running away? Or did I say that the act of running away was provocation, which does not necessarily indicate the state he was in at the instant the shots were fired?

Both the police officer's friend and the guy in this recording said he was running towards the officer. What was the officer supposed to do?

I think you're making a great point against universal surveillance; even if we have the evidence people are going to disregard it anyways.

[Candor]

I don't understand why we even have a system of law anymore, when the court of public opinion settles these cases almost immediately. I mean, legal trials and investigations take time we simply don't have in our busy lives these days.

Arguably the above is the most intelligent post in the entire thread.

[Stabbyrogue]

So you're saying that after the police shot him once unprovoked, he moved towards the police and all further shots were self-defense? That's really your argument? Really? Really???

There's a video of the scene in which that's exactly what one of the witnesses says before more police arrived. "He was running towards the cop and the cop shot him" \quote.

Everyone says teenager like he was a kid. He was like 6'5 275+ lbs. If I were a cop, shot him, and he's still coming at me, yes. I'm putting more rounds downrange. The only person I feel badly for in this whole situation is the police officer. As facts come out, that could change, but I just can't picture a cop shooting a kid with his hands in the air.

The area this happened in is about as bad as it gets. I was shot about four blocks from the scene eight years ago or so.

Living here in St. Louis, it amazes me how the national media has spun all of this. Almost like the two witnesses (one was just involved in a robbery) can't tell a lie. What ever happened to evidence?

[SHAFT]

Stabby, you were shot?

[Astray]

Wait, this is that guy who robbed a convenience store shortly before this mess broke out, right?

[Grey]

Wait, this is that guy who robbed a convenience store shortly before this mess broke out, right?

And, in his honor, some "protesters" finished the job.

See? It was all just an homage!

[Tgo01]

I thought the cop shot him as he was running away? (http://www.aol.com/article/2014/08/18/private-autopsy-reveals-brown-was-shot-6-times/20948245/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D516560)


Dr. Michael Baden, a former New York City chief medical examiner, told The New York Times that one of the bullets entered the top of Brown's skull, suggesting that his head was bent forward when he suffered a fatal injury.

Brown was also shot four times in the right arm, and all the bullets were fired into his front, Baden said.

Trick bullets or trick gun?

[Astray]

I thought the cop shot him as he was running away? (http://www.aol.com/article/2014/08/18/private-autopsy-reveals-brown-was-shot-6-times/20948245/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D516560)



Trick bullets or trick gun?

Trick question, it was racism that killed him. Just ask the locals.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I just wish they'd start shooting the looters. And Sharpton.

[Ker_Thwap]

Wait, do I have this right? The eyewitness who claimed the whole "shooting in the back" deal, was his buddy who robbed the store with him?

[Tgo01]

Wait, do I have this right? The eyewitness who claimed the whole "shooting in the back" deal, was his buddy who robbed the store with him?

Yes. Believe it or not the friend who was walking with him says the cop started it all and chased him down and shot him.

I think there is another eyewitness who says Brown's arms were in the air when he was shot, of course that alone doesn't disprove the narrative that Brown was charging at the officer.

[Parkbandit]

The investigation isn't even released yet... let's wait for the actual facts to come out.

[Gelston]

The investigation isn't even released yet... let's wait for the actual facts to come out.

Fuck that, speculating is more fun.

[Ker_Thwap]

The investigation isn't even released yet... let's wait for the actual facts to come out.

At this point, I'm more concerned about the miserable state of the news reporting. I'm thinking a whole lot less outrage would have raged across the nation had the first reporter said something to the effect of "Brown's acquaintance claimed he was shot in the back" rather than "an eyewitness claimed Brown was shot in the back."

[SpiffyJr]

At this point, I'm more concerned about the miserable state of the news reporting. I'm thinking a whole lot less outrage would have raged across the nation had the first reporter said something to the effect of "Brown's acquaintance claimed he was shot in the back" rather than "an eyewitness claimed Brown was shot in the back."

One causes way more hype than the other and hype is what the news lives for.

[Tgo01]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlMjhoYPmZ8

Interview with the friend shortly after this all happened.

Notice the 2:04 minute mark; by this time the friend had already said the two of them were running and the cop was chasing after them.

"He shot again, and once my friend felt that shot, he turned around and put his hands in the air."

Yet yesterday the medical examiner said all shots were fired from the front.

[Latrinsorm]

As facts come out, that could change, but I just can't picture a cop shooting a kid with his hands in the air.I can't picture cops turning fire hoses and dogs on peaceful protesters either, but that happened not long ago.
Living here in St. Louis, it amazes me how the national media has spun all of this. Almost like the two witnesses (one was just involved in a robbery) can't tell a lie. What ever happened to evidence?If the police don't have anything to hide, why are they arresting journalists and generally acting tyrannically? (But NOT dictatorially, because armed citizens prevent dictatorships.) It's like a person who comes home at 3 in the morning, disposes of all the knives in their kitchen, burns all their clothes, takes two showers, then insists they weren't destroying evidence. If you were a cop, would you take that defense seriously, or would you consider the circumstantial evidence?
Interview with the friend shortly after this all happened.

Notice the 2:04 minute mark; by this time the friend had already said the two of them were running and the cop was chasing after them.

"He shot again, and once my friend felt that shot, he turned around and put his hands in the air."

Yet yesterday the medical examiner said all shots were fired from the front.For someone so interested in parsing, you're doing a pretty poor job of it. You can feel a shot without the bullet hitting your body - it could hit your clothes, you could feel the zip of compressed air, you could just hear it.

Also, if you can explain how a 6'5" guy can get shot in the TOP of the skull without being on his knees in exactly the surrender position his accomplice described, I'd like to hear it.

[Tgo01]

For someone so interested in parsing, you're doing a pretty poor job of it. You can feel a shot without the bullet hitting your body - it could hit your clothes, you could feel the zip of compressed air, you could just hear it.

Right. Yeah. His friend just knew he felt a bullet hit his clothes. Good things my eyes are attached because they almost rolled right out of my head.


Also, if you can explain how a 6'5" guy can get shot in the TOP of the skull without being on his knees in exactly the surrender position his accomplice described, I'd like to hear it.

Even the medical examiner said it could fit either theory; the guy was on his knees surrendering or his head was down because he was charging towards the police officer.

Latrin, for future reference here is how things work.

Facts > Tgo01 facts > data > opinions > Latrinsorm facts

[Warriorbird]

It's funny how "There were no signs of a struggle" becomes "OMG CHARGING BEAST!"

I'm actually tending to think we ought to see how this plays out in court.

Either way, not arresting reporters tends to make these stories smaller.

[Tgo01]

It's funny how "There were no signs of a struggle" becomes "OMG CHARGING BEAST!"

How would someone charging at you be disproved by no signs of a struggle? :/

[Warriorbird]

How would someone charging at you be disproved by no signs of a struggle? :/

No no no. I'm saying an autopsy that says "no signs of a struggle" immediately becomes ZOMG HE CHARGED THE COP to you.

I'm looking forward to the court case.

[Latrinsorm]

Right. Yeah. His friend just knew he felt a bullet hit his clothes. Good things my eyes are attached because they almost rolled right out of my head.Or his friend reasonably inferred from the two events: a bullet being fired very near him, and his choosing to turn around.
Even the medical examiner said it could fit either theory; the guy was on his knees surrendering or his head was down because he was charging towards the police officer.

Latrin, for future reference here is how things work.

Facts > Tgo01 facts > data > opinions > Latrinsorm factsWhy would he be leading with the crown of his head? Is there any evidence that he thought he was the Rhino? I can buy being hunched over to some degree, but it's a long way from 6'5".

[Tgo01]

No no no. I'm saying an autopsy that says "no signs of a struggle" immediately becomes ZOMG HE CHARGED THE COP to you.

How on God's green Earth did you get that from my posts?

From the medical examiner himself, who by the way was hired by the Brown family: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/18/autopsy-michael-brown-shot-six-times-twice-in-the-head/)


“This one here looks like his head was bent downward,” he said, indicating a wound at the top of Brown’s head. “It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.”

I eagerly await your apology :D


Or his friend reasonably inferred from the two events: a bullet being fired very near him, and his choosing to turn around.

Wouldn't a better inference be his friend heard the shot and he turned around because of the sound?


Why would he be leading with the crown of his head? Is there any evidence that he thought he was the Rhino? I can buy being hunched over to some degree, but it's a long way from 6'5".

I have no idea. Ask the guy who examined him.

[Warriorbird]

How on God's green Earth did you get that from my posts?

From the medical examiner himself, who by the way was hired by the Brown family: (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/18/autopsy-michael-brown-shot-six-times-twice-in-the-head/)

I eagerly await your apology :D


From the same guy:

He cautioned against drawing conclusions from the autopsy. “Right now there is too little information to forensically reconstruct the shooting,” he told the Times, but added: “In my capacity as the forensic examiner for the New York State Police, I would say, ‘You’re not supposed to shoot so many times.’”

The first autopsy was from those evil malfactors themselves, the state, which had already suggested there were no signs of a struggle.

[Tgo01]

From the same guy:

He cautioned against drawing conclusions from the autopsy. “Right now there is too little information to forensically reconstruct the shooting,” he told the Times, but added: “In my capacity as the forensic examiner for the New York State Police, I would say, ‘You’re not supposed to shoot so many times.’”

The first autopsy was from those evil malfactors themselves, the state, which had already suggested there were no signs of a struggle.

Awfully odd apology but okay...

[Wrathbringer]

Awfully odd apology but okay...

I'm just glad our president is on top of this. That guy could have been his son.

[Tgo01]

I'm just glad our president is on top of this. That guy could have been his son.

Did Obama say the police acted stupidly again?


Miraculously in this world we have people whose conclusions aren't yours. Shocking, right?

I'm not sure what we just did. You accused me of inferring something (which I didn't) then you basically just reiterated what I have said these past 2 pages, then you say other people have opinions that differ from mine? :/

[Warriorbird]

I'm not sure what we just did. You accused me of inferring something (which I didn't) then you basically just reiterated what I have said these past 2 pages, then you say other people have opinions that differ from mine? :/

Oh no no. I'm pointing out how you immediately go with "OMG CHARGING!" as opposed to any of the other ideas (included in the same article). That definitely stands.

It's right up there with you defending violating the 1st Amendment, which is still funny.

[Tgo01]

Oh no no. I'm pointing out how you immediately go with "OMG CHARGING!" as opposed to any of the other ideas (included in the same article). That definitely stands.

Here is an example of me going with "OMG CHARGING!"


Even the medical examiner said it could fit either theory; the guy was on his knees surrendering or his head was down because he was charging towards the police officer.

[Warriorbird]

Here is an example of me going with "OMG CHARGING!"

That's a defense of you suggesting it was charging, is it not? Not really looking unbiased there.

[Tgo01]

That's a defense of you suggesting it was charging, is it not? Not really looking unbiased there.

???

[Warriorbird]

???

You post a post of you defending your suggestion that he's some malfactor as a defense for you not jumping to conclusions. It just doesn't really work.

[Tgo01]

You post a post of you defending your suggestion that he's some malfactor as a defense for you not jumping to conclusions. It just doesn't really work.

Of the two of us I'm pretty sure you're the one who hasn't been unbiased.

[Warriorbird]

Of the two of us I'm pretty sure you're the one who hasn't been unbiased.

So your entire posting history in this thread hasn't been OMG PITY THE POOR COP? News to me.

EDIT:

I forget ARREST ALL THE REPORTERS!

[Tgo01]

So your entire posting history in this thread hasn't been OMG PITY THE POOR COP? News to me.

I do believe my very first post in this thread was simply asking for why the cop would just pull up, start beating the shit out of the kid then chase him down the street and shoot him as he was running away.

You know what? I have yet to hear a reason for why the cop would just do that for no reason yet everyone seems to be willing to let the cop fry.

Hmm. Funny how I'm the biased one.

[Warriorbird]

I do believe my very first post in this thread was simply asking for why the cop would just pull up, start beating the shit out of the kid then chase him down the street and shoot him as he was running away.

You know what? I have yet to hear a reason for why the cop would just do that for no reason yet everyone seems to be willing to let the cop fry.

Hmm. Funny how I'm the biased one.

Yes, your first post was indeed COPS NEVER WOULD DO ANYTHING WRONG! You're right.

[Tgo01]

Yes, your first post was indeed COPS NEVER WOULD DO ANYTHING WRONG! You're right.

Stop! My eyes really are going to fly out of my head if I have to keep rolling them so much.

[Latrinsorm]

I do believe my very first post in this thread was simply asking for why the cop would just pull up, start beating the shit out of the kid then chase him down the street and shoot him as he was running away.

You know what? I have yet to hear a reason for why the cop would just do that for no reason yet everyone seems to be willing to let the cop fry.

Hmm. Funny how I'm the biased one.Can you cite any post in this thread advocating violence towards the police officer in question?

[Methais]

I'm just glad our president is on top of this. That guy could have been his son.

Not even close. If Obama had a son, he'd look like this:

http://media.salon.com/2010/04/dc_press_corps_spurned_by_obama_invites_justin_bie ber_to_prom.jpg

And in other news:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QetMVN5hr2w

[Tgo01]

Can you cite any post in this thread advocating violence towards the police officer in question?

You really need to learn to read between the lines.

I'm still waiting for a reason.

[Latrinsorm]

You really need to learn to read between the lines.

I'm still waiting for a reason.Your error is in assuming that people are reasonable beings. Reason is at best a distant third behind training and reflex. Think about what you're doing right now. Reflex. Training. Training. Training. Reflex. Training.

If I was wrong, then how come I'm right?