EbylHusker

ffs, stop spamming. You're a goddamn admin not a newbie poster.

Sorry, why are you spamming new threads?

I'm sure they will let people "vent" for a while. It's an unfortunate, and frequent, uneven application of the rules. It's not like there's only one or two posts in here that are blatant flames.

I see the mods have decided flaming is acceptable now.

The message these riots send: "We're tired of being treated like second class citizens, viewed as constantly dangerous by cops, and so on. So here we go burning down our own community, firing weapons at police, and so on. Just ignore those parts and please don't see us as dangerous or not part of normal society. Derp. Thanks."

I do not have any empathy or sympathy for people that riot in response to a GJ decision that, by all sane reasoning, appears to be appropriate and just. Not only that, there are many people looting and burning their own community. Of course, the people rioting are not intersested in facts or whether the justice system worked in this case. f#*k them. As far as I'm concerned, they can be arrested and tear gassed every night for the next week if they so choose. Notice I said rioters, not protestors.

You're absolutely right that some bias creeps in. However, even without that bias, officers have a lot of backing from the law when justifying deadly force. People disagree on how right or wrong that is, which isn't my point here. There are plenty of arguments for and against it. But that, combined with the stuff you posted, is a pretty potent mix.

You missed one of the major contributing factors. Court decisions in the past have given officers a relatively wide lattitude in justifying the use of deadly force. So in fact, it is not insanely easy to indict an officer for use of deadly force. I'm not making any judgements on those court rulings or their applications today with this post, but facts are facts. And those court cases are a big, big reason that officers are rarely indicted on the use of deadly force.

The justice system worked. I'm not sure how "progress" is the GJ bringing a ridiculous, unfounded indictment. There is a lot of progress that can be made on the larger issues surrounding all this that doesn't involve the GJ essentially saying, "Well, even though there's no good reason under law to actually indict, f#*k it, because hey, some people are mad. Whatevs."

Of course they're idiots. Burning down local businesses, cars, yelling "f#*k the police," firing shots around cops (possibly at cops), etc, makes them f'ing idiots. Protestors are not idiots - rioters are.

The evidence the GJ saw is being released to the public. I've yet to see or hear anything about this entire thing that warrants an indictment. No sane prosecutor would ever want to take this to trial because it's an automatic loss. There's just nothing there. It was tossed to a GJ because public outcry was so ridiculous that they were left with no other viable option.

You're right. I'm aware. Thank you.