What's the biggest reason for Blacks not advancing

[BIGREDIOWAN]

It'sNotAFakeID, on 15 Aug 2014 - 11:51 PM, said:

 

BIGREDIOWAN, on 15 Aug 2014 - 9:06 PM, said:

 

It'sNotAFakeID, on 15 Aug 2014 - 7:43 PM, said:

Guys, can we really believe anything coming out of the mouths of any Ferguson police officer?

Really? Can we really believe anything we're reading from the news source right now? Give me a break.........

 

 

Last I checked, the news sources weren't the ones sending tear gas and rubber bullets into what were peaceful protests.

 

Looks like they had more "peaceful" protests last night huh? It's not the peaceful protesters that are causing the problems, it's the morons intermingled within them that are causing the problems and using this as an excuse to act like a-holes.

It'sNotAFakeID, on 15 Aug 2014 - 11:55 PM, said:

How'd they come to the conclusion that Mike was a potential suspect in the robbery case? EDIT: See that there is video surveillance of what could be Mike Brown. However, the officer who shot him had no clue he was a potential suspect in the robbery case. That's a very big factor.

We already discussed this a few pages back, no it wasn't a factor, but no ones saying the officer said he shot him because he was a robbery suspect. The officer shot him because Brown apparently attempted to take his weapon which is a felony in Missouri.

It'sNotAFakeID, on 16 Aug 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

I don't think anybody here is attacking either party. I think we are all saying our thoughts and then defending them with what evidence is known. Nothing wrong with that. I'll change my tune if evidence comes out that the cop was actually in the right and that Brown presented enough of a danger to use deadly force. For the time being, I don't think that was the case.

 

There are reports out there that Brown might have been involved in a robbery. That's fine, but it doesn't change anything because the officer did not know that Brown was a potential suspect. So the police releasing that information is to me an attempt at justifying their potential brutality by saying that x officer was doing a service to the community.

Now it's brutality huh? And you know this for sure how? If the officer was justified in using deadly force because Brown not only beat him inside his patrol car, attempted to take his gun that's now brutality? So the officer should've just let Brown kill him if that's truly the way it went down? Makes sense.........

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Like I said, I will change my tune if it comes out that what you are saying is true (which I don't believe). Right now, I think the cop is in the wrong. I think the people looting stores are in the wrong. And I think the Ferguson PD needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Like I said, I will change my tune if it comes out that what you are saying is true (which I don't believe). Right now, I think the cop is in the wrong. I think the people looting stores are in the wrong. And I think the Ferguson PD needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt.

Glad our court system works in a different way than this thought process. Guilty until proven innocent huh? This is what's difficult about being a cop, we are supposed to make a split second life or death decision and apply the law in the exact same amount of time while folks tear us apart and our thought process and take hours, days, weeks, months, years to do so. I'll just chalk it up to those same folks never having had to make those types of choices in their lives.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

It's a very good thing I'm not the court. But we are all people and we all do have thoughts, so that's rather unavoidable.

 

So sour. I'm not attacking you. I'm not devaluing or diminishing the difficult of what constitutes being a cop. Trust me, I can imagine the difficulty of being a cop when in situations like this. But there's a certain level of performance that all cops should be held to; and I think that, in this case, that cop failed to meet those standards.

[tschu]

BRI are you an officer? I'm just skimming but it seems pretty obvious that you are...

 

Police officers have a tough job. But should not be held unaccountable. I remember reading about how police accountability in Wisconsin was investigated and no police officer had ever been found guilty of any wrongdoing in a shooting by any of their departments in 130 years. Police officers will stick up for their own no matter what. Does that seem right? The fact that it's a sh**ty situation is not an excuse - accountability is still necessary. Ferguson PD, from the incident itself, to their handling of the investigation and releasing of reports, to their handling of the riots, have not given us ANY benefit of the doubt whatsoever.

 

Hell, I don't think anyone has even specified what crime, legal or moral, that they think this officer is guilty of, yet you are jumping up and down to proclaim him innocent. Yes, innocent until proven guilty is true in the legal system. But I'd like to point out again that the legal system is one thing - the truth is another. Every single person is more than welcome to collect facts and come to their own conclusions.

 

The start point for a logical conclusion (talking logic, not legality) does not start at innocent and then have to cross some threshold to arrive at guilty. Nor does it start at guilty and have to cross some threshold to arrive at innocent. It starts at total ignorance, proceeds through the collection of facts, and then arrives at either guilty or innocent.

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Now the police are saying the officer did know of the robbery and saw Brown with a box of cigars in his hand.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

BRI are you an officer? I'm just skimming but it seems pretty obvious that you are...

 

Police officers have a tough job. But should not be held unaccountable. I remember reading about how police accountability in Wisconsin was investigated and no police officer had ever been found guilty of any wrongdoing in a shooting by any of their departments in 130 years. Police officers will stick up for their own no matter what. Does that seem right? The fact that it's a sh**ty situation is not an excuse - accountability is still necessary. Ferguson PD, from the incident itself, to their handling of the investigation and releasing of reports, to their handling of the riots, have not given us ANY benefit of the doubt whatsoever.

 

Hell, I don't think anyone has even specified what crime, legal or moral, that they think this officer is guilty of, yet you are jumping up and down to proclaim him innocent. Yes, innocent until proven guilty is true in the legal system. But I'd like to point out again that the legal system is one thing - the truth is another. Every single person is more than welcome to collect facts and come to their own conclusions.

 

The start point for a logical conclusion (talking logic, not legality) does not start at innocent and then have to cross some threshold to arrive at guilty. Nor does it start at guilty and have to cross some threshold to arrive at innocent. It starts at total ignorance, proceeds through the collection of facts, and then arrives at either guilty or innocent.

Yes, I'm a police officer, I've been doing this job for 12 going on 13 years. I'm not saying that the way Ferguson PD and namely their Chief have handled this situation has been stellar. I'll stick up for my own when I think they did the right thing and I've seen no tangible evidence at this point that refutes that in my opinion. If the officer was wrong or any officer is wrong and has abused the authority that they've been giving they can rot in hell for eternity.

 

I'm a man of integrity, I've never used excessive force against anyone I've dealt with, never had a VALID complaint filed against me and treat people with the respect that they deserve because I expect that back in return. This officer deserves his right to due process, he doesn't deserve people sending him death threats, making judgments without knowing all the facts and generally bad mouthing him because a "white police officer" killed a "black man." If Brown decided to attempt to disarm this officer and beat him, like at least one witness has said on camera, then he made a poor choice that day. I'm not saying that I would do the same thing or not do the same thing because I wasn't in that situation so it would be unfair and inaccurate for me to try and say what I would or would not do in that situation. I would also have the ability to think about the situation in a much greater time frame than the officer involved did. It was three minutes from the time he went out with Brown until Brown was dead in the street....................3 minutes!

 

So yes, I'm saying he's innocent until proven guilty, because I believe what he has to say, not someone who stood by and watched as his friend beat a police officer, attempted to take his gun and then lie about what really happened based on what another witness is saying. And why should I care that in 130 years Wisconsin never found any officer wrong in an officer involved shooting? That's some arbitrary stuff you pulled out to try and prove a point. To say that how law enforcement has grown in the past 130 years into how it investigates things today isn't even possible to describe!?

 

And show me where I said that police should be held unaccountable for their actions? You can't, because I never said it. What I find hilarious is people becoming internet experts on what police should or should not do by reading a few biased news reports on the situation, but have never strapped on the badge, duty belt, protective vest and decided that they were going to help their community be a better place by going after the lawless. I've called my wife and told her I thought I was going to die responding to a situation and said goodbye just in case...............................have you? I don't expect a thank you for that, I don't expect an award from that, I chose this profession and the baggage that comes with it. What's my reward? What do I get out of it? To see the look on a kids eyes and know they think you are awesome and are a hero is the reward. To know that I'm helping make the city my kids live in a better place is the reward.

 

People think that the "thin blue line" means that I'll lie to protect one of my brothers or sisters in blue. No, that's not what it means, that was something that was created by someone that needed another reason to complain about the police. I lie for no one..............that "thin blue line" and the blackness on either side of it shows where I stand between order and absolute chaos. It shows that I'm willing to risk my life to protect a complete stranger from the lawless. If the officer is wrong in the situation, I'll change my opinion, because I have that right and I've waited to hear all the evidence before I came to an educated conclusion on the matter. The problem is it won't matter if he's right, because a bunch of people who want to destroy buildings, steal things, and generally act like idiots will say that he's still wrong. So he'll have to quit his job and move his family some place else. Why? Because he made a decision in a split second that all of you have hours, days, weeks, months, and years to question. The lawyers will pull out all their books and say what was right and what was wrong. Try enforcing the law in a split second without your book, because you can't! And how would I know what he's going through? What his family is going through? Well that's more personal that I'm willing to get on an internet message board, but lets just say when I was four years old, I found out what it was like to be a cops child when the **** hits the fan. So excuse me while I wait for all the evidence.........

[tschu]

Now the police are saying the officer did know of the robbery and saw Brown with a box of cigars in his hand.

 

Link? I have heard nothing of this sort so far, but it would be an interesting change-of-story from the police chief himself

[Abdullah the Butcher]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/16/michael-brown-shooting-ferguson-missouri-police/14152447/

 

 

In a Friday afternoon press conference, Ferguson, Mo. Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Wilson did not initially make a connection between the robbery and Brown. Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.

Jackson would not say why he released the information when he did the way he did, other than to say he was responding to freedom of information requests from the public about the robbery.

[lo country]

Local media reportedly posted a pic of the officers house and address. If true, that is some straight up BS.

[carlfense]

Local media reportedly posted a pic of the officers house and address. If true, that is some straight up BS.

Agreed.

[carlfense]

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/16/michael-brown-shooting-ferguson-missouri-police/14152447/

 

 

In a Friday afternoon press conference, Ferguson, Mo. Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Wilson did not initially make a connection between the robbery and Brown. Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.

Jackson would not say why he released the information when he did the way he did, other than to say he was responding to freedom of information requests from the public about the robbery.

 

Well that's convenient.

[irafreak]

Liberals have been saying this since before I was born. You tell a person that they can't make anything of themselves because they are at a disadvantage and eventually they start to believe it. It's frustrating teaching students that don't realize how smart they are have no confidence....and this isn't just "blacks."

[The Dude]

When the story first broke I took the "police acted unreasonably" position.

 

Now that further information has come out (provided it is actually true) I have less of a problem with how the police reacted, although I would like them to release pictures of the cop's injuries in the interest of transparency. I still think the cops have handled some things poorly, and I also still have my doubts that the cop needed to shoot the guy, although I do question the credibility of the first eye-witness to come forward given that he had just helped Mike Brown rob a convenience store.

 

Regardless of what happened, the people rioting and looting are idiots and deserve to be tear-gassed, beaten, whatever.

 

Still, hard to argue with the idea that the militarization of police in this country has gotten out of hand.

[tschu]

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/16/michael-brown-shooting-ferguson-missouri-police/14152447/

 

 

In a Friday afternoon press conference, Ferguson, Mo. Police Chief Thomas Jackson said Wilson did not initially make a connection between the robbery and Brown. Wilson stopped Brown and a friend because "they were in the middle of the street, blocking traffic," Jackson said.

Hours later, however, Jackson told a slightly different story to CNN and NBC, saying that Wilson noticed Brown was carrying a box of cigars that had been reported stolen. Wilson, he said, initially stopped Brown for blocking traffic, but as he began driving past Brown, he noticed Brown was holding cigars.

At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.

Jackson would not say why he released the information when he did the way he did, other than to say he was responding to freedom of information requests from the public about the robbery.

 

Well that's convenient.

 

Extremely convenient.