Reply With Quote
cops prematurely fired tear gas into a crowd of women and children who were peacefully protesting BEFORE the 12am curfew
cops shooting media with rubber bullets and tear gas
where are the militia's to protect these citizens right to a assemble???
his arm was raised. which is all this tells us. it doesn't tell us he was surrendering. it doesn't tell us he was charging.
cops prematurely fired tear gas into a crowd of women and children who were peacefully protesting BEFORE the 12am curfew
cops shooting media with rubber bullets and tear gas
where are the militia's to protect these citizens right to a assemble???
arms raised is a sign of surrendering, which is consistent with several eyewitness accounts. maybe he was raising the roof???
ok trill i know you've made up your mind on the facts of this case... There were also accounts he was charging the officer, could his arm(s) have not also been raised in this scenario?
when the kitchen is REALLY REALLY hot, the Cons ution-defending militia cooks stay out
Poor babies just wanted a little milk...
there is ONE account by someone in the background of the video. when we get multiple accounts from eyewitnesses in front of the camera then i'd take that narrative a little serious.
i'm not saying i know all the facts yet. i'm just going with evidence and eyewitness accounts.
i wonder why that guy hasn't brought his account to the forefront?
exactly.
i'd do the same thing if i saw women and children get bombarded with tear gas...i'm sure most men would..well, except you of course.Poor babies just wanted a little milk...
uh oh
I don't see those goons in gas masks "pouring milk on the eyes of innocent women and children"
I see exactly what the picture shows. A bunch of blacks looting a McDonalds.
You are ing pathetic.
Why would women and children be out in this sort of situation?
So I want to protest and I take my wife and child into a dangerous situation?
I thought you said protestors were having to guard businesses ?
This is pathetic as well.
Not that anyone really cares, but I'm all over the place on this fiasco. I haven't followed any of this closely, but this has undoubtedly become a world-class cluster .
Obviously, the people on the ground are in the wrong for escalating what could be meaningful civil disobedience into criminal mischief. At the same time, the way the situation has been handled -- the seeming indifference to their anger and the vicious reaction to its percolation -- is precisely the sort of thing that tends to perpetuate itself. Won't defend looting or violence at all, but their anger strikes me as understandable. I think the PD in Ferguson has handled this abysmally from beginning and bear at least some responsibility for the fact that this has continued as long as it has. If they had elected to simply put out objective facts from the get-go, rather than trying to defend and protect their guy, I suspect these es in the protesting wouldn't have happened.
The bigger problem here is that somehow, our societal norm seems to now favor the use of deadly force as a deterrent -- without regard to the severity of the risk posed by the person against whom that force is used. Even if Michael Brown had robbed a store, assaulted a cop, or tried to flee an arrest, there's simply no justification (to me) in any of that for shooting him. If he gets away, he can be pursued and arrested. He didn't present any obvious sort of risk to the lives of innocents that would necessitate the use of lethal force against him in any way. There are other ways to "get your man."
The use of force in that cir stance should be commensurate with the urgency of the need to subdue the suspect and no more; a kid who's been stopped for petty "criminal" conduct shouldn't be subjected to lethal force unless the life of the officer or someone else is clearly and unequivocally in imminent danger -- and that couldn't possibly be true of a suspect who was shot at something other than very close range.
Being a scared cop doesn't give a person license to take a life; if he was scared to the point that shooting at least 6 times was his only means of coping, he needed to find another line of work. He's supposed to be protecting the public, not acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
We've become far too tolerant, I think, of the use of deadly force in too many situations.
i don't see them looting in the photo you posted. looks like a bunch of men standing around.
I don't see those goons in gas masks "pouring milk on the eyes of innocent women and children"
I see exactly what the picture shows. A bunch of blacks looting a McDonalds.
You are ing pathetic.
at 8pm the police started throwing tear gas into the crowds. this was a peak time of the peaceful protesting.
john oliver dropping truth bombs
Guns in hand during heat of the moment situations lead to some very difficult decision making, even for police officers that have been trained.
My question still stands.
Are you taking your wife and kid to protest knowing (from your facts) that the police have lost control?
Police officers should never remove their badges and name tags.
We are already clear on that, remember, the good cops arrived?
YES
last night was the 1st time they threw gas before the curfew. noone expected it.
why are you posting stories of people getting themselves killed?
Listen to 2:00-2:10. Says he was shot and then turned around and the officer fired 7 more shots. SO according to the witness, that is at least one shot in the back.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
