Total Posts:77|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Wilson is innocent

PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYW
Posts: 36,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.
Tsar of DDO
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 9:24:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No he isn't.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 10:37:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

The courts in this land are unlikely to convict.
According to the Wikipedia page, something happened through the window of the car, Wilson chased Brown, and shot him six time, twice in the head, and none in the back.
This shows that Brown was approaching, or at least facing, Wilson.

From Wilson's testimony, it seems that Brown attacked Wilson while in the car. Very aggressive, and a gun went off, and the boys ran.
Assuming this is true, and Brown was charging (approaching with speed, I assume) Wilson, there is no reason to assume this is a threat, and with only ten feet, the gun is the best choice, plus, it was probably already drawn. A taser could miss or be ineffective (hitting thick clothing), and a club could be deflected/overpowered.

Police are also trained to shoot more than once when they shoot.
Thus, if Wilson's account is true, it is justified IMO.

And, as far as what can be proven in court, that is nothing, and a conviction is very unlikely.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.
Hardly.
Even if Wilson did act over-aggressively, the protests/riots started the next day. Justice does not move that swiftly, and thus, were uncalled for. Actions by the police and its chief made matters worse, and Wilson cannot be held responsible for that.


Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

Here's the problem, though.
Human nature labels and categorizes. Race is a very easy thing to recognize. And in the heat of the moment, it is difficult to break away from human nature.

Blacks feel oppressed, and thus are untrusting of the justice system. Fair enough.
This makes them respond negatively to law enforcement, by being beligerent or aggressive. Makes sense.
Thus, law enforcement has to deal with a group of people who are more likely a threat than others. Naturally.
This causes law enforcement to be cautious and aggressive in dealing with blacks. Uh oh.
This inequity is showcased and cause blacks to feel oppressed. And the circle begins again.

The cycle is the problem, regardless of who is too blame, and all sides suffer, but some suffer more, given the groups involved. It is a sh!tty situation, but I am not sure the cops are wholly to blame for it, and not even society. Stereotypes exist for a reason, and the constant feelings of being a victim cannot bode well on the psyche of a black man, and this affects there interactions with everyone else.

I don't know how to break this endless cause and effect loop.
I think a good place to start is for the most black leaders to not cry foul everywhere and stop the race baiting. Politicians, news programs, and everyone else needs to stop it too. And, let's focus on legitimate issues, instead of exploiting possible ones.

Scrutiny is one thing. Vilifying is another.
Brown was a thug, and there is no reason to assume he was wholly innocent in this.
It sounds like the stumbling caused the shooting, and with such a short distance, it was likely an honest, yet tragic, mistake.
My work here is, finally, done.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 10:44:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

In order to have a constructive discussion on the topic, we must first establish and agree on what actually happened. What I have gleaned from the evidence packet released by the prosecution after the announcement:

Officer Wilson, having heard on the radio a description for a robbery suspect that matched Brown, stopped Brown as he was walking in the street. Brown approached the vehicle while Wilson was inside.

Brown, on the left of Wilson, attacked Wilson.

Wilson drew his weapon from his right hip, and Brown reached across and grabbed at the gun in an attempt to take it..

The above has been gleaned from eyewitness testimony.

During the grappling, the gun goes off, firing two shots and injuring Brown on the the right thumb. Whether by design or accident is unknown.

The above is proven by the presence of Browns blood inside the car, the presence of pistol residue inside Browns wound, and eye witness testimony. It is supported by the official findings of ALL of the autopsies.

Brown, having been injured, turns and flees. Wilson gives pursuit. Brown flees 178 feet to the east of the vehicle, at which point he stops, turns around, and runs directly at officer Wilson. This is gleaned from the blood trail left by Mr. brown, and is supported by eye witness testimony.

Wilson, between 40-60 feet behind Brown as he fled, now opens fire on Brown.

Brown continued to run toward the officer, running 25 feet until he was hit by the fatal shot.

According to the coroners report, brown was still running at full speed when he fell to the ground, 153 feet east of the police vehicle.

As for the allegations of raising his hands in the air, kneeling, so saying "don't shoot", then most of the witnesses from whom this version of the story comes have recanted their testimony and admitted that they were just repeating what they had been told. Only one witnessed maintained that story for the entire time, and it can be safely assumed that the witness in question was Mr. Browns friend who was on the scene.

Can we agree on this course of events? If not, what do yourself happened and what is your source?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 10:45:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 9:24:35 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No he isn't.

You do not believe that the officer was justified in using deadly force?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 11:13:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 10:45:37 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 11/25/2014 9:24:35 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No he isn't.

You do not believe that the officer was justified in using deadly force?

I don't know if I'd say he was justified, but from my belief of what happened, I'd say he is not culpable, which means he's not legally justified.

To illustrate my point, I'd feel justified in killing an assassin coming for me.
My work here is, finally, done.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 11:14:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 10:45:37 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 11/25/2014 9:24:35 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No he isn't.

You do not believe that the officer was justified in using deadly force?

No. He wasn't.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 11:20:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you have black skin, is it is okay to violently fight with the cops?

It's also okay to loot your town when someone black is killed by the cops?

Pants up, Don't loot.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 12:29:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 11:14:51 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/25/2014 10:45:37 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 11/25/2014 9:24:35 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No he isn't.

You do not believe that the officer was justified in using deadly force?

No. He wasn't.

Do you agree with the timeline of events as I lay it out?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 12:42:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

It is possible that in that split second Wilson was afraid of Brown charging him and he felt that the only surefire way out of this was to shoot Brown. He felt that a taser might not work.
Or, in the heat of the moment he was angry enough to impulsively shoot Brown.
Or, a combination of the two.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
YYW
Posts: 36,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 2:51:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 12:42:00 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

It is possible that in that split second Wilson was afraid of Brown charging him and he felt that the only surefire way out of this was to shoot Brown. He felt that a taser might not work.

I think it's entirely possible that Wilson feared for his life, but that really goes to the heart of the issue here. If that kid was white, he wouldn't be dead right now, because the officer would not have feared for his life in that circumstance.

But again, the kid was unarmed and within range. A taser would have been not only effective, but even if the cop was in actual danger, it would have neutralized that. (Tazers can shoot about 25 feet, btw.) This is emphasized by the fact that the kid did not have a weapon. He was unarmed. At that distance, even if the cop was being charged, he would have had plenty of time to (1) draw a gun after the taser failed, if it failed, (2) resort to other means (like pepper spray) before drawing his gun when the kid got closer, (3) or use any other means within his array of options to avoid taking a life.

The cop failed, on all those counts, to use reasonable force. He used excessive force, and now a black kid is dead.

Or, in the heat of the moment he was angry enough to impulsively shoot Brown.

That's a possibility, and if that's the case the cop should be in jail right now. I assume it wasn't, because the cop is not in jail right now.

Or, a combination of the two.

If there was evidence that the cop drew his gun out of anger, again, he'd be in jail right now.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 2:53:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 10:44:32 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
Can we agree on this course of events? If not, what do yourself happened and what is your source?

No. I'll post an account later on.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 3:04:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 10:37:26 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
The courts in this land are unlikely to convict.

Well, this was a grand jury so the purpose was to decide if there was enough evidence to go to trial, but yes, courts are extremely reluctant to convict cops of doing bad things even when they do.

Police are also trained to shoot more than once when they shoot.

No, they're not. There are *some* government agents who are trained to shoot twice, because they shoot to kill, but cops don't receive the same kind of training.

Thus, if Wilson's account is true, it is justified IMO.

The issue is that the cop NEVER should have drawn his gun; but he did. Even if the kid reached for the gun, he could have reached for it after the cop drew it without cause. The physical evidence on the gun doesn't exonerate the cop.

Even if Wilson did act over-aggressively, the protests/riots started the next day.

Yes, they did. A cop shot an unarmed black teenager. The cop is to blame the riots that follow. But for the cop's shooting the unarmed black teenager, the riots would not have taken place.

Human nature labels and categorizes. Race is a very easy thing to recognize. And in the heat of the moment, it is difficult to break away from human nature.

That's not human nature; that's racism.

Blacks feel oppressed, and thus are untrusting of the justice system. Fair enough.

Yes. I don't like the way we're talking about "Blacks" as a group, though, that is somehow "other" to the rest of races. That's not good. However, black people have every right to feel oppressed, because we learn that they are every time something like this happens.

This makes them respond negatively to law enforcement, by being beligerent or aggressive. Makes sense.

I agree; but the question that we all should be asking is WHY that is happening. It's happening because they have no other way to retake a sense of power. That's a bad sign for our society, when an entire race of people are subject to conditions like that.

Thus, law enforcement has to deal with a group of people who are more likely a threat than others. Naturally.

It's not natural; it's the result of cultural and institutional racism -these are social constructs not natural phenomena.

The cycle is the problem, regardless of who is too blame, and all sides suffer, but some suffer more, given the groups involved. It is a sh!tty situation, but I am not sure the cops are wholly to blame for it, and not even society.

That's a really good point, but I would suggest that the reason that the cops "are" to blame is because they are the only ones in a position to break the cycle. Does this mean exposing cops to increased danger? Yes. That's an acceptable cost. Cops have to take the risk to change the culture, before the culture is going to change.

Scrutiny is one thing. Vilifying is another.

Yes, it is. And the cop was absolutely in the wrong to shoot that kid. There was "no" good excuse for it. I know he was protected by policy and protocol. That means that there is a problem with policy and protocol.

Brown was a thug, and there is no reason to assume he was wholly innocent in this.

Legally, the kid was entitled to a presumption of innocence in a court of law. But, that's a separate matter. Here, it doesn't matter if he was innocent. What matters is even if the kid posed an imminent "threat," (1) what was the nature of that threat, and (2) what kind of response to that threat is appropriate.

Even granting the most cop-favoring account of the facts, he should have NEVER even drawn his gun.
Tsar of DDO
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 6:12:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 3:04:35 PM, YYW wrote:
What matters is even if the kid posed an imminent "threat," (1) what was the nature of that threat, and (2) what kind of response to that threat is appropriate.

Even granting the most cop-favoring account of the facts, he should have NEVER even drawn his gun.

http://www.elpasotimes.com...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2014 9:18:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night.

I think the witnesses (friends of Brown) who perjured and stated that Brown had his hands up are actually responsible for all the riots and should be charged with inciting.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 9:30:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have paid some attention to this case, but will not go in-depth. It is necessary to place some facts on the table relevant to what some of you have said: (1) Lethal force should not be used unless one is in locked in a situation where one's life is threatened, and no means of escape but pursuit of potentially lethal force - in this case, a gun - is necessary. (2) Whether or not Michael Brown surrendered [by being static and/or raising hands] or not entirely known through the various witness reports. (3) Darren Wilson carried no taser. Apparently, it was large and not convenient to carry.

It is rational to assume that a police officer has better ways of dealing with an unarmed, young man than using a gun. I have not yet seen a reasonable argument in defense of the officer's use of lethal force.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 9:32:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:12:50 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
http://www.elpasotimes.com...
That an officer somewhere happened to have been beaten to death for not taking necessary defense measurement does not mean it would have happened in this case.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 9:33:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/26/2014 9:32:14 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 11/25/2014 6:12:50 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
http://www.elpasotimes.com...
That an officer somewhere happened to have been beaten to death for not taking necessary defense measurement does not mean it would have happened in this case.

It's a risk of being a cop.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 9:39:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/26/2014 9:33:53 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
It's a risk of being a cop.
You're generalizing. We're talking about this very specific case, and whether or not the officer involved should have drawn his gun in the situation he was. I doubt he was in a position where his life was risked, since the witness testimonies are conflicting, and the autopsy of Michael Brown does not seem reveal whether or not he was confronting the officer and going after the gun.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 9:43:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
How would the autopsy reveal that Brown entered Wilson's police vehicle and assaulted him? (the point at which a gun was drawn)

Death (where an autopsy comes to play) occurred at the point Brown faced Wilson and (allegedly) charged him.
DarthVitiosus
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 10:23:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

#1) How is Officer Wilson responsible for the behavior of the protesters who decided to riot?

#2) Do you think people are capable of thinking rationally in a confrontation when their heart rate runs over 175 BPM?

#3) If they decide to riot more, do you think the protesters will gain more sympathy or hostility?

#4) Since you said you had no problem with the violent chaos and riots, do you think it is acceptable to for the protesters to attack "whitey" and beat them up?

#5) You claim to say there is no justice for "blacks?" Are you "black?" How do you know that? Do you live in a majority "black" area?

I am "black." I know for a fact if Officer Wilson was a black cop, the folks protesting still wouldn't of liked the guy. Just an FYI, I live in a majority black city with a majority black female police force, with majority black elected officials, and some of these characters protesting would still complain in order to fit their political narrative. I think many the of protesters had legitimate complaints about excessive use of force while others were there to stir up trouble. I am neutral on this subject because I don't know the exact details about whether Brown surrendered or not at the time he was shot. But the people rioting hurt their own image and destroyed a place they don't live in.
WILL NOT BE REMOVED UNTIL:
#1. I have met 10 people worth discussing with on DDO who are not interested in ideological or romantic visions of the world we all live in.
#2. 10 people admit they have no interest in any one else's opinion other than their own.
#3. 10 people admit they are products of their environment and their ideas derive from said environment rather than doing any serious critical thinking and search for answers themselves.
Objectivity
Posts: 1,073
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 10:51:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 2:51:46 PM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 12:42:00 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

It is possible that in that split second Wilson was afraid of Brown charging him and he felt that the only surefire way out of this was to shoot Brown. He felt that a taser might not work.

I think it's entirely possible that Wilson feared for his life, but that really goes to the heart of the issue here. If that kid was white, he wouldn't be dead right now, because the officer would not have feared for his life in that circumstance.

But again, the kid was unarmed and within range. A taser would have been not only effective, but even if the cop was in actual danger, it would have neutralized that. (Tazers can shoot about 25 feet, btw.) This is emphasized by the fact that the kid did not have a weapon. He was unarmed. At that distance, even if the cop was being charged, he would have had plenty of time to (1) draw a gun after the taser failed, if it failed, (2) resort to other means (like pepper spray) before drawing his gun when the kid got closer, (3) or use any other means within his array of options to avoid taking a life.

My law teacher who was a police officer for 10 years and an FBI agent for another 10 explicitly told us that from a distance of 35 feet if someone is charging at you, the average police officer will be able to pull their weapon and get one shot off, only one, before the person charging gets to the cop. Brown displayed lethal intent in the car by trying to take his gun, from any police officer's perspective based on that statistic and the distance between them, he was perfectly justified in shooting, he would not have had time to drop his gun, pull a tazer, aim and shoot. If someone displays lethal intent against an officer of the law while the officer is trying to do his duty, the officer shouldn't have to be afraid of being prosecuted for protecting his life.

To put the whole racial aspect in to perspective, since everyone is implying the issue wouldn't have happened if the officer was black, let me ask another question:

If the same exact events played out with a black officer would there have been as much of an uproar, if any, and would you even be discussing the issue right now?

Answer is no

The cop failed, on all those counts, to use reasonable force. He used excessive force, and now a black kid is dead.

Or, in the heat of the moment he was angry enough to impulsively shoot Brown.

That's a possibility, and if that's the case the cop should be in jail right now. I assume it wasn't, because the cop is not in jail right now.

Or, a combination of the two.

If there was evidence that the cop drew his gun out of anger, again, he'd be in jail right now.
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 11:48:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Michael Brown death is a sad case. Witnesses did say they saw him charge the officer atleast once. I think it's silly for people to cry foul when on this one. He did not deserve to die but he robbed a bank and possibly tried to fight a cop. Black men should knw by now that if you give a cop an inch he will take a mile. And besides its not like there is an epidemic of black kids getting shot by white cops. We are killing each other far faster tnen cops are. But you don't see anybody protesting that. Maddness
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 11:55:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/25/2014 2:51:46 PM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 12:42:00 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 11/25/2014 6:09:28 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/25/2014 3:18:43 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
There it is. I said it. I believe it. Rip me a new one.

No cop who shoots and kills an unarmed person, much less a kid, for any reason, is innocent. If Brown was actually "charging" (whatever the hell that means) the cop, the cop should have used a taser. Instead, he *chose* to take a life. Legally, there may not have been enough evidence to merit charges. This is because a fairly wide latitude is given to police officers to kill people. But in the courts of heaven, that cop will have a lot to answer for.

Wilson is also personally responsible for the riots that took place in St. Louis last night. But for his shooting the kid, those would not have happened. And moreover, I sympathize with the protesters/looters -not because I think looting or rioting is an acceptable activity, but because the reason they were out in the streets to begin with symbolizes all that is wrong with our justice system. If you're black, there is no justice system -and whenever sh!t like this happens, black people have even less reason to trust police authority.

Because black people have even less reason to trust police authority, the implication follows then that they are powerless in a system to which they are subject. Rioting and looting is a way to do "something" to take back power. So, it should come as little surprise that something like this happened -and riots/looting/chaos like this are going to continue to happen as long as stupid cops make stupid decisions to take human life. And I'm ok with that, because even if riots and looting are bad -they force every cop in St. Louis (and across the United States) to think twice before they pull the trigger.

Maybe the law can not afford Michael Brown justice, but the threat of popular retaliation just might be able to prevent it again -unless the police commissioners across America's cities are too inept to recognize what I just said.

It is possible that in that split second Wilson was afraid of Brown charging him and he felt that the only surefire way out of this was to shoot Brown. He felt that a taser might not work.

I think it's entirely possible that Wilson feared for his life, but that really goes to the heart of the issue here. If that kid was white, he wouldn't be dead right now, because the officer would not have feared for his life in that circumstance.

This assertion rests on absolutely nothing.

But again, the kid was unarmed and within range. A taser would have been not only effective, but even if the cop was in actual danger, it would have neutralized that. (Tazers can shoot about 25 feet, btw.) This is emphasized by the fact that the kid did not have a weapon. He was unarmed. At that distance, even if the cop was being charged, he would have had plenty of time to (1) draw a gun after the taser failed, if it failed, (2) resort to other means (like pepper spray) before drawing his gun when the kid got closer, (3) or use any other means within his array of options to avoid taking a life.

As a track runner, I can tell you that if Brown really was running full speed or near full speed at Wilson, Wilson would have gotten one chance with that tazer and then Brown would have gotten to him and done God knows what.

An average runner can runner 100m (or about 300ft) in 15 seconds. From what I have read it appears that Brown was about 50ft away from Wilson when he turned around and sprinted at him.

The math:

300ft/15s = 50ft/X
X = 2.5s

So we can imagine that Brown could have gotten to Wilson very quickly, fast enough that Wilson probably only would have had time to either use pepper spray, his tazer, or his gun before Brown got to him.

Now I certainly don't agree with what Wilson did and I think he could have made a better choice, but I just want to get a more proper look at what it would be like to be in Wilson's shoes.

The cop failed, on all those counts, to use reasonable force. He used excessive force, and now a black kid is dead.

Or, in the heat of the moment he was angry enough to impulsively shoot Brown.

That's a possibility, and if that's the case the cop should be in jail right now. I assume it wasn't, because the cop is not in jail right now.

Or, a combination of the two.

If there was evidence that the cop drew his gun out of anger, again, he'd be in jail right now.
Nolite Timere
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2014 12:19:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It is possible that in that split second Wilson was afraid of Brown charging him and he felt that the only surefire way out of this was to shoot Brown. He felt that a taser might not work.

I think it's entirely possible that Wilson feared for his life, but that really goes to the heart of the issue here. If that kid was white, he wouldn't be dead right now, because the officer would not have feared for his life in that circumstance.

This assertion rests on absolutely nothing.

ProPublica did an analysis using federally collected data on fatal police shootings and found black males, between the ages of 15 and 19, are 21 more times likely to be chot and killed by cops. Whether or not he would have shot Michael Brown if he was white is a valid question. But as the analysis already shows, the cop may not have.