OT: Riots/Looting in North St. Louis

[qazplm]

lmao

1. no it wasn't "moments later"

2. "strong armed burglary" is defined as using ANY degree of force to commit a robbery. So you can keep using those words as if you are saying something really bad, but you aren't. It's an unarmed robbery. We don't tend to kill unarmed robbers in this country. Have you actually watched the video? The kid takes some cigars, heads out the door, the owner confronts him, the kid pushes him out of the way and leaves the store. There's your "violence." A shove. The kid is a thief. That's it. In Sharia countries they just take off your hand.

3. the cop who went after him, as stated by the chief of police at his press conference, did not have a clue he was suspect in anything. The two things are utterly unrelated. He went after him because he didn't like him walking in the street. And from there that escalated into shooting the kid 10 times.

4. He didn't shoot the kid while he was going for his gun (which ONLY the cop says). If he had, that would be a lot more understandable. No, he shot the kid while he was running away. Then he shot him again repeatedly after he turned around and raised his hands.

Of course we both know you don't care about that last bit, after all, he's a bad guy. Because he pushed someone after stealing some cigars.

here's the "Strong arm robbery"

 

[qazplm]

you talk about Soldiers

Soldiers have stricter rules about when to use deadly force than some police in this country...and they absolutely do not shoot someone who has surrendered. Such an act would lead to a murder charge at a court-martial, and in fact, has, and has led to convictions.

 

[hunkgolden]

Re: I guess I'm confused

You're the only one saying he deserved to die.

Good grief - act like an adult for once on here. Can you ever have a conversation without trying turning it into an argument and attempting to win said argument by belittling others? Making up quotes and putting words in others statements?

You're simply not worth my time.

Good day sir.

 

[qazplm]

Re: I guess I'm confused

yeah I'd bug out at this point if I were you too.

 

[lbodel]

Just be happy we live in a country that allows citizens to have semi-automatic weapons with armor piercing capabilities!

Because that's necessary.

 

[atmafola]

Re: yes

Originally posted by hunkgolden:

A young man the size of a small mountain had just committed strong armed burglary then moments later assaulted a police officer and attempted to go for his gun. Damn right I know which side I'm on.

Your outrage over this criminal's death is laughable.

just curious, why did you add that bit? should crimes committed by smaller people be excused or what? All you are doing, whether you realize it or not is perpetuating that stereotype that big black men are reflexively threatening. To take it even further are therefore deserving of violence perpetrated against them.

This post was edited on 8/16 3:02 PM by atmafola

 

[hunkgolden]

Re: yes

Originally posted by atmafola:

Originally posted by hunkgolden:

A young man the size of a small mountain had just committed strong armed burglary then moments later assaulted a police officer and attempted to go for his gun. Damn right I know which side I'm on.

Your outrage over this criminal's death is laughable.

just curious, why did you add that bit? should crimes committed by smaller people be excused or what? All you are doing, whether you realize it or not is perpetuating that stereotype that big black men are reflexively threatening. To take it even further are therefore deserving of violence perpetrated against them.


This post was edited on 8/16 3:02 PM by atmafola

I added that because he's huge...not because he's black. Do you think I would've said that if he was under 6 foot and weighed less than a buck 80? The size of this guy compared to everyone else in that video was astounding. I can't imagine the fear the policeman must have been feeling as they struggled for the officer's gun. We could very easily be talking about another cop being killed in the line of duty had the policeman not gained the upper hand during their struggle. Your life experiences and/or influences have unfortunately caused you to look at race first and everything else a distant second. And that's unfortunate.

 

[qazplm]

yes

the fear that officer felt when he shot a guy (he'd already shot once or twice) multiple times who was standing dozens of feet away with his hands up must have been unimaginable.

 

[hunkgolden]

Re: I find this curious

Originally posted by atmafola:

If it comes out that this young man was killed in the midst of his altercation with the police. Tough luck to his family. Sorry he shouldn't have assaulted the police officer.

By this eyewitness account - sounds like he was charging the officer when multiple shots were fired.

I also like how the guy with the camera walks out there well after the shooting was over and starts telling everyone how the police shot Brown for no reason. Meanwhile a real eyewitness had this to say:


@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 coming 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")

Additionally, this eye witness account clarifies other issues and disputes the "shot in back narrative". The police vehicle was positioned "screen view left" ? Mike Brown's body is positioned head toward police vehicle. This would also corroborate both the Officer (as told to his friend) and this witness account of what transpired.




Boom Goes the Narrative

 

[hunkgolden]

Autopsy report show Brown shot 6 times with the fatal shot coming to the top of his head. All 6 shots were in front. 4 of those bullets hit him in the right arm. This basically means that Officer Wilson would've had to be aiming well above Brown's head if Brown truly had his arms raised above his head in a surrendering position.

From Dr. Baden - "This one here looks like his head was bent downward," he said, indicating the wound at the very top of Mr. Brown's head. "It can be because he's giving up, or because he's charging forward at the officer."

Based on the conversation had on the video by the eyewitness I linked earlier, the "charging forward at the officer" story seems most plausible at this point. We'll know for sure as more facts come out.

But I suggest that everyone continue rioting, looting, and marching in Ferguson until we know for sure what happened. After all, "Justice For Michael"...even if it turns out he wasn't surrendering at all...but rather charging at the policeman.

 

[hunkgolden]

Not sure if you're including Dorian Johnson as one of the eyewitnesses you're choosing to believe over the police but consider these comments from Dorian:



"Everyone else's mentality be on some nonsense, silliness," Johnson said. "But Mike had his mind set on more than that, helping others. I just got a good feeling from being around him." I guess part of that "good feeling" included burglary.


About 20 minutes before the shooting, Johnson said he saw Brown walking down the street and decided to catch up with him. The two walked and talked. That's when Johnson says they saw the police car rolling up to them. Hmmm, Dorian conveniently forgets about the burglary the two committed just prior to the shooting. To hear his version, they were just a couple of boy scouts discussing how they were going to help other people.


Brown made it past the third car. Then, "blam!" the officer took his second shot, striking Brown in the back. We now know this is false as Brown has no gunshots that entered from the back.

 

[lbodel]

Why do you only pick out what you want to pick out?

"It can be because he's giving up, or because he's charging forward at the officer."

You question earlier that he wasn't giving up or have his hands up. Then you put this quote in and then go off running about charging forward at the officer. Also in the report of the autopsy released, the examiner stated that none of the shots appeared to be in close range at all because of a lack of gun powder residue. He goes on to say they did not have access to his clothes, so it's not definitive. But if the shots were from a distance, that calls into question how "threatened" the officer truly was, would you agree?

We don't know a lot and I'm not making a judgment (none of my posts have been about the officer in question really). But keep in mind this information is all coming from an independent autopsy as the STL police have been very vague and not answered questions on things. They have not been very forthright and also have been inconsistent in their statements. So don't act like the mis-information is only coming from one side.

 

[hunkgolden]

Originally posted by lbodel:
Why do you only pick out what you want to pick out?

"It can be because he's giving up, or because he's charging forward at the officer."

You question earlier that he wasn't giving up or have his hands up. Then you put this quote in and then go off running about charging forward at the officer. Also in the report of the autopsy released, the examiner stated that none of the shots appeared to be in close range at all because of a lack of gun powder residue. He goes on to say they did not have access to his clothes, so it's not definitive. But if the shots were from a distance, that calls into question how "threatened" the officer truly was, would you agree?

We don't know a lot and I'm not making a judgment (none of my posts have been about the officer in question really). But keep in mind this information is all coming from an independent autopsy as the STL police have been very vague and not answered questions on things. They have not been very forthright and also have been inconsistent in their statements. So don't act like the mis-information is only coming from one side.

I'm the one who linked the entire quote. Yet you're accusing me of picking out what I want to pick out? OK. There's zero evidence that Brown was giving up yet thousands are rioting, looting, marching, and etc. A witness to the shooting is heard on video stating Brown was charging at the policeman. 4 of his shots were in the arm. Highly unlikely that a policeman would be aiming at Brown's arms over his head.

I think it's pretty obvious that people started marching, rioting, and looting based on misinformation (gentle giant, shot in back, just out walking with his friend, shot for no reason, and etc) from supposed witnesses and the media. Hell - when had some of our own on here getting all worked up over this misinformation. As the evidence starts to come in, it's looking more and more like this narrative is fiction. But what the hell - let's keep rioting, looting, and causing mayhem until we know for sure, right?

 

[threeeputtt]

Originally posted by threeeputtt:
I love all of the "Monday morning" comments. The story is simply to sketchy to draw any conclusions. I will wait until more facts come out. I have no opinion other than it is sad.

There still aren't enough facts to come to a sane and complete conclusion from what I have read.

 

[lbodel]

You put the quote - then only ran with half of the quote.

The point of the quote is that one person could not determine, but that one person also did not have access to everything that's available (i.e. the clothes), so when you complain about people making assumptions, then you take the "charging forward" assumption and run with it - you're doing the exact same thing.

If you TRULY aren't forming an opinion and waiting for the facts as you seem to want everyone else to do, I'd suggest you do the same thing, cause you definitely are not.