And I get to watch this all unfold first hand, being from St. Louis and all.... Wonder how far this will spread in the city before it turns into Urban Warfare.. :/

well the police started it, and built it up, so probabmy it will get worse....

Negative

If that guy and his buddy hadnt just committed a robbery, i bet the kid/guy who got shot wouldnt have been so combative when the officer stopped them.

missouri has a lot of black people

With a name like MilitantOrgy i would think you'd be on the front lines of this riot :P

But yeah, that sucks. Hopefully they can contain it

Just saw the video where they are all taking about what happened. And its clear one of the guys who witnessed it said that Brown charged the police officer.

Autopsy report shows Brown was struck ontop of his head, consistent with someone "Charging", and not running away.

this was all browns fault, but people just wanted a reason to act like jackasses, and lawyers certainty arnt helping the situation.

granted, the police's initial response wasnt the greatest, but blaming the police for a bunch of fluffing idiots looting small businesses is idiotic. That town looked depressing BEFORE this all happened, the residents are just using this as an excuse to act like flufftards.

i hope every single "witness" that has lied their face off over the last week is thrown in jail for inciting riots, and i hope the police cheif loses his job.

The sensationalism has been nuts with this incident...

my favorite part is the tavon martin lawyer being the first on scene with the family offering his legal expertise

i fluffing hate ambulance chaser lawyers. they are the catalyst to the slow downfall of this country imo.

Read this book, http://www.amazon.com/...mas-Sowell/dp/1594031436. There's a part in there that explains this situation perfectly. Basically it says anytime cops use force against a black criminal the media will always call it "excessive force." Whenever cops show up in large numbers (thus reducing the chances of having to use force) the media calls it an overreaction. Cops can't win when it comes to black criminals. People who weren't on the scene of the crime automatically assume the cop used excessive force. Imagine having this big guy, he was like 6'3 280 lbs or something huge like that, charging at you. What would you do? Tell him to please stop? I don't think so.

Regardless of blame let me ask you this:
why are riots set off so easily over these types of incidents in the first place in these situations in those locations?. In most other industrialized countries at most it would invoke a protest, some letter writing and maybe some "public condemnations".
It is some form of "racial tension"? I would argue not really. Minorities around here get harassed by police both for legitimate and illegitimate reasons. The reaction is rarely violence although they do protest very loudly via the media and through prominent local figures, politicians. Occasional they might hold a demonstration in front of city hall but that's pretty much the end 99 times out of 100.
The media? the media generally reacts the same way as it does in the US (sort of).

Maybe it's something else then....

where's the NRA saying this would be better if everyone there (the riots) had a gun? or that the people in that area should all be better armed...

*waits for link* :)

and no, imo, the issue has nothing to do with guns... just poking fun a little.

http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/...on-of-americas-local.html
and
http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/...ver-arming-local-law.html
?
Seems like a lot of wasteful government spending to me.

No, the autopsy report *didn't* say that. In fact it said that the shots were consistent with someone moving either forward or backward, but it was impossible to tell which.

It also said that of all the shots, the only fatal one was the headshot.

And either way, if the guy is unarmed, why were the police even shooting in the first place? It's supposed to be a last resort if the officer's life is in danger, not if a confrontation will simply be inconvenient.

He went for the gun.. so down hewent

Then use a police baton and beat his ass ffs. People make it sound like there was no other option than to use a gun. Pretty sad when so many people justify taking another person's life.

"It was Brown's fault"

"He shouldn't have charged"

"He was going for the gun"

All polite euphemisms saying he deserved to die. Despicable.

I doubt you would say that if someone went for your gun to put your life in danger. Im sad someone died, but ican see past that to see that another life could have been taken if the suspect had gotten the gun and.killed the officer

Why didn't they have a taser gun instead?

From what I understand, police gun holsters are specifically designed to make pulling the gun out a pain in the ass if coming from a poor angle.

Let the guy lunge for the gun - he's not going to get it unholstered in the 2 seconds it'll take to plant that baton in his stomach.

It's because they're black, is that what you're hinting at?

I'm going to tell you a story. I was on the way to work, passing through downtown Tallahassee, when this beat-up honda civic with a fart can pulled out in front of this Lexus SUV, being driven way too fast for the conditions, by a black woman, with another black woman in the front passenger seat. Now, this Lexus had plenty of time to slow down and adjust to the new traffic conditions, but, instead, what does the black woman behind the wheel do?

Lays on her horn. Lays on it like she's personally responsible for the Civil Rights movement, personally responsible for every single white-on-black incident that garnered huge media coverage, as if her mighty horn would literally bring Martin Luther King Jr., Treyvon Martin, Michael brown, and every other black person that had died at the hands of white people back from the dead and revert human history back to the point before civilized contact, where she would be living in sweet, ignorant bliss in her dirt hut, picking lice off her mate and every other racist thing anyone can think of. The SUV got right on that dented-up civic, singing its twin-tone, one-note song of praise and hallelujah, before whipping behind me, where I could clearly see with my rear-view the driver flashing gang signs and yelling about something, probably more racist, that would probably make the baby Jesus cry had he been able to afford a dented-up honda civic to drive to the synagogue every week.

Now, I thought to myself "Now why is this specimen so angry that she is putting herself and her passenger at great risk of getting lynched?" before remembering I wasn't in the 1960s, and that we are a more civilized nation than we were back then. I then turned left on the parkway, confident in my prediction that I would never see the dented-up honda civic or the Lexus SUV again, as both of them kept going straight.

But no, I saw them again like 5 minutes later. No idea how, as I didn't think there was another way from there onto the parkway. But the SUV was following the dented-up honda civic (I wouldn't see the civic for another 2 minutes), probably to do something black to it (which was odd, as the civic was already black), and the SUV had turned onto the service road to try to beat the traffic on the parkway to a side street. However, as I also needed to take the side street, and as I was closer to the turn-off on the parkway, I was able to reach the intersection before they could. After turning on the street, we both caught up to the dented-up civic, going through another intersection. He went straight, and me and the Lexus SUV turned right. Nothing else happened.


Is that the sort of fun you were poking?

no. Although fear of each other is kind of a sad fact of life in certain parts of both of our countries,
It might be a contributing factor but I would say that the main cause very little* to do with racism, skin color, or racial segregation.

and yeah there is the joke about the old lady and two black men in the elevator who turn out to be basketball stars and give her an autograph.

bonus

Spoken like someone not in a life or death situation. In general people don't make the best decisions in perceived life or death situations. The officer thought someone was trying to get his gun, go into survival mode. He didn't know if the kid was armed or not either. Hindsight is 20/20

What that officer knew was these 2 dumb asses were walking down the middle of the road and got aggressive when asked to stop breaking the law. Deserve to die? No. Wound he of died if he didn't make a series of dumb and illegal decisions that day? Doubtful.

Don't blame the officer for his reaction, blame the person who created the situation in the first place. This everyone is a victim mentality is fugging stupid imo. Brown was the agressor. And he clearly wasn't the fine upstanding citizen that was executed by the police for no reason like the family is saying. That mentality is why there are riots. Aversion to the truth.

Brown was shot at least 6 times. You can draw the line between defense and overkill.

Usually if you shoot a person once (who isn't drugged up - but it's pretty easy to tell those who are) that's enough to get them to go down. Six times?

I don't understand why people justify it.

"blame the person who created the situation in the first place."

So if a woman is wearing a provocative dress and is walking back from a club and gets raped, blame her for creating the situation, huh? Let's not blame the rapist - or in this case, the cop who unloaded his firearm on someone who is supposed to be TRAINED to incapacitate someone. Brilliant logic.

Wearing a dress isn't the same thing as breaking the law or attacking a cop.

Stop with your blanket generalizations, they display ignorance or desperation. Maybe both.

I would be surprised if he wasn't high or drunk. He had just robbed a store in his own small town in broad daylight. That is incredibly stupid behavior. Then he was walking down the middle of the road. Then he, unarmed, attacked a cop. That either points to an extremely stupid individual or someone who's high/drunk.

Furthermore, why do you care how many times the cop shot this guy? Would you be satisfied if it had been 1 deadly headshot?

wearing a provocative dress isn't illegal. if the person assaulting her gets shot and killed, then it's his fault that he was shot and killed.

It's not a "blanket generalization," it's comparison. And stop resorting immediately to ad hominems, it takes away from your argument.

So instead of firing those 6 shots center of mass, why not fire those 6 shots at his legs (they're hard targets, but with 6 shots, one of them is bound to hit)? Why not disengage? Why was his firearm even unholstered - where was the tazer?

mrford, you are talking about being in a life or death situation, but we're just people. Cops are people too, but they're TRAINED (or supposed to be) to deal with situations like this. The police officer is either willfully incompetent or incidentally, and either way, he shouldn't get a free pass because of "hindsight 20/20".

correct. but it is sexy. and makes my pants tighter

mrford, I agree with you on this.

TAN, your example about the woman wearing a dress causing her to get raped make you a fluffing idiot. It's nowhere near the same thing.

No, if that same woman (not on drugs, or drunk, but in her right mind) was holding the dress over her head and telling the guy to screw her, and then reported it as rape the next day... then you have an appropriate example.

Furthermore, i saw the video from the store where Browm walked in the store, took cigars, pushed the store clerk aside and walked out. He just committed a crime and was blatant about it. he didn't even attempt to sneak the cigars. He knew he was big enough to not have to worry about the clerk.

He had the idea in his head the he was big and bad enough that he didn't have to worry about other people. He forgot that he needed to worry about guns.

If brown was charging a little old lady, or small child and the cop shot him, you'd be saying the cop did the smart thing. But because the cop was only protecting himself, well now he's just wrong.

You want accountability for everyone except Brown. Apparently try dying absolves you of all wrongdoing.

As for your "aim for the legs" lol. Have you even fired a gun? If so, have you ever fired a gun after an intense struggle, massive adrennalin, and heartrate? This ain't the movies, it is diffivult. People don't immediately drop when shot. There isn't a hit marker, or a score keeper. You shoot till your target goes down.

If the struggle was for his gun, then he already had the gun on his mind and his arms in a position to draw. What if in the time it took him to go to his right to get his tazer Brown pulled out hus own weapon? What if he missed with the tazer? Hard to bank on a one shot weapon in a life or death situation.

Brown took his life into his own hands when he attacked the cop. Period. There is nothing more to this case imo. I would of shot a 6'4 280 pound dude going for my gun too.

When I was in the military, i was trained to use guns too. I was trained to always shoot for center of mass. In my 7 years, i never had to use the gun.

How many times has this particular cop been in this type of situation? i don't care how much he trained for it, until it happens, you cannot predict how you or someone else will react.

If his training was anything like mine, then he pulled his gun and shot for center of mass because that's how he was trained. Also, I was trained that if I pulled my gun, expect to kill the target. There is no such thing as shooting to maim, hurt, or injure. You shoot to kill. If they don't die and just go down, then they are lucky.

Uh if the report was he was charging the police, by other witnesses, this autopsy proves that. Yes it could ALSO be someone moving forward or walking backwards(but the way he fell after being shot is consitent with charging and his momentum falling forward.)

6'4 300 pound dude is charging you??? That isn't enough to defend yourself?

To use deadly force you must be in fear of your life or great bodily injury. In these instances there is no weapon escalation. What i mean is one does not have to use a chemical agent, then a baton, then a tazer and then use a gun. There doesnt even have to be a weapon involved. One can by shot multiple times unarmed and still be at fault . Happens all the time.
If the cop had an automatic, in this case he showed restraint and situational awareness. He had rounds left and may have needed them for that other flufflock lieing thief that was with mb.

I just heard them play some audio on the radio of a guy that was talking to someone else about what he just saw. The guy did not know he was being recorded.

The guy said, (paraphrasing here) "there was a scuffle at the police car, then Brown ran and the officer got out of the car and chased after Brown. Then Brown turned around toward the office. [the guy] thought the office was missing Brown when firing his gun because Brown kept going toward the officer."

someone talking, without knowing they are being recorded, to me, is the best witness.

Also, the family asked for the autopsy and it showed that he was shot from his front (at least that's what they said on the radio about it. They also said several witnesses reported that he was shot in the back. (maybe those witnesses saw the cop chasing Brown, but either didn't remember correctly, or chose to lie for whatever reasons they have, because people do that).

I saw on tv, some Brain show, that had a magician doing something for a crowd of people, while 10 feet away, in perfect view of the crowd, two guys mugged a girl. A real cop came and asked everyone what they saw of this mugging and not a single person had even half of it correct. You cannot rely on a few witnesses alone. You need a much larger group to get accurate information.

this right here. i was taught never pull a gun unless you plan to use it, and never use it unless you intend to kill.

if this cop was in a situation where he reasonably felt the need to discharge his weapon, it wouldnt be to shoot to disable. shooting people in the leg? only a naive person would consider that an option.

if this kid did get ahold of the cops gun and killed the cop, how many of you "everyone deserves to live libtards" would even give a second fluff when you heard about it? this kid deserved the fate he met. play stupid games win stupid prizes.

play stupid games win stupid prizes

What every brilliant internet researcher in this thread is forgetting is that the police are there to "serve and protect," not "kill if someone lunges at me". The very sad thing about all the comments in this thread is the blase attitude towards militarization of the police and the acceptance of a "shoot first" policy. You can spin it and dance around it all you guys want, but it's attitudes like this that lead to NO accountability whatsoever.

shoot first?

the cop was in a fight with someone who was more than likely much larger than him. you are acting like this cop rolled up and opened fire. you keep oversimplifying the situation into an idealistic situation, which is flawed because no situation is ever idealistically simple.

what should the cop of realistically done differently? if you suggest hitting a 6'4 280 pound dude with a stick a couple times you have clearly never been in a real fight.

the biggest point you ignore is the kid shouldnt of done what he did. you are the type of person who lets a criminal sue because he broke his leg while robbing someones houes. it is disgusting.

This

that was actually Pain, i just liked it so much i repeated it. probably should of quoted but i was too lazy.

Police shoots a criminal. Town erupts in riot to protest the shooting of said criminal. It's not the criminal's fault. It's not the rioters fault. It's people on the Internet's fault. Got it.

TAN is a bleeding heart. Everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt unless they are in a position of authority. Then it is automatically their fault because they had the power and chose to use it instead of running away.

I think TAN would have the police do nothing, and let crime run rampant. Now everyone is unsafe, but hey its not the cops killing the criminals anymore.

"you are the type of person who lets a criminal sue because he broke his leg while robbing someones houes."

No, I'm not ford. You're better than this. Stop hiding being the proto-typical conservative shell and knee-jerkingly assume this is a "liberal" vs "conservative" argument (whatever the fluff that even means). I never disagreed with this sentence:

"the kid shouldnt of done what he did."

You are 100% correct. No one is disputing this. What I'm talking about is the easy acceptance of the use of force. I've been in fights before with people who are bigger than me and lost. I know what's on the line, so don't patronize me. But cops are TRAINED for this sort of fluff. They are trained in how to disarm people (unneeded, in this case) or to put people in arm locks, incapacitate them...etc.

What could the police officer have done? He could have backed away instead of pointing a loaded firearm at someone. He could have waited for backup so they could restrain the guy. He could have initiated the contact holding a tazer instead of a firearm. He could have used pepper spray to subdue to victim.

But hey. These are just things a police officer is trained to do. They're also apparently trained to interpret a big black guy rushing him as a "life or death situation" where you only use your firearm to "shoot to kill."

none of these suggestions are viable in this instance

backed away? he was being charged by someone he was already in hand to hand combat with, an instance where his gun was groped at. Backing away from a charging person is idiotic. you want him to run around the car until backup arrives?

Initiate the contact holding a tazer? the contact was initiated when no weapon was drawn. that is why the criminal went for his gun. and tazers dont always work. Brown had already shown hostile intent and if you want to take the chance that the tacer will work, and that you can hit a running target with your one shot, then go for it. I wouldnt.

Pepper spray? jesus dude im not even going to go into that one. pepper spray isnt for situations like this.





your points may stand if the situation was different, but imo the cop had every right to shoot, and i would of done the same thing. Brown displayed hostile intent, brown turned around and reingaged, brown got shot.

Brown is the criminal here, not the cop. stop acting like there is any other explination

Good to see that TAN is still dumb. Some things never change.

Shoot center mass. If the target doesn't go down shoot again.

Actually, when I shoot I practice firing twice rapidly, then sidestepping, then firing twice, etc., so waiting for him to go down wouldn't happen.

Nationwide, fists are already recognized as lethal force. By the accepted legal standard, he was in danger of his life and thus is justified in shooting the [kid].

The fact that he robbed a store beforehand is inconsequential because it had nothing to do with why the police confronted him. It is a coincidence and it does not detract from any criticism about profiling or racial tensions or whatever else may be the issues in the region.

However, if he did attack the cop then the cop has every right to do what needs to be done to subdue the individual.
That being said, if it is also true that this Brown fellow was on his knees with his hands in the air when he was shot "multiple times", then the cop is guilty of manslaughter in my opinion.