MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #20

[katydid23]

I am curious to see how many protestors they actually will get there on Sunday for the Rams game. It's going to be harder than getting them out in Ferguson. And they are going to need a lot more if they want to even be noticed among the crowd. Or to even stand up for themselves.

When they say ' No Fooball'--what are they saying, exactly? How do they expect to shut down an NFL game? It would take a lot more than they have shown so far to accomplish that task. And in the end, it would mean serious :jail: time. I have a feeling this threat will go by the wayside.

 

[oh_gal]

Alleged criminal?!?!?! Suspect?!?!?!?! Subject of the investigation!?!?!?! What is a person who is before a grand jury called???? Whatever that is, substitute that term if that is more palatable.

"Criminal" implies guilt to me, or at the very least, someone who commits a crime. What is OW guilty of, except going to work that day and carrying out his duties? Where is the guilt in that? Do you think he woke up that morning and said, "I'm gonna kill a person today..." But for the actions of MB, we wouldn't even be here.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I am curious to see how many protestors they actually will get there on Sunday for the Rams game. It's going to be harder than getting them out in Ferguson. And they are going to need a lot more if they want to even be noticed among the crowd. Or to even stand up for themselves.

When they say ' No Fooball'--what are they saying, exactly? How do they expect to shut down an NFL game? It would take a lot more than they have shown so far to accomplish that task. And in the end, it would mean serious :jail: time. I have a feeling this threat will go by the wayside.

Ask them, tell them have have until noon tomorrow to answer....or else!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BirdycatNY]

IMO the problem is, the criminal element is entrenched. Once it gets to that point...it's very difficult to do anything about it.

Years ago, the first property I owned was a condo. Life was wonderful. Until, quite a few units became section 8. There would be 15 people living in a two bedroom condo....outside all night, drinking, drug empty packets all in the parking lot. Using other people's patio furniture, loud, ....basically neighbors from hell!
We called the police every single time. The condo association began fining the owners...the owners started screening their renters better and the problem went away. But it took the rest of us to make those calls and voice our concerns consistently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EXACTLY and the problem is once the criminal element gets out of control, the community may be afraid to call LE for support. imo in for example Chicago, as long as you left gangbangers alone in the bad neighborhoods no worries, but confront them and you may be a target. I forget the name of the anti-violence activist, but I remember an activist was killed in Chicago a few years ago for trying to fight crime, will try to find link. Yes, it only takes one criminal neighbor to create problems for the street/neighborhood, such a shame for sure.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2003-06-08/news/0306080514_1_activism-latino-alderman

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/..._1_death-penalty-murder-charge-top-prosecutor

 

[rob]

My brother lives 5 minutes tops walking distance from the Shoe Carnival. There's always thuggery going on there. Won't get any argument from me about getting more LEO and better paid LEO if we can find the money. Thuggery bothers me more than LEO too. What I said is that I expect thuggery from thugs. I don't expect it from LEO. As to this case...you have your opinion and that's cool. I'm still waiting because I haven't even heard OW's version yet.

Reedus, I really respect your opinions and cool head. But, don't you feel the family's attorneys agreeing that there was an altercation when the LEO was trying to get out of his car, sorta gives you the feeling of who the is here?
I'm sorry, but if I'm approached by LE, I do what they ask, not slug them, not curse them, not tell them the many reasons I don't have to do what they have asked of me. Good grief, if he had just gotten out of the street, he probably would have went on home, loaded the blunts with pot, chilled out, and started school tomorrow.
All MOO only.

 

[K_Z]

IMO the problem is, the criminal element is entrenched. Once it gets to that point...it's very difficult to do anything about it.

Years ago, the first property I owned was a condo. Life was wonderful. Until, quite a few units became section 8. There would be 15 people living in a two bedroom condo....outside all night, drinking, drug empty packets all in the parking lot. Using other people's patio furniture, loud, ....basically neighbors from hell!
We called the police every single time. The condo association began fining the owners...the owners started screening their renters better and the problem went away. But it took the rest of us to make those calls and voice our concerns consistently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great example! And therein lies the dilemma to work to improve race relations and socioeconomic relations.

Should we "zone" poverty (a euphemism for crime and undesirable behaviors) into ghettos like Canfield Green, to keep the undesirable elements away from law abiding, tax paying members? Or, do we integrate poverty into blended areas with subsidized housing? That very debate is raging where I live, as multiple attempts to put "low income and affordable" multifamily rental units near relatively high property value single family home neighborhoods. You can imagine the howls of NIMBY from property owners!

I don't honestly think most people care what income level a neighbor has-- it's the crime, disrespectful, and undesirable behavior they don't want.

In our area, a factory attracted a large number of immigrant workers to the area. Lots of people worried about crime moving in with the immigrants. The immigrant group moved families with kids, and has become a true value to the community, because their own values and behaviors were compatible. They are honest, law abiding, quiet, church going, and very engaged and hands-on parents.

It's an issue of attitude and behavior, and personal responsibility, not income or race, IMO. Diversity is not about law abiding citizens being forced to tolerate crime, disrespect, and disruptive behavior, and then called "racist" when they object to the behavior. That is not what diversity is all about. It's not about being forced to "hug a ", to borrow that phrase from one of my fellow posters. That's not tolerance, either.

 

[Dana]

Great example! And therein lies the dilemma to work to improve race relations and socioeconomic relations.

Should we "zone" poverty (a euphemism for crime and undesirable behaviors) into ghettos like Canfield Green, to keep the undesirable elements away from law abiding, tax paying members? Or, do we integrate poverty into blended areas with subsidized housing? That very debate is raging where I live, as multiple attempts to put "low income and affordable" multifamily rental units near relatively high property value single family home neighborhoods. You can imagine the howls of NIMBY from property owners!

I don't honestly think most people care what income level a neighbor has-- it's the crime, disrespectful, and undesirable behavior they don't want.

In our area, a factory attracted a large number of immigrant workers to the area. Lots of people worried about crime moving in with the immigrants. The immigrant group moved families with kids, and has become a true value to the community, because their own values and behaviors were compatible. They are honest, law abiding, quiet, church going, and very engaged and hands-on parents.

It's an issue of attitude and behavior, and personal responsibility, not income or race, IMO. Diversity is not about law abiding citizens being forced to tolerate crime, disrespect, and disruptive behavior, and then called "racist" when they object to the behavior. That is not what diversity is all about. It's not about being forced to "hug a ", to borrow that phrase from one of my fellow posters. That's not tolerance, either.

Great post! ITA! THANK YOU!

 

[K_Z]

Off topic.

oh_gal

Your "Grandpa" poster is now hanging in my daughter's elementary school classroom! She saw it on the screen and thought it was so funny, she brought it to school! They all thought it was hilarious! That's one class of kids that will learn to properly use commas! :loveyou:

 

[katydid23]

RE: the Rams game threats---- the only way I can think of that they could hope to shut down the game, would be to lie in the street to block the entrances. I wonder how many streets there are that enter into the stadium? Probably a lot of them. I don't think there are going to be enough protestors to pull that off. jmo

 

[oh_gal]

Off topic.

oh_gal

Your "Grandpa" poster is now hanging in my daughter's elementary school classroom! She saw it on the screen and thought it was so funny, she brought it to school! They all thought it was hilarious! That's one class of kids that will learn to properly use commas! :loveyou:

Thanks funny! Thanks for letting me know! I must confess, a writer friend had it on her website....and I "borrowed" it from her.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Well, someone better post it!!!
Please!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lovejac]

I am curious to see how many protestors they actually will get there on Sunday for the Rams game. It's going to be harder than getting them out in Ferguson. And they are going to need a lot more if they want to even be noticed among the crowd. Or to even stand up for themselves.

When they say ' No Fooball'--what are they saying, exactly? How do they expect to shut down an NFL game? It would take a lot more than they have shown so far to accomplish that task. And in the end, it would mean serious :jail: time. I have a feeling this threat will go by the wayside.

Much like when they were going to block the highway.

That was a big ole dud :wink:

 

[Lovejac]

I am curious to see how many protestors they actually will get there on Sunday for the Rams game. It's going to be harder than getting them out in Ferguson. And they are going to need a lot more if they want to even be noticed among the crowd. Or to even stand up for themselves.

When they say ' No Fooball'--what are they saying, exactly? How do they expect to shut down an NFL game? It would take a lot more than they have shown so far to accomplish that task. And in the end, it would mean serious :jail: time. I have a feeling this threat will go by the wayside.

------------------

 

[Lovejac]

https://twitter.com/MOTreasurer/status/512678560306192385

Treas @ClintZweifel today requested #MHDC staff conduct a quality of life study on properties in #Ferguson.

 

[al66pine]

Good question.
https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-demonstrations-and-protests
Not usually. However, certain types of events require permits. For example:
•A march or parade that does not stay on the sidewalk, and other events that require blocking traffic or street closure;
•A large rally requiring the use of sound amplifying devices; or
•A rally at certain designated parks or plazas.

Thanks LambChop for link aclu info.
Sorry to be several hrs behind, but here's more specifically--
Ferguson's ordinance re Parades & Processions (w my bolding)
ARTICLE VI. - PARADES AND PROCESSIONS

Sec. 44-316. - Permit required, exception.
(a)
It shall be unlawful to conduct any parade or procession, and for any person to participate in any parade or procession comprised of more than six (6) vehicles or a group of pedestrians more than eight (8) feet in width or more than forty (40) feet in length, under the direction of one (1) or more persons, except in accordance with a permit issued by the chief of police. Parade permits shall designate the street or streets such procession shall traverse and the hours of the day within which the same shall proceed. The chief of police may issue any such permit with the approval of the city manager; provided, however, that the military forces of the United States and the state, the personnel of the police and fire departments of the city and funeral processions shall be exempt from the provisions of this section.
(b)
An application for a permit to conduct a parade or procession shall be made to the chief of police of the city at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the conducting of the same. The application shall contain the name and address of the applicant, the time, date and route of the proposed parade or procession and a description of any special equipment or vehicle to be used. If the information set forth on the application shall meet the requirements of this section, the chief of police shall issue a permit for the parade or procession; provided, no such permit shall be issued if the nature or conduct of any parade or procession might tend to be dangerous or harmful to the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of the city.
(Code 1973, § 42.52)
State law reference— Similar provisions, RSMo 300.325.
https://www.municode.com/library/mo...s/PTIICOOR_CH44TRMOVE_ARTVIPAPR_S44-316PEREEX

My first glance interp is that a permit sh/h/bn required for many of the protests over the past several weeks,
but I c/be wrong.

I've not found provision re 'assemblies' not conducted on streets or in a public park.
Ditto re 'rallies' or 'protests.'May have missed it.
Ord. re pedestrians: https://www.municode.com/library/mo/ferguson/code_of_ordinances/toc/PTIICOOR_CH44TRMOVE_ARTVIIPE
Re entire city code: https://www.municode.com/library/mo/ferguson/code_of_ordinances/toc/PTIICOOR
For parks, a reservation and/or fee may be required to use facilities like a pavilion, but IDK????

 

[Lovejac]

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/09/18/missouri-creates-office-to-address-racial-issues/

Missouri Creates Office to Address Racial Issues

Gov. Jay Nixon on Thursday signed an executive order creating the Office of Community Engagement.

 

[oh_gal]

Am I in TO?? No one has posted anything for over 40 minutes....I smell something rotten in the state of Denmark....

ETA: Nevermind.....my post apparently kick started my system again.....
ETAA: OK...now I can't "thank" the last few posts....the "thanks" button is gone....

 

[katydid23]

Here is the major big story on #Feruguson twitter. The breaking story that the police chief lied and they can prove it and he needs to be fired:


Ryan Shetler ‏@arjayshetler 33m
"wait for the facts?" Hardly a good idea when the #Ferguson police are so busy making them up... https://storify.com/VeryWhiteGuy/shaunking-exposes-ferguson-pd-lie-about-distance-f …



Follow
In that video, the Chief says it was 35 feet from the window of Wilson's car to where Mike Brown was killed. This was a DELIBERATE lie.
An officer is allowed, expected even, to use force, when in danger, when as much as 25-35 feet away. Mike Brown was ONE HUNDRED feet away.




[OK, so the big lie is the distance from the SUV, that the body fell. But they seem to make the assumption that OW stayed with the SUV. But he didn't. He ran behind chasing them. So he was only a few feet away at the final shots. So what is the big deal about the 100 foot distance?]

 

[Dana]

Here is the major big story on #Feruguson twitter. The breaking story that the police chief lied and they can prove it and he needs to be fired:


Ryan Shetler ‏@arjayshetler 33m
"wait for the facts?" Hardly a good idea when the #Ferguson police are so busy making them up... https://storify.com/VeryWhiteGuy/shaunking-exposes-ferguson-pd-lie-about-distance-f …



Follow
In that video, the Chief says it was 35 feet from the window of Wilson's car to where Mike Brown was killed. This was a DELIBERATE lie.
An officer is allowed, expected even, to use force, when in danger, when as much as 25-35 feet away. Mike Brown was ONE HUNDRED feet away.




[OK, so the big lie is the distance from the SUV, that the body fell. But they seem to make the assumption that OW stayed with the SUV. But he didn't. He ran behind chasing them. So he was only a few feet away at the final shots. So what is the big deal about the 100 foot distance?]

ITA. This story teller, gatherer of facts *ugh* would be correct if the SUV shot MB. More BS as usual.

 

[Lovejac]

Here is the major big story on #Feruguson twitter. The breaking story that the police chief lied and they can prove it and he needs to be fired:


Ryan Shetler ‏@arjayshetler 33m
"wait for the facts?" Hardly a good idea when the #Ferguson police are so busy making them up... https://storify.com/VeryWhiteGuy/shaunking-exposes-ferguson-pd-lie-about-distance-f …



Follow
In that video, the Chief says it was 35 feet from the window of Wilson's car to where Mike Brown was killed. This was a DELIBERATE lie.
An officer is allowed, expected even, to use force, when in danger, when as much as 25-35 feet away. Mike Brown was ONE HUNDRED feet away.




[OK, so the big lie is the distance from the SUV, that the body fell. But they seem to make the assumption that OW stayed with the SUV. But he didn't. He ran behind chasing them. So he was only a few feet away at the final shots. So what is the big deal about the 100 foot distance?]

Nice little theory there. Of course it would help make it believable if Officer Wilson was actually standing in his car when he fired the shots.

Nice try and some will believe it.