MO - Grief & protests follow shooting of teen Michael Brown #9

[popsicle]

STLtoday ‏@stltoday 4m
Peaceful march draws more than 300 to Ferguson http://bit.ly/1sgUHIP

 

[liloleme]

Mark Fuhrman had some really good points about that video above. He said something akin to, "you have a few seconds to commit and once you commit.. you can't go back.." Or something like that.

 

[cady]

Exactly, this is how you protest and march and express your constitutional right to be seen and heard.

Yes. It is. What I gather from the speaker is that this is in support of DW and that they all are DW today. They are protesting what they consider to be the mischaracterization of DW, to whom they relate, in the MSM, cyberworld, and riotous demonstrations of MB supporters, (the peaceful ones of which) relate to MB. Both sides claim to seek JUSTICE. Both sides wanted an immediate decision that would absolve their respective symbol of innocence. Neither side wanted a thorough investigation. Just a decision. We have no biblical Solomon. We have a slow-moving system of justice. Let it be. JMO

 

[aa9511]

Yes ITA.

 

[tlcya]

:sigh:

I really don't want to see this thread get closed. If we can't even discuss this situation without being personal or coming at one another with aggression over differing views or directing posts to posters rather than the content of theirs how on earth can we ever tackle the problems that divide us as humans and avoid another Ferguson?

feeling sad this afternoon.

I know it is hard not to take things personally or emotionally. I struggle with it. But I do think that overall we have done a decent job of it considering the very hot social buttons this case touches for all of us. But I sure hope we continue to do so because I really feel this conversation and others like are where healing begin.

 

[Kimster]

Leave the tit for tats off the forum please and thank you.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[SStarr33]

The article had a "404" error.........

Stealing 2 cans of soda to make a point sure doesn't add up to being killed. Was there a knife? Or were LE posturing? Guy videoing it said the man had "nothing". Man's dead and they handcuff him. Not the same SOP they used with MB.
2 wrongs don't make a right.
Sick, sick sick.
Sorry if this rubs peeps the wrong way, but LE over reacted IMO.

He clearly had a knife in his right hand. Additionally, the Alderwoman who called 911 said he had a second knife in his pocket. The rules say police can use deadly force if someone with a knife is within 21 feet of the officer.

I was shocked at the video too, but in the state of MO, what they did was legal.

 

[liloleme]

If I were a protestor and the story from the MB side just kept getting progressively worse (as it is), I think I'd stop and say, "hey... what's the reason for not telling us the straight scoop to begin with so that we can draw our own conclusions? Do you think we're too stupid to form our own opinions from facts?"

To me, that would be insulting.

As a person who isn't a protestor, I look on it and say, "if this isn't justifiable, why aren't you just telling the good, the bad, and the ugly?"

They know that this is the only shot they have at getting OW to trial- by creating a mob and turning this into something it's not. They know that if they released all of the facts initially, there's no way charges would ever be filed.

I certainly hope that our justice system doesn't fail us, yet again.

 

[branwynbreeze]

I think this is crux of both cases. Regardless of emotions about both shootings, were LE actions within boundaries of the law.

He clearly had a knife in his right hand. Additionally, the alderwoman who called 911 said he had a second knife in his pocket. The rules say police can use deadly force if someone with a knife is within 21 feet of the officer.

I was shocked at the video too, but in the state of MO, what they did was legal.

 

[Linda7NJ]

If I were a protestor and the story from the MB side just kept getting progressively worse (as it is), I think I'd stop and say, "hey... what's the reason for not telling us the straight scoop to begin with so that we can draw our own conclusions? Do you think we're too stupid to form our own opinions from facts?"

To me, that would be insulting.

As a person who isn't a protestor, I look on it and say, "if this isn't justifiable, why aren't you just telling the good, the bad, and the ugly?"

They know that this is the only shot they have at getting OW to trial- by creating a mob and turning this into something it's not. They know that if they released all of the facts initially, there's no way charges would ever be filed.

I certainly hope that our justice system doesn't fail us, yet again.

I do have to laugh at Daryl Park's hypocrisy.
Yelling about transparently and implying the grand jury is conducted in secretly for nefarious reasons.
While offering up nothing ...

If officer Wilson had ONE single grievance filed against him for racism, brutality he would be screaming it from the rooftops.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SStarr33]

I think this is crux of both cases. Regardless of emotions about both shootings, were LE actions within legal boundaries of the law.

ITA. Popsicle has posted the law/rules several times. Do you have that handy pops?

 

[popsicle]

ITA. Popsicle has posted the law/rules several times. Do you have that handy pops?

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap563.htm

 

[branwynbreeze]

ITA. Popsicle has posted the law/rules several times. Do you have that handy pops?

It was more a rhetorical question.

 

[popsicle]

Yes. It is. What I gather from the speaker is that this is in support of DW and that they all are DW today. They are protesting what they consider to be the mischaracterization of DW, to whom they relate, in the MSM, cyberworld, and riotous demonstrations of MB supporters, (the peaceful ones of which) relate to MB. Both sides claim to seek JUSTICE. Both sides wanted an immediate decision that would absolve their respective symbol of innocence. Neither side wanted a thorough investigation. Just a decision. We have no biblical Solomon. We have a slow-moving system of justice. Let it be. JMO

I don't agree. OW's supporters seem to be asking for the presumption of innocence until the investigation is complete. jmo And for the media to stop being biased in their reporting.

 

[liloleme]

He clearly had a knife in his right hand. Additionally, the Alderwoman who called 911 said he had a second knife in his pocket. The rules say police can use deadly force if someone with a knife is within 21 feet of the officer.

I was shocked at the video too, but in the state of MO, what they did was legal.

Exactly. I'm saddened by the fundamental disregard for authority. You don't have to like what a cop says or does, you just have to do it.

My husband is ex federal law enforcement and I will be THE FIRST two tell you that I AM NOT a fan of cops. He'll be the second to tell you that he is not a fan of them either. (Sorry, y'all...) I find the justifiable lying and entrapment completely unethical. However, it's what we have.

It doesn't matter how wrong I think they are, provided they are not violating my civil rights, I must comply. And, sometimes even if they are violating my civil rights, I still must comply and must deal with that in the avenue that I am provided (the court system). Is it right? Nope. But, thankfully, I've never had that happen.

I've always advised my children that if they are pulled over by the cops and the cops ask them to search their vehicle they are to tell them, "no, I do not consent to the unlawful search and seizure of my vehicle." And, if the cops proceed to do it, they are not to physically intervene, they are just to videotape.

If an officer pulls a gun on you and you don't like it, you can't go for the gun. You don't have to like it, but you CANNOT go for the gun. You will end up dead and, rightfully so. Regardless of what LE does, you have to act lawfully.

(For the record, I am not saying that I believe OW drew down on MB and that MB didn't like it and went for the gun... clearly that is not what happened...)

 

[Bernina]

I just want a link to "apprx 5 hours".

I'm looking! It was waaaaayyyyy back on the threads!

For about four hours, in the unrelenting summer sun, his body remained where he fell.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/u...ys-timeline-4-hours-on-a-ferguson-street.html

It's NOT the one that was posted waayyyy back. Still looking for the 5 hour one.......

 

[tlcya]

Since the suggestion has come up a number of times that a more appropriate way to handle a threatening unarmed suspect was to taser Mr. Brown I am doing a bit of reading about the use of tasers by LE, the protocols and training for use of tasers, etc.

There are a number of premises upon which all interested parties should be able to
agree. First, it is preferable to incapacitate a violent individual than to kill that individual.
Second, the use of tasers should be permitted to the extent that such use is necessary to
protect officer safety while minimizing the risk of physical injury to suspects. Third,
police officers should have some understanding of the effects that using a weapon is
likely to have upon a suspect before deploying the weapon in question. Unfortunately,
however, agreeing on the validity of these premises does not lead anyone to any obvious
conclusions regarding the legitimate use of tasers by police officers.
At the outset, we note that this report is directed solely to the question of when,
and under what circumstances, police officers should be authorized (and perhaps
required) to use a taser on a suspect

http://www.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/child-page/164097/doc/slspublic/tasers.pdf

for those interested in this question a report by Stanford law in regard to the legalities of tasers used in law enforcement.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05464.pdf

I wish I could find more info about whether taser use is recommended when in close contact or struggle with intended target or from within a non moving vehicle but am not finding those specifics thus far to link.

 

[sorrell skye]

Yes. It is. What I gather from the speaker is that this is in support of DW and that they all are DW today. They are protesting what they consider to be the mischaracterization of DW, to whom they relate, in the MSM, cyberworld, and riotous demonstrations of MB supporters, (the peaceful ones of which) relate to MB. Both sides claim to seek JUSTICE. Both sides wanted an immediate decision that would absolve their respective symbol of innocence. Neither side wanted a thorough investigation. Just a decision. We have no biblical Solomon. We have a slow-moving system of justice. Let it be. JMO

The NAACP march (which was the one being discussed upthread) was not connected to officer Wilson. The 'rally' (as STL Today characterized it) in support of DW was held in St. Louis.

The march was organized by the St. Louis County chapter of the NAACP. Kenneth Murdock, a spokesman for the NAACP branch, said the march was organized to channel anger over Brown’s death into “positive activism” such as registering to vote or applying for higher education scholarships and grants.

“We have to kind of refocus anger into activism,” Murdock said.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_81124bbb-084e-5a56-aee0-b361f4ac41ab.html

I like the focus of the NAACP march that was held in Ferguson today. Very positive energy and motives.

 

[tlcya]

I'm looking! It was waaaaayyyyy back on the threads!
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/u...ys-timeline-4-hours-on-a-ferguson-street.html

It's NOT the one that was posted waayyyy back. Still looking for the 5 hour one.......

is this the link everyone is looking for?

Mr. Brown’s body remained in the street for several hours, a delay that Chief Jackson said last week made him “uncomfortable.” Antonio French, a St. Louis alderman who has been active in this case, said on ABC on Sunday that the body had remained in the street for nearly five hours.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html

Or maybe the embedded ABC one?

 

[cady]

I do have to laugh at Daryl Park's hypocrisy.
Yelling about transparently and implying the grand jury is conducted in secretly for nefarious reasons.
While offering up nothing ...

If officer Wilson had ONE single grievance filed against him for racism, brutality he would be screaming it from the rooftops.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah. He would be screaming it. But he is representing the family on a Civil Rights issue, which goes beyond Darren Wilson. I personally don't think, as yet, that this particular incident is proof of a civil rights infraction, but the Feds are not just looking at DW..........I believe that they are looking at the Ferguson PD and the Law Enforcement protocols of greater St. Louis. This case is a jumping-off point in the larger Civil Rights investigation by the Feds. JMHO