- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 26,629
- Reaction score
- 6,661
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Yes. He attacked someone. That's called "Assault". It's the same in every state.
In response to what I've bolded, no, their safety isn't more important.
Even if he did mean Brown, when the original riots and unrest began, the story reported was eyewitnesses saw police shoot an unarmed guy who was running away.
Yes, a couple of someones, the store owner and the cop.
Yet, the headline that kept being repeated was "white cop shoots unarmed black teenager" instead of "thug commits strong arm robbery, attacks cop, gets shot for his trouble. Good job."
Oh, and he was walking down the middle of the street at night. Too bad some black guy didn't run over him. We'd never have even heard of the incident.
Which was completely untrue. The "eyewitnesses" included an accomplice. How is that fair to the cop? Last time i checked he is still human too. And he deserves fair treatment.
Yet, the headline that kept being repeated was "white cop shoots unarmed black teenager" instead of "thug commits strong arm robbery, attacks cop, gets shot for his trouble. Good job."
Oh, and he was walking down the middle of the street at night. Too bad some black guy didn't run over him. We'd never have even heard of the incident.
I don't think many would argue with what you are saying. The entire situation was ****ed up, including the prosecutor calling a witness to defend the defendant that was clearly racist and probably wasn't even there.
I have no idea about Brown's character, I'm speaking specifically about the response to a history of perceived injustice.You don't mean brown do you? Because that is a poor choice of straws. He was a scumbag.
I have no idea about Brown's character, I'm speaking specifically about the response to a history of perceived injustice.
I'm honestly not particularly interested in reading post mortum smears about him. His character isn't really my concern.You have no idea about Brown's character? You need to learn how to use the "google" on the "internet machine". He's got videos of his "thuglife" lifestyle along with PLENTY of pictures to show you just how good of a "gangster" he was.
I'm honestly not particularly interested in reading post mortum smears about him. His character isn't really my concern.
While I agree with everything you say, I was speaking of George Zimmerman, per the convo with the guy I was replying to.
I'm not sticking up for Mike Brown, but didn't it turn out he didn't rob the store? I thought it came out that the owner thought he was stealing but was wrong and it was paid for after.
Oh. I missed the change of subject.
I doubt they give us any information about why an unarmed man should be shot by a trained law enforcement officer.What smears are you speaking of? They are posts, pictures, and videos HE posted on social media.
I doubt they give us any information about why an unarmed man should be shot by a trained law enforcement officer.
Grand jury testimony and evidence are not the same as determining character from Google searches.The bullet holes in the police cruiser and the testimony of witnesses saying Brown went for the cop's gun, give us (and the Grand Jury) plenty of information on why Brown attempted to murder a Law Enforcement Officer.
I doubt they give us any information about why an unarmed man should be shot by a trained law enforcement officer.
Sounds like the NRA is starting to infiltrate the screen writers guild.In the case of Michael Brown, we know why.
I saw a great scene in Blue Bloods the other day, and yes, I understand it's fiction and not real, but the answer was a good one:
Reporter asks why the cops shot an unarmed suspect.
Cop says, You see a suspect going for something that might be a gun, what do you do?
Reporter starts long winded answer....
Cop says, "Too late. You're dead."
Point being, if it is a gun, you have to shoot first if you're going to shoot at all.
Grand jury testimony and evidence are not the same as determining character from Google searches.
I'm not defending or promoting his character, simply arguing that it's irrelevant in what his rights should be.Yes, but both reveal his horrible character which you are somehow defending.
I'm not defending or promoting his character, simply arguing that it's irrelevant in what his rights should be.
No one is claiming you have a right to resist arrest, the issue is whether resisting arrest should include a death sentence, instantly executed by the nearest police officer.He lost his right the moment he attacked a police officer. ALSO, as Jesse Jackson stated, you do NOT have the right to resist arrest.
No one is claiming you have a right to resist arrest, the issue is whether resisting arrest should include a death sentence, instantly executed by the nearest police officer.
I want justice by jury whenever possible and justice by police officer as little as possible. While this may have been legal, I don't believe it was the action that should've been taken.The death sentence, as you call it, didn't come because he resisted. That happened once Brown tried to grab his gun. He tried to grab the officer's firearm. Lol, that's why it was so easy for the Grand Jury to not press charges. Brown tried to murder a police officer.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?