Best, Complete, Factual Account Of What's Happening In Ferguson

[Winchester]

Back up a second here.....

 

Your fiancee is a she....and you're a female, according to your profile?

Down, boy.

[Norseman82]

i actually had a friend on fb who posted that Brown got exactly what he deserved.

 

I asked her if she thinks stealing cigars is worthy of the death penalty...she didnt answer. 

 

Did you ask her about him shoving the store owner? 

 

Tell the whole story.....

[Norseman82]

Down, boy.

 

Do I get a belly rub or a scratch behind the ear followed by a Snausage?

[ToJesusMyHeart]

shoving doesn't deserve death penalty either...?

 

Did you ask her about him shoving the store owner? 

 

Tell the whole story.....

 

[Lilllabettt]

Did you ask her about him shoving the store owner? 

 

Tell the whole story.....

 

 

shoving doesn't deserve death penalty either...?

 

 

The point is, you don't know the whole story.

[Winchester]

Do I get a belly rub or a scratch behind the ear followed by a Snausage?

Of course; I'm not a monster.

[Winchester]

shoving doesn't deserve death penalty either...?

No, but it does indicate a willingness to employ aggression.

 

Shoving a tiny store owner is a big step away from charging a man holding a gun, but the commitment to violence can overwhelm common sense. It's possible the officer's account is true. It's possible Mike Brown was hopped up on drugs or his own recent success at bullying (if that's him in the video).

 

All the information is important. I'd like to know how many people the officer had previously used violence against, as well. Did he consider jaywalking a crime sufficiently terrible to use physical violence over? I would hope not, but one never knows. I believe that if a jaywalker refuses to stop after a cop politely asks him to stop, then the officer should have no recourse to violence of any sort. I would say that following the jaywalker and determining his identity that way could be acceptable.

 

But then again, jaywalking is not really a crime in itself.

[PhuturePriest]

No, but it does indicate a willingness to employ aggression.

 

Shoving a tiny store owner is a big step away from charging a man holding a gun, but the commitment to violence can overwhelm common sense. It's possible the officer's account is true. It's possible Mike Brown was hopped up on drugs or his own recent success at bullying (if that's him in the video).

 

All the information is important. I'd like to know how many people the officer had previously used violence against, as well. Did he consider jaywalking a crime sufficiently terrible to use physical violence over? I would hope not, but one never knows. I believe that if a jaywalker refuses to stop after a cop politely asks him to stop, then the officer should have no recourse to violence of any sort. I would say that following the jaywalker and determining his identity that way could be acceptable.

 

But then again, jaywalking is not really a crime in itself.

 

I was shocked when I found out cops actually enforce jaywalking laws. Where I live, it's common to just walk in the middle of the street itself, and no one cares. Crosswalks are used for decoration only.

[CatherineM]

I remember when this happened in St. Pete. Black teenager, white cop. Teen acting stupid bumped cop with car and cop stupid enough to stand in front of moving car shot teen through windshield. What always bothered me is that they looted black owned businesses. Why not go after me? I was white and lived in "their" part of town because I was too poor to live elsewhere. They pulled our pediatrition out of her car and beat her up in front of her kids. Black female doctor who allowed people who couldn't pay to get their kids treated.

What I remember the most is cops in shorts driving golf carts wearing riot helmets. Looked so stupid on cnn that they did away with shorts right afterwards. I guess they all have military surplus now.

[Credo in Deum]

If he reflexes so consume him that he shoots a suspect multiple times who is not a direct and obvious threat to his life or the lives of civilians then he needs to not be a police officer.

Nah, he should just transfer to Seattle, WA. One of our officers shot a sick half deaf Native American, 4 times because he wouldn't drop his whittling knife. Dude wasn't even facing the cop when he was shot.

[Ice_nine]

 

 

 

yes, very bad to think black kid must be guilty of something.

also very bad to think white cop who shot black kid must be racist murderer.

see the connection?

 

 

No, I'm too dumb. I do see a glaring difference however. Cops are not a persecuted minority and are often times considered above the law (or at least carry themselves that way). They get away with thuggery all the damn time, particularly against black males. The outcry over individual incidents is part of a wider social context wherein racial tensions do exist between the police and black people. No I don't know the particular facts of the Brown shooting but I understand the wider social context pretty well and understand the rage felt by the black community.

 

How is it just as bad to automatically assume a white cop is guilty in the same way it is bad to think a black man deserves to be arrested or shot at? I'm talking practical issues here, maybe morally or even logical it's all "the same thing but in reverse," but how many cops are real victims of this? Do they frequently lose their lives and face the same amount of violence they dish out? Cops still enjoy a high status and praise among mainstream white America. I would imagine courts are biased in their favor whereas the justice system is biased against racial minorities. Cops are allowed to engage in thuggery with virtual impunity whilst every character flaw of a black suspect/victim is analyzed and proffered as a reason as to why the incident happened.

 

It's almost like when people say it's just as bad to hate a white people as it is to hate black people. Maybe on some personal moral and/or logical level this is true. However the actual impact of one, is very different from the other. And, perhaps more importantly, one is a reaction to the other; one historically precedes the other. There are different dynamics involved when a more powerful group lashes out against a less powerful one than when the "underdog" lashes out at those who tend to hold all the cards.

 

And maybe I'm a little emotionally charged and not being logical enough, but I'm human, and I do find your "lolz i luv irony" stuff to be a little grating.

[Winchester]

The whole thing about Ferguson PD beating a man whom they wrongly arrested, because they a half-wits, and then charging him with a crime because he got blood on their uniforms indicates to me that there is a reason for the people under their thumb to not trust them.

[Lilllabettt]

No, I'm too dumb. I do see a glaring difference however. Cops are not a persecuted minority and are often times considered above the law (or at least carry themselves that way). They get away with thuggery all the beaver dam time, particularly against black males. The outcry over individual incidents is part of a wider social context wherein racial tensions do exist between the police and black people. No I don't know the particular facts of the Brown shooting but I understand the wider social context pretty well and understand the rage felt by the black community.

 

How is it just as bad to automatically assume a white cop is guilty in the same way it is bad to think a black man deserves to be arrested or shot at? I'm talking practical issues here, maybe morally or even logical it's all "the same thing but in reverse," but how many cops are real victims of this? Do they frequently lose their lives and face the same amount of violence they dish out? Cops still enjoy a high status and praise among mainstream white America. I would imagine courts are biased in their favor whereas the justice system is biased against racial minorities. Cops are allowed to engage in thuggery with virtual impunity whilst every character flaw of a black suspect/victim is analyzed and proffered as a reason as to why the incident happened.

 

It's almost like when people say it's just as bad to hate a white people as it is to hate black people. Maybe on some personal moral and/or logical level this is true. However the actual impact of one, is very different from the other. And, perhaps more importantly, one is a reaction to the other; one historically precedes the other. There are different dynamics involved when a more powerful group lashes out against a less powerful one than when the "underdog" lashes out at those who tend to hold all the cards.

 

And maybe I'm a little emotionally charged and not being logical enough, but I'm human, and I do find your "lolz i luv irony" stuff to be a little grating.

 

 

idk I guess I am sort of not impressed by the thinking that says hatred, prejudice, and hypocrisy are less of a problem depending on who is standing on the sending and receiving ends of the hatred, prejudice, and hypocrisy. Do not find that compelling at all.

 

but if you do find it compelling, on a "practical" level, then I would like to ask you, on a practical level - how is that working for you?* Is that philosophy going to set up any truth and reconciliation commissions in ferguson? I really doubt it.

 

*please note use of rhetorical "you"

 

btw, no one likes to have it pointed out to them when they are being accidentally ironic. But its an education like none other. I don't think I will ever forget those times when someone called me out for accidental irony. It stings big time.

 

recent favorite, have gotten a lot of mileage out of this one:

The vast majority of people nowadays use the word "bigotry" in an unintentionally ironic way. They use it to insult people who hold opinions different from themselves. Meanwhile, the actual definition is

big-ot-ry noun: intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ice_nine]

 

btw, no one likes to have it pointed out to them when they are being accidentally ironic. But its an education like none other. I don't think I will ever forget those times when someone called me out for accidental irony. It stings big time.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately you didn't really school me as much as you may think. As I wrote the original post I considered that by itself "guilty until proven innocent" might refer to the cop, not Brown. In fact that was the only thing I was going to write, but because I knew it wouldn't be clear and it might look like I'm aligning my sympathies with the "victims" in law enforcement, and I couldn't have that. I wanted to make it clear where my sympathies lie. I considered pre-empting the point in my original post, but as you can see I tend to ramble and didn't want to overesplain myself. Anywho I find the implication that you've been educating me, along with your general tone, to be just a touch, a smidge, condescending. Maybe it's unintentional or misinterpreted on my end, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. One thing we can agree on is that we both find each other's arguments uncompelling. hooray!

 

 

 

idk I guess I am sort of not impressed by the thinking that says hatred, prejudice, and hypocrisy are less of a problem depending on who is standing on the sending and receiving ends of the hatred, prejudice, and hypocrisy. Do not find that compelling at all.

 

Really? That's too bad, because the body count and incarceration rate of black people vs. cops is pretty lopsided, but whatevs. To each their own. If someone who hates you has the power to destroy you it IS less of a problem if they wield no such power.

[Lilllabettt]

Unfortunately you didn't really school me as much as you may think. As I wrote the original post I considered that by itself "guilty until proven innocent" might refer to the cop, not Brown. In fact that was the only thing I was going to write, but because I knew it wouldn't be clear and it might look like I'm aligning my sympathies with the "victims" in law enforcement, and I couldn't have that. I wanted to make it clear where my sympathies lie. I considered pre-empting the point in my original post, but as you can see I tend to ramble and didn't want to overesplain myself. Anywho I find the implication that you've been educating me, along with your general tone, to be just a touch, a smidge, condescending. Maybe it's unintentional or misinterpreted on my end, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. One thing we can agree on is that we both find each other's arguments uncompelling. hooray!

 

 

 

Really? That's too bad, because the body count and incarceration rate of black people vs. cops is pretty lopsided, but whatevs. To each their own. If someone who hates you has the power to destroy you it IS less of a problem if they wield no such power.

 

 

you misunderstand. which i anticipated, hence why i inserted a * with the words "note use of rhetorical "you"

 

I assume you (am using the non rhetorical you) do not actually think lynch mobs, political prosecutions, and public square trials are ay-oh-kay for objects of social scorn.

 

correct me if I'm wrong.