How are cops supposed to know if their attacker is armed or not?

[elektra]

it's easy to believe especially when you don't have a rebuttal saying the opposite

argue facts with a liar?

 

[BULLDOG]

There was no trial. No proof other the word of the officer. And, he could've been arrested and jailed. The officer could've called for back up. The officer could've followed him until assistance arrived. There were several other ways it could've been handled besides murder.

AND

MB could have submitted to a lawful order

See how easy the world really works

Maybe so, I agree. But, still, there was no cause to murder him. The cops could've arrested him and tried him in a court of law. There were other ways to handle the situation since he was unarmed.

So you would try and fight a 300 hundred pound dude who is an obvious law breaker?
How about if he attacked a women cop? Or maybe a 115 lb little old man?

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

 

[ClosedCaption]

it's easy to believe especially when you don't have a rebuttal saying the opposite

argue facts with a liar?

again, no rebuttal

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

AND

MB could have submitted to a lawful order

See how easy the world really works

Maybe so, I agree. But, still, there was no cause to murder him. The cops could've arrested him and tried him in a court of law. There were other ways to handle the situation since he was unarmed.

So you would try and fight a 300 hundred pound dude who is an obvious law breaker?
How about if he attacked a women cop? Or maybe a 115 lb little old man?

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

You got a link?

 

[emilynghiem]

Good point, Sonny Clark
I think you nailed it, the "conflicts of interest" that are political

Right now our laws only define conflicts of interest in terms of proven contracts and financial transactions exchanged.

What about political conflicts of interest?
These are subjective and harder to prove intent or causality.

That's why my whole neighborhood got destroyed by abuse of taxpayer's money.
No conflict of interest could be PROVEN because the developers and politicians who did this consulted with lawyers.
They know the grey areas and used all the loopholes they could.

See Code of Ethics for Govt Service ethics-commission.net

"Any person in Government service should:

"I. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.

"II. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.

"III. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving earnest effort and best thought to the performance of duties.

"IV. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.

"V. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or herself or for family members, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of governmental duties.

"VI. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Governmental employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.

"VII. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of governmental duties.

"VIII. Never use any information gained confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means of making a private profit.

"IX. Expose corruption wherever discovered.

"X. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.

Dante pointed out that literally and legally these 10 articles only apply to civil servants in federal govt.

Sonny Clark what about the idea of incorporating these like the Bill of Rights
where EVERYONE in any level of govt or public institution has to follow them
and also set up a grievance process to redress complaints of abuses by citizens.

And just like OSHA and the codes for health and safety,
the agency or agents complained of receive a warning or citation,
naming the Amendments or Articles they are accused of violating,
and a hearing is held to review the complaints and issue corrections.

If Ralph Nader, a consumer advocate, can write up legislation that created
OSHA, the review and penalty system, and the consumer protection act,
why not create a Constitutional ethics review and redress system.
That resolves conflicts by consensus so people are accountable to each other directly.
and any "conflicts of interest" have to be resolved, or there won't be agreement if
someone on any side is playing games.

We already have the U.S. Constitution. We already have laws that imply equal and fair justice. Yes, we could amend what we have to make points a lot clearer and easier to interpret. We need to reestablish true justice in our courtrooms. We need to do away with giving a free pass to politicians, members of law enforcement, and others that seem to always either get away with crime, or get a mere slap on the wrist.

Well, Sonny Clark
if govt and cops are NOT following the Constitution
we have to ask ourselves WHY.

And I find it is like the Bible and why Christians are or are not following it.
When Christians rebuke other Christians using the Bible, it works, they obey and work for agreement.
When Conservatives rebuke each other using the Constitution, it works, they obey and reach agreement.

But when Atheists use the Bible to attack Christians, or liberals use the Constitution to attack Conservatives, it doesn't work. Why? Because the critics are not following those laws they are trying to hold others too, so they have no authority to compel corrections.

So the same way the Church uses the laws for MEMBERS to enforce among themselves,
(and this is how the Reformation came about because MEMBERS stood up against authority that wasn't following laws)

then this same process is happening today with the State
the PEOPLE who are the govt are standing up for Constitutional laws, and demanding that govt follow it. But the KEY is the PEOPLE need to be FOLLOWING the laws in order to hold others accountable, or we bear no weight.

it has to come from the PEOPLE. if you keep waiting on replacing other officials and HOPE they do better, that's what went wrong with the church. The conflicts in interest over power.
If you give up power, what leverage do you have left to work with?

When we EMPOWER the people to enforce laws directly, then this carries authority of law,
and like Christians who follow the laws, they can be like Luther who stood up to corrupt authority.

We lose authority if we don't follow the laws and we keep handing this power to others.
Why keep making this same mistake.

When we hire contractors to build a house, we don't just hire them and let them do whatever they want with the budget.
We write out the plans that we want to build, and hire the contractors to do the work.

We need to give instructions to the govt on the policies and reforms we want passed, enforced and built.
Not blindly hiring "a different person this time" throw them onto the job site, and get mad when they go out and do whatever.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The guy was a punk. The police behavior made that more prevalent in the neighborhood.

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

So now the cop is judge, jury, and executioner? I believe most cops are probably good, but I'm not naïve enough to think more than a few aren't. With the power given to them, they should be held to a higher standard than others.

No, Michael Brown served as his own judge when he disobeyed a lawful order AND attact the officer doing his job.

Would you allow your own death for a paycheck?

Whether or not he actually attacked the officer is a matter of debate. Some witnesses says no, some say yes. There's no video to prove one way or the other.

 

[BULLDOG]

The guy was a punk. The police behavior made that more prevalent in the neighborhood.

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

I guess you would have to be 6' 4" and have had police training to stand up to something like that. Oh wait.......he was, and he did.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The guy was a punk. The police behavior made that more prevalent in the neighborhood.

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

What about calling for back up? Pepper spray? Mace? Get back in patrol car and follow until back up arrived?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

I guess you would have to be 6' 4" and have had police training to stand up to something like that. Oh wait.......he was, and he did.

So you truly believe cops have the skills of an MMA fighter?

 

[BULLDOG]

Maybe so, I agree. But, still, there was no cause to murder him. The cops could've arrested him and tried him in a court of law. There were other ways to handle the situation since he was unarmed.

So you would try and fight a 300 hundred pound dude who is an obvious law breaker?
How about if he attacked a women cop? Or maybe a 115 lb little old man?

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

You got a link?

Sure
Exactly How Often Do Police Shoot Unarmed Black Men Mother Jones

 

[BULLDOG]

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

I guess you would have to be 6' 4" and have had police training to stand up to something like that. Oh wait.......he was, and he did.

So you truly believe cops have the skills of an MMA fighter?

Don't know. I do know he had police training. Do you believe Brown had skills of an MMA fighter?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

What about calling for back up? Pepper spray? Mace? Get back in patrol car and follow until back up arrived?

I promise you I could kill you long before back up arrived and be long gone.
And do you really think MB or anyone trying to avoid police are going to run down the street so you could follow them in a car?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you would try and fight a 300 hundred pound dude who is an obvious law breaker?
How about if he attacked a women cop? Or maybe a 115 lb little old man?

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

You got a link?

Sure

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

I guess you would have to be 6' 4" and have had police training to stand up to something like that. Oh wait.......he was, and he did.

So you truly believe cops have the skills of an MMA fighter?

Don't know. I do know he had police training. Do you believe Brown had skills of an MMA fighter?

At 300 lbs do you really need em?

 

[BULLDOG]

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

What about calling for back up? Pepper spray? Mace? Get back in patrol car and follow until back up arrived?

I promise you I could kill you long before back up arrived and be long gone.
And do you really think MB or anyone trying to avoid police are going to run down the street so you could follow them in a car?

Was it really that important for him to be dead right then? The town isn't that big. Cops would have easily rounded him up even if it took a day or two to do it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you would try and fight a 300 hundred pound dude who is an obvious law breaker?
How about if he attacked a women cop? Or maybe a 115 lb little old man?

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

You got a link?

Sure
Exactly How Often Do Police Shoot Unarmed Black Men Mother Jones

So now your lying to make your point? And you wonder why we dont take you seriously. Or maybe you just need to stop going to Mother jones for your info.
4 Unarmed Black Men Have Been Killed By Police in the Last Month Mother Jones

I expect a retraction.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

What about calling for back up? Pepper spray? Mace? Get back in patrol car and follow until back up arrived?

I promise you I could kill you long before back up arrived and be long gone.
And do you really think MB or anyone trying to avoid police are going to run down the street so you could follow them in a car?

Was it really that important for him to be dead right then? The town isn't that big. Cops would have easily rounded him up even if it took a day or two to do it.

So who's to say MB wouldnt go out and kill someone in the meantime?
MB is responsible for his own death.

 

[emilynghiem]

And still there was no murder. I will not allow myself the luxury of second guessing a man who was attacked by a 300 pounder who refused a lawful order and came back to do more damage.

So the story goes. But, there were several different version of that story.

Not after the UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL agreed with the grand jury. Case closed.

Just to be clear. I take NO JOY in a young man losing his life. But the truth is, he caused it, he could have stopped it.

Law enforcement agencies investigating law enforcement agencies, or their members, does not impress me. Now, if an independent agency, experienced in these types of cases did the investigating, then I'd be impressed and satisfied. When an agency investigates it's own members, what are we to think?

Good point, Sonny Clark
I think you nailed it, the "conflicts of interest" that are political

Right now our laws only define conflicts of interest in terms of proven contracts and financial transactions exchanged.

What about political conflicts of interest?
These are subjective and harder to prove intent or causality.

That's why my whole neighborhood got destroyed by abuse of taxpayer's money.
No conflict of interest could be PROVEN because the developers and politicians who did this consulted with lawyers.
They know the grey areas and used all the loopholes they could.

See Code of Ethics for Govt Service ethics-commission.net

"Any person in Government service should:

"I. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.

"II. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.

"III. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving earnest effort and best thought to the performance of duties.

"IV. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.

"V. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or herself or for family members, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of governmental duties.

"VI. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Governmental employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.

"VII. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of governmental duties.

"VIII. Never use any information gained confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means of making a private profit.

"IX. Expose corruption wherever discovered.

"X. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.

Dante pointed out that literally and legally these 10 articles only apply to civil servants in federal govt.

Sonny Clark what about the idea of incorporating these like the Bill of Rights
where EVERYONE in any level of govt or public institution has to follow them
and also set up a grievance process to redress complaints of abuses by citizens.

And just like OSHA and the codes for health and safety,
the agency or agents complained of receive a warning or citation,
naming the Amendments or Articles they are accused of violating,
and a hearing is held to review the complaints and issue corrections.

If Ralph Nader, a consumer advocate, can write up legislation that created
OSHA, the review and penalty system, and the consumer protection act,
why not create a Constitutional ethics review and redress system.
That resolves conflicts by consensus so people are accountable to each other directly.
and any "conflicts of interest" have to be resolved, or there won't be agreement if
someone on any side is playing games.

I can't think of a single person who could possibly disagree with any of that, except, of course, the politicians who are the only ones who are capable of enacting any of it. They don't even want to limit superPacs. They would laugh at that list as they wadded it up and threw it in the trash.

Hi BULLDOG
and that's where we have a choice not to hire such politicians.
If we held all parties and politicians/corporate leaders to clean up and pay back taxpayers for PAST abuses
and corruption at our expense, they'd be too busy cleaning up old messes to create new ones.

If you don't make your kids clean up their own rooms, they won't ever do it,
and make you pay the maid to clean up.

We need to decide what kind of household we want to run.

If we keep saying "nobody's going to follow the law anyway"
that's why we end up with a system where nobody does, they're not expected to.

 

[emilynghiem]

Cops are trained to defend themselves. They carry pepper spray, tasers, batons, maze, MagLites ( heavy flashlights ), and they have radios to call for help.

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

What about calling for back up? Pepper spray? Mace? Get back in patrol car and follow until back up arrived?

I promise you I could kill you long before back up arrived and be long gone.
And do you really think MB or anyone trying to avoid police are going to run down the street so you could follow them in a car?

Was it really that important for him to be dead right then? The town isn't that big. Cops would have easily rounded him up even if it took a day or two to do it.

So who's to say MB wouldnt go out and kill someone in the meantime?
MB is responsible for his own death.

Yes and no, getting in the car with a drunk driver
may be our responsibility in whether we live or die from that choice.
But it is still the driver that crashes from driving drunk and causing death.
They are still held legally responsibility for the death and not the victims in the same car for getting into it.

 

[BULLDOG]

Call for back up. Follow suspect until help arrives. Use pepper spray if necessary. Use a taser if necessary. Do something besides murder an unarmed person like a dog in the street. Shoot as a last resort, not as a first action.

Calling for back up isn't always an option. Do you really believe Wilson just shot MB in cold blood when officer Wilson had no idea if multiple witnesses were watching?
That is so unbelievable it's ludicrous.

Not really. There were at least 4 shootings of unarmed black men by cops in Ferguson in just the month before Brown's death, and many, more over the previous years with not one cop ever found to have used excessive force. It was just something that happened over, and over, and over. What do you think the odds of him being found guilty were, no matter what the circumstances were?

You got a link?

Sure

I know what a maglight is,I have four or five of em. And I dont give a rats ass how much training you may have a 300 lb dude is most likely going to kick your ass unless you're a MMA fighter.

I guess you would have to be 6' 4" and have had police training to stand up to something like that. Oh wait.......he was, and he did.

So you truly believe cops have the skills of an MMA fighter?

Don't know. I do know he had police training. Do you believe Brown had skills of an MMA fighter?

At 300 lbs do you really need em?

Yep. To be as dangerous as you claim he was. I'm not defending Brown. The Justice Department investigation already made that call, and I trust their investigation. I'm just saying that a cop doesn't have to escalate every situation the way Wilson did.

 

[Pop23]

No,the lack of proper upbringing made that prevalent.
His father was a gang member,is it any wonder he turned out like he did?
If the cycle isnt broken this shit will continue to happen.
Nothing pisses me off more than to hear the dead criminals parents/parent blame the police when they are the ones to blame.
And if I hear "he was such a nice boy"one more time I'm gonna puke.

I already told you I think he was probably a punk. I didn't trust the investigation done by local police because they showed a callous disregard for the rights of the peaceful protestors, but I do trust the DOJ. Contrary to right wing rhetoric, they didn't have a vested interest in the results of the investigation. Bad parents are a terrible problem, and I don't have any more idea how to completely solve that problem than you do, but cops are hired to deal fairly with everybody. It's their job. They aren't allowed to abuse their power just because it is a hard job.

When you attack a cop you forfeit your rights to a trial.
Deal with it in the courtroom not on the street.

So now the cop is judge, jury, and executioner? I believe most cops are probably good, but I'm not naïve enough to think more than a few aren't. With the power given to them, they should be held to a higher standard than others.

No, Michael Brown served as his own judge when he disobeyed a lawful order AND attact the officer doing his job.

Would you allow your own death for a paycheck?

Whether or not he actually attacked the officer is a matter of debate. Some witnesses says no, some say yes. There's no video to prove one way or the other.

That's why we have a grand jury system PLUS the Attorney General of United States review the evidence.

I ask again, would you be willing to bet your life on the paycheck a small city cop brings home?