Michael Brown had robbed a Quick Trip just before the fatal shooting

Obama says Ferguson is rightly hurting, so what does this mean actually ? Does he mean that he agrees with the reaction so far, and so he figures that "Now" is the time for it to stop after all the looting and stealing has taken place, but what about before hand ? What about speaking to the crowd for their wrong in doing what they are or have been doing there ? Is he biased in the case ?
 
Then your poor ass whines about how there's no effin jobs! Poor old fucking me! YOu don't do shit to better your own life so you blame it on us.

We didn't start the riots
We do support the police but because we don't want our businesses burnt down

Fuck you
 
Are you kidding me? If you get hit in the arm FOUR TIMES with a 9MM, you are going down!
It seems you are over-rating the 9mm, which hasn't the impact rating of an ordinary .38.

.45 or .357 magnum are stoppers -- especially hollow-point or flat-nose semi-jacket bullets.

Assigning 9mm as the standard police handgun round when was somebody's bad idea when police were upgraded to 15 shot automatics. while some (many?) police agencies have upgraded to .40 caliber because, as we just seen in the need to shoot a charging bull like Michael Brown six times with the 9mm round. One or two .45s or .357s would have dropped him.

9mm is a fast bullet but it's light and has a relatively soft impact.
 
Few years back in Canada, a Canadian team lost hockey match to a US team in some kind of grand tournament. In response, Canadian fans rioted. They destroyed cars, burned stores and even hurt people. The Canadian government's response was very determined. The government said that it would make every effort to identify and arrest the rioters and it did. That was a correct approach. There are innocent people in Ferguson whose cars got burned. There were businesses that got destroyed. For what? We do not know what actually happened. There is an investigation in progress. Let federal and state investigators do their job first before crucifying the police officer.
It appears this incident has ignited an explosive level of Black citizens' accumulated resentment of Ferguson's predominately White police officers whom they denounce as being excessively aggressive. I can't offer a substantive opinion about that because until this incident occurred I'd never heard of Ferguson, MO.

Normally I am strongly critical of the increasingly authoritarian nature and the overly-militarized condition of America's civilian police agencies. And were it not for the fact that a video showing Michael Brown to be nothing but a bullying thug who deserved what he got I might be more sympathetic to the position of these demonstrators. But as it is the deference being expressed for an assaultive criminal like Michael Brown is misplaced and the lies that were told about his confrontation with the cop who shot him have thoroughly alienated me.

Bottom line is I'd say these people have picked the wrong reason to protest.
 
Youre a racist. It means you basically think you are somehow better than another race. Its not for you to believe but to label you as an ignorant inbred for everyone else to know.

I am a lowly sinner, saved by grace. God sees no black or white. I see it because I am human, a sinner and point out the facts/stats to show blacks commit the majority of crimes even though they are only 13% of the pop. 72% single black mothers, the list goes on and on and on. Just because you do not like the FACTS you attack the poster like most good little libs.
 
Guy, he had five bullets in him before the kill shot. seriously, if he was still charging when the sixth bullet hit him, he was fucking Jason Vorhees.
Most of those in the arm.

If they were center mass you might have a point but as usual you don't

and how do you know what order the shots hit?

He could have been hit in the head on the first or second shot and the cop could have kept firing as he fell
 
Yes I have. If I was going to charge at someone my head would be up with my eyes fastened on my target. The bullet hit him in the head as he was going down consistent with the testimony of Tiffany and Paigent. You must be the one that never played football. What coach told you to charge with your head down so you cant see your target nimrod?

So you assume a guy charging an armed cop is going to use proper form?

And still even if he did use proper form that does not rule out a head shot if he was using proper form then his head and shoulders would have been at the level of the cops midsection. A standing cop could still shoot him in the head

Your problem is that you have absolutely no objectivity
 
Most of those in the arm.

If they were center mass you might have a point but as usual you don't

and how do you know what order the shots hit?

He could have been hit in the head on the first or second shot and the cop could have kept firing as he fell

when you shoot a person 6-8 times at range, it's kind of hard to argue that it wasn't excessive.

Combine with that.

1) The police have been stonewalling the press.
2) Witnesses say he was trying to give up.
3) The withholding of the "robbery" tape and selectively sending out frame before releasing the less-incriminating whole tape.

This really looks like a corrupt police department trying to cover its ass.
 
when you shoot a person 6-8 times at range, it's kind of hard to argue that it wasn't excessive.

Combine with that.

1) The police have been stonewalling the press.
2) Witnesses say he was trying to give up.
3) The withholding of the "robbery" tape and selectively sending out frame before releasing the less-incriminating whole tape.

This really looks like a corrupt police department trying to cover its ass.


On 3) it was the press and media who did that shit. They used the Sunshine Law to get the records, then they are the ones who broke the story on the video in sections - all of the video was on a disc given to them in answer to their Freedom of Information requests.
 
So you assume a guy charging an armed cop is going to use proper form?

And still even if he did use proper form that does not rule out a head shot if he was using proper form then his head and shoulders would have been at the level of the cops midsection. A standing cop could still shoot him in the head

Your problem is that you have absolutely no objectivity

You're dealing with theoreticians who watch a lot of tv. No real life experience.
 
when you shoot a person 6-8 times at range, it's kind of hard to argue that it wasn't excessive.

Combine with that.

1) The police have been stonewalling the press.
2) Witnesses say he was trying to give up.
3) The withholding of the "robbery" tape and selectively sending out frame before releasing the less-incriminating whole tape.

This really looks like a corrupt police department trying to cover its ass.

No, it looks like chaos, and the officer in question is clean, those who who know him state he is generous to a fault, kind & decent. The perfect conundrum.
 
when you shoot a person 6-8 times at range, it's kind of hard to argue that it wasn't excessive.

Combine with that.

1) The police have been stonewalling the press.
2) Witnesses say he was trying to give up.
3) The withholding of the "robbery" tape and selectively sending out frame before releasing the less-incriminating whole tape.

This really looks like a corrupt police department trying to cover its ass.

The thing is those shots in the arm probably didn't stop his forward motion he was certainly able to keep coming at the cop with a few 9 mm slugs in his arm.

Tell me if a 300 lb bear is charging you do you only fire a predetermined number of rounds or do you fire until it stops coming at you?
 

Forum List

Back
Top