Racist Police Response to Ferguson Protests

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Much of this could have been avoided (other than Brown still being dead, unfortunately) if the police had gotten their shit together to release information. We're supposed to trust their story when it takes them days to get their story together?

And right after the cops release the robbery stills, there's a statement from the police saying "oh, but it had nothing to do with him being pulled over." ... okay?

EVEN IF it turns out the shooting was even remotely somewhat justified, it was their lack of response that led to this clusterfuck.
 
The entire point of releasing the robbery stills was to let people's mind wander to the subject of Michael Brown's character even though it was, and still is, totally irrelevant.
 
It is like what do you expect young people to be in these marginalised communities? It doesn't create saints, but it also doesn't create monsters who need to be gunned down.



But fear is important.

How else do you get not-quite-as-poor people to buy guns and vote Republican?


Sent from
 
You guys are boring...

Were your previous posts an attempt to troll the forum to get a reaction? Because they're certainly not the usual considered thoughts I expect from you.

I certainly didn't expect you to say that if you punch a cop you get what's coming to you, including being killed.
 
The entire point of releasing the robbery stills was to let people's mind wander to the subject of Michael Brown's character even though it was, and still is, totally irrelevant.

Exactly. To Aeon and everyone who is stating that because Michael Brown stole some $5 cigarellos and pushed a convenience clerk out of the way who was attempting to block his escape, he must be A Very Bad Man who deserved whatever came his way, the police chief himself has stated, numerous times, that the robbery was in no way connected to Officer Wilson confronting these two teens.
 
I didn't know the US now implement martial-law for not nice characters.
Whether that guy was an angel or not is completely irrelevant. Lethal force is justified in a situation of self-defense. Someone not being nice is not self-defense.
 
It's like that poor girl who was shot in Detroit for banging on someone's door trying to get help. "Oh, but she was stoned and/or drunk! She was driving impaired!"

Yes, that's bad. But it has nothing to do with her being shot for no damned good reason.

(Also, am so glad that guy got convicted.)
 
I didn't know the US now implement martial-law for not nice characters.
Whether that guy was an angel or not is completely irrelevant. Lethal force is justified in a situation of self-defense. Someone not being nice is not self-defense.


yes but he was black and unarmed.
 
700.hq.jpg
 
you should probably put that under a spoiler tag or at least give us some kind of warning -- seeing a black teenager could be very upsetting for some white people. we don't want anyone shooting out their laptop screen at home.
 
Exactly. To Aeon and everyone who is stating that because Michael Brown stole some $5 cigarellos and pushed a convenience clerk out of the way who was attempting to block his escape, he must be A Very Bad Man who deserved whatever came his way, the police chief himself has stated, numerous times, that the robbery was in no way connected to Officer Wilson confronting these two teens.

You are incorrect on several points:

1) I do not believe Michael Brown deserves "whatever came his way" for stealing cigarellos - but when you assault an officer, you will probably get shot. And there seems to be some good evidence coming in the officer was assaulted before the shooting.

2) The surveillance videos also point out that Michael Brown was certainly NOT a gentle giant. He used his size to intimidate and manhandle two clerks in the span of two minutes simply to get what he wanted. The fact that they were only worth 5 dollars actually tells me more about him than if he ripped off a diamond bracelet.

3) The police chief said the "initial" stop between Michael Brown and the officer was unrelated, however - that changed when Wilson drove past Michael...

...At that point, Wilson "made the connection" that Brown might have been involved in a theft that had just been broadcast on police radio, Jackson said.
Chief: Officer noticed Brown carrying suspected stolen cigars

I agree with others that the police department has certainly mishandled the information about this incident. They are certainly at fault for that.
 
Curious - if the forensic evidence points out that Michael Brown DID punch Darren Wilson in the face and DID rush toward the officer after being ordered to freeze - would that change your mind about this incident?
 
but when you assault an officer, you will probably get shot.

And that's the problem!

Police officers are sworn to protect and serve. They are supposed to be trained to act professionally in tough situations, and to not flip out and overreact and shoot an unarmed teen to death because of a(n alleged) punch.
 
Curious - if the forensic evidence points out that Michael Brown DID punch Darren Wilson in the face and DID rush toward the officer after being ordered to freeze - would that change your mind about this incident?


No


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Curious - if the forensic evidence points out that Michael Brown DID punch Darren Wilson in the face and DID rush toward the officer after being ordered to freeze - would that change your mind about this incident?
Not at all.
 
And that's the problem!

Police officers are sworn to protect and serve. They are supposed to be trained to act professionally in tough situations, and to not flip out and overreact and shoot an unarmed teen to death because of a(n alleged) punch.

I am fairly certain that police are trained to shoot individuals assaulting them.

I am also fairly certain they are trained to shoot a suspect (which he became at this point - if for anything else, assaulting an officer) charging toward him after being ordered to freeze.

Again - we will have to wait until the forensics are released.
 
That is simply amazing...
I'm sure many police officers have faced individuals like Michael Brown before, and were able to arrest without shooting them. Regardless of how that situation escalated, shooting an individual who is unarmed (and with no criminal record, at the time being) is just wrong.
 
I am fairly certain that police are trained to shoot individuals assaulting them.



I am also fairly certain they are trained to shoot a suspect (which he became at this point - if for anything else, assaulting an officer) charging toward him after being ordered to freeze.



Again - we will have to wait until the forensics are released.


Please don't ever become a cop. No, this is false. Police are assaulted everyday. Police are trained to shoot only when their or another life is thought to be in danger. He is going to have to prove his life was in danger, hence why the autopsy and incident report are vital.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
And if he really felt the need to shoot couldn't he have at least aimed for leg?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Also, Brown was shot 9 times, right?

The vast majority of those shots, including the fatal ones, were when Brown was running away and had his hands up in surrender. I'd hardly think the officer feared for his life at that point.
 
I am fairly certain that police are trained to shoot individuals assaulting them.

I'm fairly certain you're wrong. I'm fairly certain that the brush you're painting with is far too wide, and that actual police rules of engagement limit use of deadly force to situations where the officer's life is in immediate danger or where allowing the suspect to escape would put others' lives in immediate danger. i don't think a shoplifting teen, even one who pushed a clerk out of the way, meets that criteria.

I am also fairly certain they are trained to shoot a suspect (which he became at this point - if for anything else, assaulting an officer) charging toward him after being ordered to freeze.

There has been no evidence presented so far that indicates that Officer Wilson shot Michael Brown to death as Brown was charging him. All evidence so far points to Brown being shot while either running away or after having put his arms in the air in the universal sign of surrender.

I'm curious, Aeon - you have yet to reply to the eyewitness reports. There have been at least two independent sources - sources who don't know each other - who claim that Brown was shot while fleeing and then gunned down once he turned around with his hands up. What are your thoughts on that? If those witnesses' stories are accurate, do you STILL think Officer Wilson was justified in killing Brown?
 
Last edited:
You are incorrect on several points:

1) I do not believe Michael Brown deserves "whatever came his way" for stealing cigarellos - but when you assault an officer, you will probably get shot. And there seems to be some good evidence coming in the officer was assaulted before the shooting.

2) The surveillance videos also point out that Michael Brown was certainly NOT a gentle giant. He used his size to intimidate and manhandle two clerks in the span of two minutes simply to get what he wanted. The fact that they were only worth 5 dollars actually tells me more about him than if he ripped off a diamond bracelet.

3) The police chief said the "initial" stop between Michael Brown and the officer was unrelated, however - that changed when Wilson drove past Michael...

Chief: Officer noticed Brown carrying suspected stolen cigars

I agree with others that the police department has certainly mishandled the information about this incident. They are certainly at fault for that.
Most of this is police propaganda.
 
Back
Top Bottom