Wuh-Oh: Michael Brown, the unarmed teen shot in Ferguson, allegedly robbed a store minutes before be - Polidicks

[QUOTE=drutehtkehs;45716891]what a post so devoid of thought[/QUOTE] Do elaborate.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;45717631]No, they confirmed it was him. [editline]17th August 2014[/editline] Unless you are talking about the video of his body then I don't know. [editline]17th August 2014[/editline] Unless you are talking about the video of his body then I don't know.[/QUOTE] The police officer didn't stop Brown as a suspect, which is pretty damn weird considering how that should be a top, well-known priority. And also, find me a single article that confirms instead of saying "was" or "allegedly" it was Brown.

at this point i feel that the original case itself does not matter as much as the protests and the police response to the protest

a fun game to play is to add "and he deserved to die" at the end of every one of these headlines, since that's basically what they're trying to say, revealing just how fucking disgusting the writers are basically being

[QUOTE=axelord157;45717586]This is borderline misinformation. I'm pretty sure its been proven that dude in the video and Brown are completely different people. The police said it themselves.[/QUOTE] if you look at the video of the robbery and pictures from the scene of Brown's death it is extremely obvious it was him unless there happened to be another very large black man wearing the exact same clothing

[QUOTE=evlbzltyr;45717872]a fun game to play is to add "and he deserved to die" at the end of every one of these headlines, since that's basically what they're trying to say, revealing just how fucking disgusting the writers are basically being[/QUOTE] Yes, the point is totally that he deserved to die because of it, not that there's a very clear and obvious reason for him to have resisted and fought with the police when they stopped him. And how come you don't attempt to point out any of the bias in his favor in any of the articles which paint him as an innocent little angel?

I just find it funny how all these "innocent black boys" are portrayed to be so cuddly and harmless in the eyes of parents or the community as soon as they die. The one kid that even made a statement claiming they were innocent was THERE WITH BROWN robbing the store. This happened with Martin, too. After a while, some "not-so-innocent" photos of him surfaced and half of everyone shut their mouths. This is what is going to happen here. And Reverand Al Sharpton is already all over this, even linking this to the Eric Garner situation. Both dudes who were portrayed as sweet and innocent.. But really, just like any other criminal. And no, I'm NOT saying that strong-armed robbery is a reason to be shot, but maybe Brown DID actually go for the officer and try to get his gun. In that case, I don't blame the officer and I would've done the same thing.

[QUOTE=axelord157;45717743]The police officer didn't stop Brown as a suspect, which is pretty damn weird considering how that should be a top, well-known priority. And also, find me a single article that confirms instead of saying "was" or "allegedly" it was Brown.[/QUOTE] The damned article in the op says that the suspect was identified as Brown.

[QUOTE=Govna;45716844]But that makes too much sense and doesn't allow us any room for overemotional, unreasonable outrage.[/QUOTE] The outrage that minorities in America have towards their treatment by the American justice system is completely reasonable and if they didn't have cause to be upset before, they certainly have good cause after police used tear gas and rubber bullets to suppress their right to assemble. [editline]17th August 2014[/editline] These protests are about far more than this specific killing.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;45718246]The outrage that minorities in America have towards their treatment by the American justice system is completely reasonable and if they didn't have cause to be upset before, they certainly have good cause after police used tear gas and rubber bullets to suppress their right to assemble.[/QUOTE] Sweet. I'm going to start a riot and get people to loot and burn YOUR house. You wouldn't mind would you? after all, it's our right to assemble! The sad part is that nobody would care if they were peacefully assembling. However, when things get violent, they need to be stopped. The fact that you can't grasp that shows that you've already chosen a side instead of waiting for the entirety of the evidence to come out for both sides....

[QUOTE=KorJax;45717195]Just like the Trayvon Martin case, turns out the guy who got killed was literally trash of a human being and yet uninformed dumbasses build him up to be some kind of martyr That said unlike the Martin case, lethal force was most likely not justified at all, and the how the police handled protests/rioting was awful. If anything, thats the real black spot against the police in this whole thing - how the aftermath of his death was handled. A shitty person gets himself killed by being stupid and shitty, the cops handle it extremely poorly (and not to mention probably didn't need to use lethal force). Everybody are losers here.[/QUOTE] I agree with the whole post except where you said lethal force was justified in the Trayvon Martin case. It absolutely wasn't and it was some asshole playing cop who had a vigilante boner is why Trayvon died. No justified reason for it other than someone wanted to play cop and got themselves into a situation easily avoidable. If anything this Ferguson case has way MORE justification than the Martin case being that its an actual police officer and not some dickhead playing cop.

Allegedly Brown rushed the cop, maybe a taser would've worked as well. However tasers don't always stop people, so if this is true, maybe it was justified. Nothing is exactly confirmed though. Best course of action is to stay back and follow both sides of the story as new details emerge.

[QUOTE=outlawpickle;45718315]I agree with the whole post except where you said lethal force was justified in the Trayvon Martin case. It absolutely wasn't and it was some asshole playing cop who had a vigilante boner is why Trayvon died. No justified reason for it other than someone wanted to play cop and got themselves into a situation easily avoidable. If anything this Ferguson case has way MORE justification than the Martin case being that its an actual police officer and not some dickhead playing cop.[/QUOTE] If Martin wasn't dead, Zimmerman would be, but I suppose you think that's more fair. Though I do agree that this case is likely even more justified than the Martin case.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45718289]Sweet. I'm going to start a riot and get people to loot and burn YOUR house. You wouldn't mind would you? after all, it's our right to assemble! The sad part is that nobody would care if they were peacefully assembling. However, when things get violent, they need to be stopped. The fact that you can't grasp that shows that you've already chosen a side instead of waiting for the entirety of the evidence to come out for both sides....[/QUOTE] there's more sides to this than just the police and everyone else, don't act like there isn't

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;45718405]there's more sides to this than just the police and everyone else, don't act like there isn't[/QUOTE] Of course there is. That's not what I'm saying at all. But when you start saying that violent riots are covered under your "right to assemble", you're obviously not taking a step back to look at the entire picture.....

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;45718321]Allegedly Brown rushed the cop, maybe a taser would've worked as well. However tasers don't always stop people, so if this is true, maybe it was justified. Nothing is exactly confirmed though. Best course of action is to stay back and follow both sides of the story as new details emerge.[/QUOTE] If you have a gun pointed at you by police and you rush at them like a dumbass then R.I.P. and good riddance. Just IMO

[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;45718368]If Martin wasn't dead, Zimmerman would be, but I suppose you think that's more fair.[/QUOTE] You can't say that for sure, and also if Zimmerman didn't pursue Martin than the incident wouldn't have happened.

[QUOTE=Valnar;45718468]You can't say that for sure, and also if Zimmerman didn't pursue Martin than the incident wouldn't have happened.[/QUOTE] That doesn't give Martin permission to attack him without him being allowed to defend himself. TBH what Zimmerman did was great, he was following a person he thought was a criminal so that the police could catch him. If Zimmerman was the one who was killed people would be calling him brave, but because he isn't black and the guy that died was black suddenly he's Hitler for trying to do the right thing.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45718428]Of course there is. That's not what I'm saying at all. But when you start saying that violent riots are covered under your "right to assemble", you're obviously not taking a step back to look at the entire picture.....[/QUOTE] the thing is the police didn't just use tear gas and rubber bullets against those who were rioting but also against those who were peacefully assembling.

[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;45718477]That doesn't give Martin permission to attack him without him being allowed to defend himself. TBH what Zimmerman did was great, he was following a person he thought was a criminal so that the police could catch him. If Zimmerman was the one who was killed people would be calling him brave, but because he isn't black and the guy that died was black suddenly he's Hitler for trying to do the right thing.[/QUOTE] He acted as a vigilante even after told by a dispatcher to not pursue. He ended up creating the situation, and for all we know the only real justification we have seen for Zimmerman pursing Martin was walking while black. That is one reason why it became a big racial issue. Edit. Not to mention there were a number of police missteps that had ended up keeping things in haze for the entire trial. [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us/trayvon-martin-case-shadowed-by-police-missteps.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0[/url]

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;45718503]the thing is the police didn't just use tear gas and rubber bullets against those who were rioting but also against those who were peacefully assembling.[/QUOTE] Weather you like it or not, when people start rioting, there is no longer a "peaceful assembly". The good get punished for the bad. The cops are required to break it up and send everyone home in order to keep more disorder from happening. When people don't listen, this is what you get. You can't blame the cops for trying to do their jobs. You also do realize that if everyone went home for a few days, they could resume a peaceful protest within a few days after the bad apples were taken care of right?

how do you rob a store in america when you're unarmed ???

[QUOTE=Arc Nova;45718566]how do you rob a store in america when you're unarmed ???[/QUOTE] Because not literally everyone in america has a weapon on them at all times????????????? do you actually believe this????????????

[QUOTE=Valnar;45718537]He acted as a vigilante even after told by a dispatcher to not pursue. He ended up creating the situation, and for all we know the only real justification we have seen for Zimmerman pursing Martin was walking while black. That is one reason why it became a big racial issue.[/QUOTE] really the main thing from what i remember was how the cops and media reacted rather than the case itself. it was really just another time when a relatively minor thing snarled and dredged up a bunch of really bad systemic issues, exactly like what's happening now. and just like then those issues are being ignored in favor of randomly demonizing whoever brings them up

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45718428]Of course there is. That's not what I'm saying at all. But when you start saying that violent riots are covered under your "right to assemble", you're obviously not taking a step back to look at the entire picture.....[/QUOTE] Peaceful protests wouldn't have turned into a riot if police hadn't started beating protestors up. People aren't animals and they don't do things arbitrarily.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;45718578]Because not literally everyone in america has a weapon on them at all times????????????? do you actually believe this????????????[/QUOTE] Shoplifting.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45718564] You also do realize that if everyone went home for a few days, they could resume a peaceful protest within a few days after the bad apples were taken care of right?[/QUOTE] It's the police's job to deal with looters, not private citizens. However, the police have chosen to treat everyone on the streets like a looter. I mean I can tell the difference between someone holding a sign and someone breaking a storefront but apparently the police in ferguson cannot because they've been teargassing and firing rubber bullets at both. Do you still think the police response is just about "looting?"

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;45718700]Peaceful protests wouldn't have turned into a riot if police hadn't started beating protestors up. People aren't animals and they don't do things arbitrarily.[/QUOTE] REALLY???? If they don't do things arbitrarily, then what was the reason for looting Shaniqua's hair salon and running out with arm fulls of hair extensions?????? That had sooooo much to do with why they were protesting in the first place right?????

[QUOTE=Mitsudigi;45718452]If you have a gun pointed at you by police and you rush at them like a dumbass then R.I.P. and good riddance. Just IMO[/QUOTE] Oh, I agree.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45718739]REALLY???? If they don't do things arbitrarily, then what was the reason for looting Shaniqua's hair salon and running out with arm fulls of hair extensions?????? That had sooooo much to do with why they were protesting in the first place right?????[/QUOTE] Oh, you're super racist. That explains everything.