• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Ferguson Live Feed

Nope. I'm saying they are human beings. Systematic bullying will end up in people fighting back. To then punish and abuse them for fighting back is pure, imbecilic sadism that requires a lack of awareness and us vs. them compartmentalization. That's the mentality running through law enforcement all over the country. People will continue to fight back, and bullies will continue to injure, kill, and blame the victims.
How was Michael Brown bullied that he had to "fight back" by robbing a store and attacking a police officer?
How was the Ferguson mob bullied that they had to "fight back" by looting stores and setting them on fire?
What is repeated frequently is that Ferguson residents are upset that some of them had warrants issued against them because they ignored their court dates for various fines. Sorry, but that is not bullying. Neither does it justify them breaking the law.
 
Nope. I'm saying they are human beings. Systematic bullying will end up in people fighting back. To then punish and abuse them for fighting back is pure, imbecilic sadism that requires a lack of awareness and us vs. them compartmentalization. That's the mentality running through law enforcement all over the country. People will continue to fight back, and bullies will continue to injure, kill, and blame the victims.
How was Michael Brown bullied that he had to "fight back" by robbing a store and attacking a police officer?
How was the Ferguson mob bullied that they had to "fight back" by looting stores and setting them on fire?
What is repeated frequently is that Ferguson residents are upset that some of them had warrants issued against them because they ignored their court dates for various fines. Sorry, but that is not bullying. Neither does it justify them breaking the law.

I hope someday you find the wherewithal to see human beings first, before your narrow punishment mentality hijacks your view. Will you always reject understanding in favor of supporting power? That's got to be exhausting.
 
I hope someday you find the wherewithal to see human beings first, before your narrow punishment mentality hijacks your view. Will you always reject understanding in favor of supporting power? That's got to be exhausting.
I see them as human beings. Human beings that have a choice in how they act and are therefore responsible for their actions.
B3daRyJCUAARZjH.jpg
 
Just as you are responsible for your hateful regard for your fellow human beings.

Give your cardiovascular system a rest already.
 
These people living in these blighted areas are the discarded, the superfluous, the walking dead. These are the people the system excludes and then harasses and jails. These are the people those in power don't represent at all, don't care about at all.

Conditions in poor areas of this country have been allowed to wither and die so that the 1% can get richer and we can have more foreign wars.

And as these places die the police are set upon them to feed the for-profit prison system.

Sometimes the young act foolishly and attack the police who do nothing but harass and exploit.

The question is; how much of this nation will the 1% allow to die, with the help of the legislatures and courts they own, before the people rise up and begin to do something about it?
 
In regards to your post Untermensche, there is a Edgar Allan Poe essay that I have been trying to find where he says something like

"the amount of respect and good behavior that young men show is related to them trusting that they will have a fair chance of rising up the social ranks."

Does anyone have a clue as to which essay this is from?
 
In regards to your post Untermensche, there is a Edgar Allan Poe essay that I have been trying to find where he says something like

"the amount of respect and good behavior that young men show is related to them trusting that they will have a fair chance of rising up the social ranks."

Does anyone have a clue as to which essay this is from?

Also the amount of respect people think society is paying them is the amount they will have for the instruments of power in that society.

Not only hope, but real options and the vision of your peers doing more than going to prison is needed.
 
Reminds me of a second hand story I heard. An older man who is a Rotarian talked about a t-shirt that said "Deny Everything" and saw it as being nihilistic. But actually it was pointing out what those in power are doing.
 
Reminds me of a second hand story I heard. An older man who is a Rotarian talked about a t-shirt that said "Deny Everything" and saw it as being nihilistic. But actually it was pointing out what those in power are doing.

No they're not.
 
I don’t yet quite see — ten yards — a man who is shot — even a large fearsome man — known to be unarmed — (did I mention he was already shot?) — can’t be avoided non-fatally? Even when fearing for one’s life if he completes the charge. Could he keep his cool enough to keep saying “Stop or I’ll Shoot!” until he gets two yards away? Should we expect that from a police officer? Apparently not, according to this Grand Jury.

If you try "Stop or I'll shoot!" at 2 yards you're going to lose. He's going to be on you before he could react to it even if he chose to.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not the way the world works. If he had retreated I would be calling for him to be fired.
Because Brown would most likely still be alive? Wow.

I'd be calling for him to be fired because he wasn't doing his job.
 
Good grief. This whole thing was a farce from the beginning.

Their inconsistencies began almost immediately after the shooting, from people in the neighborhood, the friend walking with Brown during the encounter and even one woman who authorities suggested probably wasn't even at the scene at the time.

Jurors also were presented with dueling versions from Wilson and Dorian Johnson, who was walking with Brown during the Aug. 9 confrontation. Johnson painted Wilson as provoking the violence, while Wilson said Brown was the aggressor.

But Johnson also declared on TV, in a clip played for the grand jury, that Wilson fired at least one shot at his friend while Brown was running away: "It struck my friend in the back."

Johnson held to a variation of this description in his grand jury testimony, saying the shot caused Brown's body to "do like a jerking movement, not to where it looked like he got hit in his back, but I knew, it maybe could have grazed him, but he definitely made a jerking movement."

Other eyewitness accounts also were clearly wrong.

One woman, who said she was smoking a cigarette with a friend nearby, claimed she saw a second police officer in the passenger seat of Wilson's vehicle. When quizzed by a prosecutor, she elaborated: The officer was white, "middle age or young" and in uniform. She said she was positive there was a second officer — even though there was not.

Another woman testified that she saw Brown leaning through the officer's window "from his navel up," with his hand moving up and down, as if he were punching the officer. But when the same witness returned to testify again on another day, she said she suffers from mental disorder, has racist views and that she has trouble distinguishing the truth from things she had read online.

Prosecutors suggested the woman had fabricated the entire incident and was not even at the scene the day of the shooting.

Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off." But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."

The witness, who lives in the predominantly black neighborhood where Brown was killed, also acknowledged that he changed his story to fit details of the autopsy that he had learned about on TV.

"So it was after you learned that the things you said you saw couldn't have happened that way, then you changed your story about what you seen?" a prosecutor asserted.

"Yeah, to coincide with what really happened," the witness replied.

Another man, describing himself as a friend of Brown's, told a federal investigator that he heard the first gunshot, looked out his window and saw an officer with a gun drawn and Brown "on his knees with his hands in the air." He added: "I seen him shoot him in the head."

But when later pressed by the investigator, the friend said he had not seen the actual shooting because he was walking down the stairs at the time and instead had heard details from someone in the apartment complex.

"What you are saying you saw isn't forensically possible based on the evidence," the investigator told the friend.

Shortly after that, the friend asked if he could leave.

"I ain't feeling comfortable," he said.

___

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/078c82ad45ff4ec6aa1c7744dfa7df14/grand-jury-documents-rife-inconsistencies
 
Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off." But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."
Pretty much sums up the whole Ferguson movement, doesn't it?
 
To believe that he's telling the truth is to believe that there was a person so enraged with him that he would run directly into a flurry of bullets to get at him. That really boggles the mind! Maybe if he was on some kind of mind altering drugs or had some other kind of mental deficiency that might be reasonable, but no mention has been made that Michael Brown was extraordinary in that regard.

While I do not think drug use or mental issues are necessary to explain criminals doing incredibly stupid things, it has been reported that marijuana was found in his system.
Jurors have also seen the St. Louis County autopsy report, including toxicology test results for Brown that show he had tetrahydrocannabinol, the active ingredient in marijuana, in his system. The Post’s sources said the levels in Brown’s body may have been high enough to trigger hallucinations.
I would say that qualifies as a "mind altering drug".
 
And I do not see that happening here. Surely there must be better causes than a guy who robs a store and attacks a cop.
I never claimed it was the case here. I was pointing to the difference in general between illegitimate power ( as you and Hylidae were commenting on illegitimate power) and institutionalized illegitimate power. I stand by what I actually stated :

IMO the issue is when illegitimate power is institutionalized. When there is a system who supports it and benefits of immunity. Those who are subjected to such institution have no choice but rebel against it. Throughout the history of mankind, such systems grant themselves immunity from accountability.

Do you disagree with what I stated that the issue is WHEN illegitimate power is institutionalized?
When there is a system who supports it and benefits of immunity. Those who are subjected to such institution have no choice but rebel against it. Throughout the history of mankind, such systems grant themselves immunity from accountability.
Police has no immunity from accountability. There was an investigation. Evidence was collected, witnesses questioned. Evidence was presented to a grand jury and no true bill was returned.
Again, I was pointing to the difference in general between illegitimate power and institutionalized illegitimate power. Do you disagree that there is a difference?
Just because the mob didn't like the outcome doesn't mean that it was illegitimately arrived at.
Again see the above and once more make the effort to comprehend what is being conveyed before clicking on reply.
The perception at this point is that the police force benefits of immunity from accountability.
There is no immunity for police. However, since police are authorized to use deadly force as part of their job the standards used are different than for a civilian. A civilian is not expected to pursue and confront a suspect, but police officers are. In fact, it would be dereliction of duty not to. Yet people have criticized Wilson for not disengaging from the suspect.
Are you not aware that there is perception among some of the public(again in general) that the police force (again in general) benefits of immunity from accountability? In case you have not noticed, my statements were intended to explain why there is such climate of distrust towards the police force in the US.
The lack of transparency and the inconsistencies in the Chief of Police's statements to the media ,following the shooting, could only aggravate the pre existing sense that this police department was susceptible to protect Officer Wilson from accountability. Then of course the Governor's refusal to appoint a different Prosecutor to the case despite of the very vocal expression of distrust from the local community. All the symptoms of distrust were present.
Given that following the conclusion of the grand jury process all the evidence including witness statements was released to the public I fail to see how charges of "lack of transparency" hold water.
Again, "the lack of transparency and inconsistencies in the Chief of Police's statements to the media". I was referring to the Chief of Police's lack of transparency IN the Chief of Police's statements, statements which also contained inconsistencies. Again and again, explaining how and why such failures on his part could only fuel further a pre existing climate of distrust. Of course the absence of a detailed statement in writing provided by Officer Wilson to his chain of command known as an incident report also fueled the sense that there was a lack of transparency on the part of the PD. LEOs involved in shooting incidents are expected to formulate in writing a detailed report.

Again, making the effort to comprehend what is being stated before clicking on reply would spare me from expanding more energy than it should be necessary.
 
A couple of good post articles examining the evidence.

Witnesses testimony was all over the place, 3 described his motion as "charging" Wilson, several said he was walking or moving toward, others weren't sure. Nearly all agree he spun around to face the officer:

Was Michael Brown surrendering or advancing to attack Officer Darren Wilson?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2014/11/29/b99ef7a8-75d3-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

And also:

The physical evidence in the Michael Brown case supported the officer [updated with DNA evidence]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...supported-the-officer/?tid=hybrid_1.1_strip_3
 
A couple of good post articles examining the evidence.

Witnesses testimony was all over the place, 3 described his motion as "charging" Wilson, several said he was walking or moving toward, others weren't sure. Nearly all agree he spun around to face the officer:

Was Michael Brown surrendering or advancing to attack Officer Darren Wilson?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2014/11/29/b99ef7a8-75d3-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

And also:

The physical evidence in the Michael Brown case supported the officer [updated with DNA evidence]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...supported-the-officer/?tid=hybrid_1.1_strip_3
He did all of that after being shot twice and running away. Wilson pursued the unarmed man with his fire arm. And sometime during that pursuit, Wilson became "afraid for his life". Do you see any reason why some people do not find Officer Wilson's testimony satisfactory?
 
A couple of good post articles examining the evidence.

Witnesses testimony was all over the place, 3 described his motion as "charging" Wilson, several said he was walking or moving toward, others weren't sure. Nearly all agree he spun around to face the officer:

Was Michael Brown surrendering or advancing to attack Officer Darren Wilson?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2014/11/29/b99ef7a8-75d3-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

And also:

The physical evidence in the Michael Brown case supported the officer [updated with DNA evidence]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...supported-the-officer/?tid=hybrid_1.1_strip_3
He did all of that after being shot twice and running away. Wilson pursued the unarmed man with his fire arm. And sometime during that pursuit, Wilson became "afraid for his life". Do you see any reason why some people do not find Officer Wilson's testimony satisfactory?

If you shoot a guy several times, and he still goes at you, then yeah.
 
He did all of that after being shot twice and running away. Wilson pursued the unarmed man with his fire arm. And sometime during that pursuit, Wilson became "afraid for his life". Do you see any reason why some people do not find Officer Wilson's testimony satisfactory?

If you shoot a guy several times, and he still goes at you, then yeah.
Except that Brown did not still go after Wilson until Wilson went after Brown.
 
Back
Top Bottom