What the fuck Ferguson?

[Derec]

All we know is that the settlement is for less than 3 million dollars. That means anywhere from $0 to $2,999,999.99. So, the settlement could be for a couple of million or it could be for a half a million or even ten thousand dollars for all we know.

Actually it is for $1.5M.
Ferguson attorney: Michael Brown's family settles with city for $1.5 million
His parents are now rich because they created a thug who decided to rob a convenience store off some Swisher Sweets and attack a police officer for telling him to walk on the sidewalk.

Getting bent out of shape over a settlement of an unknown amount with a known upper limit is unnecessary. Presumably, the city (and the insurance company) weighed the expected expense of a trial and the likely outcome in determining the settlement amount.

As I said, if that is the case, George Costanza must be their risk management guy, because that assessment is bullshit. Their case is without any merit.

I must have a faulty memory, because I cannot recall a thread where the anyone has a cow over a settlement for the death of a white thug. Can anyone help me out with a link to one?

Has there ever been a case of a city giving out a large settlement to a white thug who was justifiably shot by police? I can't think of one, and I doubt very much Ferguson would have settled either had Michael Brown been white.

 

[Derec]

Because I do not think families of thugs should be enriched at taxpayers' expense?

No, it's because you take joy in punching down.

Punching down? Even before the settlement, the family was quite well off thanks to siring/giving birth to a thug who got himself shot by police.

His family profited greatly from having their son be a thug who shot himself by police. They sold T-shirts and other merchandise with his likeness (there were even violent disputes among factions of the Brown/McSpadden clans, for which Leslie McSpadden was never tried), got flown to Geneva to badmouth US at the UN, and then later came the book and movie deals. Now they get $1.5M. All because of lies such as "hands up don't shoot", "gentle giant", or "on the day he was killed Michael Brown was spreading the word of Jesus Chirst".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If it's ok because the recipient is <insert race> then it's racist.

While Mumbles never exactly said that, I don't think you actually believe what you're writing. For example, you don't think giving Jewish people land is racist.

1) "Jewish" isn't a race, it's a religion. Thus it would be impossible for it to be racist.

2) I think it would have been better if Israel were never created. We have to live with the situation as it is, though.

- - - Updated - - -

While Mumbles never exactly said that, I don't think you actually believe what you're writing. For example, you don't think giving Jewish people land is racist.

Want me to say it?

Yes, Ferguson was, in effect, a white supremacist group. I hope they get dismantled due to this.

This is true of every racial supremacist group. If there';s a town that works to discriminate against against white people, I'll call them out as well. And that's not due to some sort of payback - it's just what's right.

You realize a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black?

 

[Keith&Co.]

1) "Jewish" isn't a race, it's a religion. Thus it would be impossible for it to be racist.

Impossible?
What if the racist thinks it's a race? The Bible isn't all that careful to distinguish race, religion and nationality for the Jews.
And many people have treated the Jews as a separate race, with distinct qualities and deplorable traits.
Hell, I've had people try to convince me they're a distinct species. Their poor science was only part of their prejudice. But still, if they're complaining about the Jews and using the word 'race,' to indicate the distinction between Jews and, say, white Europeans, they're probably meeting the definition of racists.

 

[laughing dog]

As I said, if that is the case, George Costanza must be their risk management guy, because that assessment is bullshit. Their case is without any merit.

Since you think you know more than these cities and their attorneys and the insurance companies, perhaps you should start a consulting business to help them save money.

Has there ever been a case of a city giving out a large settlement to a white thug who was justifiably shot by police? I can't think of one, and I doubt very much Ferguson would have settled either had Michael Brown been white.

Funny, there were no threads and complaining about
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/palm-beach/fl-pn-seth-adams-shooting-settlement-20170515-story.html or
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/crime--law/pbso-boynton-family-settle-over-teen-death-for-million/JG3vrGglEcxAbzFHVWPNLJ/, so please excuse me for pointing out that your outrage seems restricted to payouts to the families of black shooting victims.

 

[Bronzeage]

Actually it is for $1.5M.
Ferguson attorney: Michael Brown's family settles with city for $1.5 million
His parents are now rich because they created a thug who decided to rob a convenience store off some Swisher Sweets and attack a police officer for telling him to walk on the sidewalk.

Getting bent out of shape over a settlement of an unknown amount with a known upper limit is unnecessary. Presumably, the city (and the insurance company) weighed the expected expense of a trial and the likely outcome in determining the settlement amount.

As I said, if that is the case, George Costanza must be their risk management guy, because that assessment is bullshit. Their case is without any merit.

I must have a faulty memory, because I cannot recall a thread where the anyone has a cow over a settlement for the death of a white thug. Can anyone help me out with a link to one?

Has there ever been a case of a city giving out a large settlement to a white thug who was justifiably shot by police? I can't think of one, and I doubt very much Ferguson would have settled either had Michael Brown been white.

What you seem unable to grasp about the Michael Brown shooting is that it would not be a criminal trial. It would be a civil trial, which means damages can be assessed as a percentage of responsibility. It's kind of a Catch-22. This means the Ferguson Police Department would have to show how the Officer was trained, and that he followed his training. If he wasn't properly trained, and was let out on the streets, the Department has exposed itself as negligent. If the Officer violated training, the Department is still responsible.

Their only way out would be to show the Officer was properly trained, but violated proper procedure, which resulted in the death of a citizen. In other words, throw him to the wolves.

The real problem is that a full trial would expose the Ferguson Police Department's many failings and the information revealed would be evidence in many more lawsuits. They felt better off to just keep a lid on it.

That's the reason so many thug mothers, the thug babymamas, and of course, the thug babies, get these generous settlements. Police departments can't afford to show their dirty laundry in public. There's too may people who haven't sued because the needed evidence was kept concealed. All it takes is one ambitious lawyer to expose one case, and there's dozens more, just like it.

Think about it for a moment. Who signs away $3million dollars, if they don't think it was a good deal for them?

 

[blastula]

No, it's because you take joy in punching down.

Punching down? Even before the settlement, the family was quite well off thanks to siring/giving birth to a thug who got himself shot by police.

His family profited greatly from having their son be a thug who shot himself by police. They sold T-shirts and other merchandise with his likeness (there were even violent disputes among factions of the Brown/McSpadden clans, for which Leslie McSpadden was never tried), got flown to Geneva to badmouth US at the UN, and then later came the book and movie deals. Now they get $1.5M. All because of lies such as "hands up don't shoot", "gentle giant", or "on the day he was killed Michael Brown was spreading the word of Jesus Chirst".

Sure, that was their plan all along, it worked to perfection. Or, that's how the pathetic down puncher thinks. The down puncher reduces the parents and the son to "they raised a convenience store robbing thug." Keep fighting the good fight!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Their only way out would be to show the Officer was properly trained, but violated proper procedure, which resulted in the death of a citizen. In other words, throw him to the wolves.

The problem here is that you are assuming the cop was in the wrong. I see no wrongdoing on the cop's part in the Michael Brown case. He challenged a lawbreaker. In-your-face about it because his initial challenge was ignored. Said lawbreaker reacted in street mode rather than civilized mode. 100% fault to Michael Brown.

That's the reason so many thug mothers, the thug babymamas, and of course, the thug babies, get these generous settlements. Police departments can't afford to show their dirty laundry in public. There's too may people who haven't sued because the needed evidence was kept concealed. All it takes is one ambitious lawyer to expose one case, and there's dozens more, just like it.

Think about it for a moment. Who signs away $3million dollars, if they don't think it was a good deal for them?

The reason is BLM and the like. Juries see a grieving family and award money, right or wrong.

 

[Mumbles]

Really? In what way? Because they used fines for revenue? Many places in the US do that. Why is it only wrong when it mostly affects blacks?
Also, I think using fines paid mostly by residents of a community to fund services used by residents of the community is much more ethical than using fines paid mostly by passers-through, such as is common for communities that have major highways go through them.

Yes, many places do this. It's a problem.

This is true of every racial supremacist group.

Including Black Lives Matter?

No.

If you want to discuss actual supremacist groups, go for it. BLM isn't among them.

If there';s a town that works to discriminate against against white people, I'll call them out as well.

But was Ferguson discriminating against black people?

And what does any of it have to do with Michael Brown? Remember, he is the one who robbed a store and attacked a cop. That cop had a right to defend himself. To pay his family $1.5M is ridiculous. Whatever else may or may not have been going on in Ferguson, the Michael Brown case should only be about Michael Brown, not about larger political issues.

I'm aware of all that. I;'m also aware of the fact that the police attacked mourners.

 

[LordKiran]

The problem here is that you are assuming the cop was in the wrong. I see no wrongdoing on the cop's part in the Michael Brown case. He challenged a lawbreaker. In-your-face about it because his initial challenge was ignored. Said lawbreaker reacted in street mode rather than civilized mode. 100% fault to Michael Brown.

That's the reason so many thug mothers, the thug babymamas, and of course, the thug babies, get these generous settlements. Police departments can't afford to show their dirty laundry in public. There's too may people who haven't sued because the needed evidence was kept concealed. All it takes is one ambitious lawyer to expose one case, and there's dozens more, just like it.

Think about it for a moment. Who signs away $3million dollars, if they don't think it was a good deal for them?

The reason is BLM and the like. Juries see a grieving family and award money, right or wrong.

He's not assuming anything, he's explaining what their options are and where those options are likely to lead.

 

[KeepTalking]

You realize a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black?

You are incorrect, sir.

At the time of the Michael Brown shooting, the mayor, the police chief, the city manager, 5 out of 6 city council members, and 50 out of 53 police officers of the town of Ferguson were white. Even now, only the police chief and two of the city council seats have flipped to black representation, and the majority of the police department is still white.

So, where the hell did you come up with this information that "a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black"?

 

[Keith&Co.]

So, where the hell did you come up with this information that "a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black"?

Well, if you go back far enough, we're all of African descent...

 

[Bronzeage]

The problem here is that you are assuming the cop was in the wrong. I see no wrongdoing on the cop's part in the Michael Brown case. He challenged a lawbreaker. In-your-face about it because his initial challenge was ignored. Said lawbreaker reacted in street mode rather than civilized mode. 100% fault to Michael Brown.

That's the reason so many thug mothers, the thug babymamas, and of course, the thug babies, get these generous settlements. Police departments can't afford to show their dirty laundry in public. There's too may people who haven't sued because the needed evidence was kept concealed. All it takes is one ambitious lawyer to expose one case, and there's dozens more, just like it.

Think about it for a moment. Who signs away $3million dollars, if they don't think it was a good deal for them?

The reason is BLM and the like. Juries see a grieving family and award money, right or wrong.

The cop shot an unarmed citizen. How does something like that happen, when a cop does nothing wrong.

The problem here is you think a policeman has a license to kill. You see no wrong doing on the part of the policeman, yet he was the only person on the site who had a weapon. Somehow, he ended up wrestling over his pistol, through the window of his patrol car. I wonder if Ferguson Police training includes fighting a suspect while sitting in a car.

You say Brown reacted in street mode, but suppose the policeman did called Michael Brown over to his car. Brown responds in a civilized manner and then is shot him in cold blood. What evidence is there to dispute that scenario?

What we have here is a tradition of allowing police to fuck up, and then shoot their way our of a situation of their own making. That is a license to kill.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You realize a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black?

You are incorrect, sir.

At the time of the Michael Brown shooting, the mayor, the police chief, the city manager, 5 out of 6 city council members, and 50 out of 53 police officers of the town of Ferguson were white. Even now, only the police chief and two of the city council seats have flipped to black representation, and the majority of the police department is still white.

So, where the hell did you come up with this information that "a majority of the leaders of Ferguson are black"?

I don't recall what it was then. Looking now I find 3 black, 3 white and one that's probably Hispanic. Whites are the minority.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The problem here is that you are assuming the cop was in the wrong. I see no wrongdoing on the cop's part in the Michael Brown case. He challenged a lawbreaker. In-your-face about it because his initial challenge was ignored. Said lawbreaker reacted in street mode rather than civilized mode. 100% fault to Michael Brown.



The reason is BLM and the like. Juries see a grieving family and award money, right or wrong.

The cop shot an unarmed citizen. How does something like that happen, when a cop does nothing wrong.

Exhibit A as to why the juries unjustly award money in such cases.

Unarmed does not mean not a threat. Michael Brown's DNA was on the gun--he tried to take it. That makes it an armed conflict.

The problem here is you think a policeman has a license to kill. You see no wrong doing on the part of the policeman, yet he was the only person on the site who had a weapon. Somehow, he ended up wrestling over his pistol, through the window of his patrol car. I wonder if Ferguson Police training includes fighting a suspect while sitting in a car.

If you are legitimately pointing a gun at someone and they try to take it you're justified in pulling the trigger.

You say Brown reacted in street mode, but suppose the policeman did called Michael Brown over to his car. Brown responds in a civilized manner and then is shot him in cold blood. What evidence is there to dispute that scenario?

Exhibit B.

 

[Bronzeage]

The cop shot an unarmed citizen. How does something like that happen, when a cop does nothing wrong.

Exhibit A as to why the juries unjustly award money in such cases.

Unarmed does not mean not a threat. Michael Brown's DNA was on the gun--he tried to take it. That makes it an armed conflict.

The problem here is you think a policeman has a license to kill. You see no wrong doing on the part of the policeman, yet he was the only person on the site who had a weapon. Somehow, he ended up wrestling over his pistol, through the window of his patrol car. I wonder if Ferguson Police training includes fighting a suspect while sitting in a car.

If you are legitimately pointing a gun at someone and they try to take it you're justified in pulling the trigger.

You say Brown reacted in street mode, but suppose the policeman did called Michael Brown over to his car. Brown responds in a civilized manner and then is shot him in cold blood. What evidence is there to dispute that scenario?

Exhibit B.

As I said, when a policeman loses control of a situation and has to kill someone to protect himself from death or injury, it is a failure on his part. Michael Brown was not hunting the policeman. He didn't run out of the dark and lunge through the window. He was approached by the officer and through a sequence of incompetent actions, quickly found himself in danger. The death of Michael Brown was not an inevitable thing.

Police Departments that send poorly trained officers out onto the streets will bear the responsibility for the damage done by poor training. This time, it cost $3 million. A license to kill is an expensive thing. The renewal fees are a bitch.

 

[LordKiran]

Question LP:

Do you believe it is the job of a police officer to de-escalate a situation whenever and wherever possible in order to avoid unnecessary violence? Because this is the standard in other countries.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As I said, when a policeman loses control of a situation and has to kill someone to protect himself from death or injury, it is a failure on his part. Michael Brown was not hunting the policeman. He didn't run out of the dark and lunge through the window. He was approached by the officer and through a sequence of incompetent actions, quickly found himself in danger. The death of Michael Brown was not an inevitable thing.

Police Departments that send poorly trained officers out onto the streets will bear the responsibility for the damage done by poor training. This time, it cost $3 million. A license to kill is an expensive thing. The renewal fees are a bitch.

This isn't a liberal utopia where there's always a good answer if you just look hard enough and thus the person in power is always to blame for a bad outcome.

The real world is made up of imperfect situations.

Brown chose armed conflict over submitting. His choice.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Question LP:

Do you believe it is the job of a police officer to de-escalate a situation whenever and wherever possible in order to avoid unnecessary violence? Because this is the standard in other countries.

The problem is that you have to balance deescalation with doing the job. Focus too much on deescalation and you get ineffective cops that can't arrest the bad guys. The European attitude leads to things like the Srebrenica massacre.

 

[LordKiran]

Question LP:

Do you believe it is the job of a police officer to de-escalate a situation whenever and wherever possible in order to avoid unnecessary violence? Because this is the standard in other countries.

The problem is that you have to balance deescalation with doing the job. Focus too much on deescalation and you get ineffective cops that can't arrest the bad guys. The European attitude leads to things like the Srebrenica massacre.

I don't get it. A cops job is to keep the peace, protect and serve and enforce the law. How is needlessly escalating a situation until it ends in bloodshed conducive to that job?