Meanwhile, here's what most likely happened

Quote:Brown was shot after the officer encountered him and another man on the street at 12:01 p.m. local time after responding to an armed robbery call, and Brown fit the description of the suspect, Chief Jackson said on Friday.

Police say one of the men pushed the officer into his squad car, then physically assaulted him in the vehicle and struggled with the officer over his weapon. At least one shot was fired inside the car. The struggle then spilled onto the street, where Brown was shot multiple times.

(08-15-2014 11:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  According to witnesses, he was running away when he was shot. What justifies shooting someone who is running away?

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Cowardice in this situation. What makes you think this is true?

(08-15-2014 01:00 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Meanwhile, here's what most likely happened

Quote:Brown was shot after the officer encountered him and another man on the street at 12:01 p.m. local time after responding to an armed robbery call, and Brown fit the description of the suspect, Chief Jackson said on Friday.

Police say one of the men pushed the officer into his squad car, then physically assaulted him in the vehicle and struggled with the officer over his weapon. At least one shot was fired inside the car. The struggle then spilled onto the street, where Brown was shot multiple times.

But that would actually make sense and not bring justice to the racebaters.

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

(08-15-2014 01:00 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Meanwhile, here's what most likely happened

Quote:Brown was shot after the officer encountered him and another man on the street at 12:01 p.m. local time after responding to an armed robbery call, and Brown fit the description of the suspect, Chief Jackson said on Friday.

Police say one of the men pushed the officer into his squad car, then physically assaulted him in the vehicle and struggled with the officer over his weapon. At least one shot was fired inside the car. The struggle then spilled onto the street, where Brown was shot multiple times.

That has the ring of truth to it....it makes sense. The so-called witnesses do not make sense (though I suspect it is possible parts may be correct). The point of contention is what happens after the officer and Brown move away from the car. The coroner's report should shed light onto that, one way or the other.

But let's not forgot that the so-called "kid" was an 18 year old, 6'3", 300lb, young man. And regardless, when the police give you a command, just follow it. If you feel "wronged", fill out a report or file a lawsuit.

Thank you Pharoah, you're the voice of reason in this post as in others.

(08-15-2014 01:14 PM)pharaoh0 Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:00 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Meanwhile, here's what most likely happened

Quote:Brown was shot after the officer encountered him and another man on the street at 12:01 p.m. local time after responding to an armed robbery call, and Brown fit the description of the suspect, Chief Jackson said on Friday.

Police say one of the men pushed the officer into his squad car, then physically assaulted him in the vehicle and struggled with the officer over his weapon. At least one shot was fired inside the car. The struggle then spilled onto the street, where Brown was shot multiple times.

That has the ring of truth to it....it makes sense. The so-called witnesses do not make sense (though I suspect it is possible parts may be correct). The point of contention is what happens after the officer and Brown move away from the car. The coroner's report should shed light onto that, one way or the other.

But let's not forgot that the so-called "kid" was an 18 year old, 6'3", 300lb, young man. And regardless, when the police give you a command, just follow it. If you feel "wronged", fill out a report or file a lawsuit.

I for one am sick and tired of this notion sweeping our country that sides with criminality. You see it with liberals and libertarians. Quick to blame the police. Quick to give the criminal a pass.

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

That it's a 24 hour National story - Yep.

I don't think for the locals in Ferguson it was originally to push a liberal agenda - I think they were p!ssed someone was killed that was unarmed. Hopefully, we will find out if the shooting/killing was justified or not.

I am smart enough to know that not every "thug" that gets shot was "a good boy" like his mamma will proclaim. If the photos of the Kwiky Mart are of Brown - he's a thug.

Conversely, it seems that the police are getting caught more and more often using what could be deemed as "excessive force". I realize that cops in many jurisdictions have a tough job and often not much time to make snap decisions.

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

So why are heavily armed police OK in Ferguson MO, but not in Clark County NV? Since the militias who defended the Bundy Ranch and their supproters don't have the slighest drop of racist blood in their veins, why didn't they come to Ferguson to oppose the police there?

(08-15-2014 01:22 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

So why are heavily armed police OK in Ferguson MO, but not in Clark County NV? Since the militias who defended the Bundy Ranch and their supproters don't have the slighest drop of racist blood in their veins, why didn't they come to Ferguson to oppose the police there?

Are you so stupid that you can't tell the difference? Honestly, does someone actually have to answer that question for you?

(08-15-2014 01:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  I for one am sick and tired of this notion sweeping our country that sides with criminality. You see it with liberals and libertarians. Quick to blame the police. Quick to give the criminal a pass.

Oh, please.

And what do you call people who mindlessly defend out-of-control cops?

(08-15-2014 01:31 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  I for one am sick and tired of this notion sweeping our country that sides with criminality. You see it with liberals and libertarians. Quick to blame the police. Quick to give the criminal a pass.

Oh, please.

And what do you call people who mindlessly defend out-of-control cops?

Yeah, how dare those cops try and apprehend a guy suspected of robbing a convenience store! Out of control, I tell you.

(08-15-2014 01:22 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

So why are heavily armed police OK in Ferguson MO, but not in Clark County NV? Since the militias who defended the Bundy Ranch and their supproters don't have the slighest drop of racist blood in their veins, why didn't they come to Ferguson to oppose the police there?

What?

Do you even remember when "race" entered the conversation about the elderly cowboy? This is about as discombobulated a jump as one could make.

What?

(08-15-2014 12:00 PM)gdunn Wrote:  The witnesses that's stories go along with his buddy's story, and they came forward days later.. Then there's this other witness that will only talk to the feds..

Then there's the autopsy... Which will show where he was shot and how many times.. Which makes me wonder why a second autopsy was ordered by the family..

The autopsy won't lie, if it proves he was shot in the back with a 9mm at 35 feet, it's pretty clear.. But here's a crazy thought, what if it shows the entry wound was at the top of the shoulder and exited the back..

Why don't we wait for the facts before we start ASSuming things?

(08-15-2014 01:32 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:31 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  I for one am sick and tired of this notion sweeping our country that sides with criminality. You see it with liberals and libertarians. Quick to blame the police. Quick to give the criminal a pass.

Oh, please.

And what do you call people who mindlessly defend out-of-control cops?

Yeah, how dare those cops try and apprehend a guy suspected of robbing a convenience store! Out of control, I tell you.

I was speaking generally.

I don't claim to have any idea what happened in this case.

(08-15-2014 12:00 PM)gdunn Wrote:  The witnesses that's stories go along with his buddy's story, and they came forward days later.. Then there's this other witness that will only talk to the feds..

Then there's the autopsy... Which will show where he was shot and how many times.. Which makes me wonder why a second autopsy was ordered by the family..

The autopsy won't lie, if it proves he was shot in the back with a 9mm at 35 feet, it's pretty clear.. But here's a crazy thought, what if it shows the entry wound was at the top of the shoulder and exited the back..

Wanna bet that they call in a "special" doc for the second autopsy? Perhaps one that the family themselves requested? Good catch on the second autopsy request BTW...

(08-15-2014 01:22 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

So why are heavily armed police OK in Ferguson MO, but not in Clark County NV? Since the militias who defended the Bundy Ranch and their supproters don't have the slighest drop of racist blood in their veins, why didn't they come to Ferguson to oppose the police there?

Lol, I can't help but chuckle at those who are comparing the Bundy Ranch event to this one... Wasn't that the feds going after Bundy anyways, for refusing to pay taxes? This story is about an unarmed black man, on his way to college, being shot by a white cop and then rioting and looting all of the stores, which is what caused the police to show up in the first place.

Pick and choose a little better please.

(08-15-2014 01:31 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  I for one am sick and tired of this notion sweeping our country that sides with criminality. You see it with liberals and libertarians. Quick to blame the police. Quick to give the criminal a pass.

Oh, please.

And what do you call people who mindlessly defend out-of-control cops?

I've yet to see a story where anyone defended any out-of-control cops...

(08-15-2014 01:43 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:22 PM)Proud Bammer Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:12 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 01:07 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-15-2014 12:58 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  The media is still in love with the idea of using this to "demilitarize" police. That's how they are going to use this thing and nothing else matters.

Actually - I prefer demilitarizing police forces as well except in some really bad areas of the country such as south Chicago, etc. I'm thinking Ferguson Missouri wouldn't be a place that needed a police force outfitted as though they were in a war zone in Iraq.

I did find it interesting that as soon as another "Police force" was used to control things (that wasn't in riot gear, etc.) - everything calmed down. I'm not saying Ferguson is a crime free safe place, but I don't think it's the wild west either like Compton, CA, etc.

This is nothing more than theatrics to help push the liberal agenda.

So why are heavily armed police OK in Ferguson MO, but not in Clark County NV? Since the militias who defended the Bundy Ranch and their supproters don't have the slighest drop of racist blood in their veins, why didn't they come to Ferguson to oppose the police there?

Lol, I can't help but chuckle at those who are comparing the Bundy Ranch event to this one... Wasn't that the feds going after Bundy anyways, for refusing to pay taxes? This story is about an unarmed black man, who just got finished robbing a convenience store, on his way to college, being shot by a white cop and then rioting and looting all of the stores, which is what caused the police to show up in the first place.

Pick and choose a little better please.

I agree with 99% of what you said, but FIFY.