djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,077
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 14, 2014 15:53:42 GMT -5
here is the problem, PK. black, white, yellow or green, if a cop kills, it is VERY RARE for them to see any sort of "regular guy" jail time. most often, they get a reprimand and some cooling time, and then go right back to work. the victims and their communities are RIGHT to see this as elitism- when the conduct of an officer is placed above that of the citizen. in a situation where the law is being disrespected by those that are in charge, ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP, how is a community SUPPOSED to react? by the way, i am not excusing the actions- but i understand the desperation and anger. Oh, I don't know....maybe like civilized citizens? Tell me exactly who is suffering desperation? People in the street looting and burning stores? That's a great way to do it. Loot & burn down in your own community? Exactly how is that going to help?
did you miss my statement in red, above? i am not excusing the actions. but the actions indicate that the community feels like they have nothing to lose. it is a sign of utter hopelessness. now, you can get all high-roady here. that is fine. all i am saying is that i UNDERSTAND it. i don't agree with it.
Maybe the police just need to let these communities police themselves, is that a good solution? Let the police pack up and go off duty. I'm sure that will solve the problem within a short period of time. <sarcasm switch turned on>
i think that is very doubtful. there are two other outcomes that i consider far more likely.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,422
|
Post by Tennesseer on Aug 14, 2014 19:40:26 GMT -5
What took the KKK so long to put in their two cents? KKK raising money for ‘hero’ Ferguson cop who shot ‘Jewish controlled black thug’The Ku Klux Klan is soliciting funds for the police officer in Ferguson, Missouri who shot and killed unarmed teenager Michael Brown, 18. The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hate Watch blog reported that the South Carolina-based New Empire Knights of the Ku Klux Klan boasted that its Missouri chapter is raising money as a “reward” for the officer. “We are setting up a reward/fund for the police officer who shot this thug,” said an email from the Klan group. “He is a hero! We need more white cops who are anti-Zog and willing to put Jewish controlled black thugs in their place. Most cops are cowards and do nothing while 90 percent of interracial crime is black (and non-white) on white.” KKK raising money for ‘hero’ Ferguson cop who shot ‘Jewish controlled black thug’
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,865
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 14, 2014 19:50:02 GMT -5
That's as bad as the AL show.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 15, 2014 14:42:25 GMT -5
They've released the video of Mr. Brown in a strong-arm robbery of a convenience store, which is apparently what prompted the police to show up. Not going to help win him sympathy points with the masses.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 15, 2014 17:13:36 GMT -5
Not that it will make a difference to the masses who have made their minds up, but the cop who shot him did not stop him for that. It is really irrelevant to the issue- whether or not a police officer shot an unarmed person with their hands up. But we know where this goes- the 'anti-thug' people will feel vindicated by this video, but all it is going to do is muddy the water. And strong-arm robbery- that sounds scary- sounds a lot like some kind of armed robbery. An arm robbery maybe. Looks like a misdemeanor situation- otherwise known as a death penalty level offense to the 'anti-thug' crowd.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 15, 2014 17:20:37 GMT -5
I don't feel I have enough information to make an informed comment about what went down here. The FBI and the state police are both investigating the issue. I want to see those reports before I make any decisions as to how I feel about it.
I lived in St. Charles, right across the river from St. Louis for about a year. In all honesty, I saw far more outright racism there than I've ever seen here in South Carolina. However, that was many years ago. I'm not going to draw a bead on anybody because of it; nor, am I going to draw a bead over the little I've seen on the internet. Too many unknowns for me.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Aug 15, 2014 17:26:03 GMT -5
Not that it will make a difference to the masses who have made their minds up, but the cop who shot him did not stop him for that. It is really irrelevant to the issue- whether or not a police officer shot an unarmed person with their hands up. But we know where this goes- the 'anti-thug' people will feel vindicated by this video, but all it is going to do is muddy the water. And strong-arm robbery- that sounds scary- sounds a lot like some kind of armed robbery. An arm robbery maybe. Looks like a misdemeanor situation- otherwise known as a death penalty level offense to the 'anti-thug' crowd. I hadn't yet made up my mind (and still haven't - we don't have as many facts as possible yet). However, I was starting to get concerned about a possible cover up when the first reports of the "teenager" being a suspect in a robbery came out. Then I saw the video of a large man walking in, taking what he wanted, and shoving someone around who protested then advancing again on him in a meanacing manner. I have not doubt this individual had an aggressive nature. So no, my mind is not yet made up but I'm no-where as neutral as I was yesterday.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Aug 15, 2014 18:03:14 GMT -5
Not that it will make a difference to the masses who have made their minds up, but the cop who shot him did not stop him for that. It is really irrelevant to the issue- whether or not a police officer shot an unarmed person with their hands up. But we know where this goes- the 'anti-thug' people will feel vindicated by this video, but all it is going to do is muddy the water. And strong-arm robbery- that sounds scary- sounds a lot like some kind of armed robbery. An arm robbery maybe. Looks like a misdemeanor situation- otherwise known as a death penalty level offense to the 'anti-thug' crowd. "Strong-arm" robbery because the store owner tries to stop him, and Mr. Brown shoves him out of the way like he's nothing. Basically, "What are you going to do about it?" And again, these issues aren't pertinent to whether a man with his hands up should be shot by police, they're pertinent to whether the public believes he had his hands up.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,865
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 15, 2014 18:20:41 GMT -5
Was he really 280 pounds?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 4:56:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2014 18:44:51 GMT -5
Was he really 280 pounds? I'm 280... and he looked about my size in the video of him robbing the store... so I'd say that's a good guess.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 15, 2014 20:22:18 GMT -5
Probably right.
The new argument is that since he robbed the store he might have had a different attitude towards the police. OK- possible sure, or more likely to run away? I can't see why someone would want to fight the police or go for a weapon over petty theft- what's the worst that would come of it- probation?
What does make sense to me is like the witness said- the cop told them to get out of the road and probably had an attitude, they probably had an attitude, there was a thing with the door- cop saw it one way and reacted- and quite possible over-reacted and let his emotions run. That would make sense. And remember there is more than one witness to the 'hands up' part of it.
Could have even been a scuffle at the car- and if so maybe a shot from the car might be justified- but that still would not justify following that up with shots as someone is running away or giving up. Autopsy results will be crucial.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Aug 15, 2014 23:04:57 GMT -5
He was a THUG behaving as thugs do.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,077
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 15, 2014 23:10:28 GMT -5
He was a THUG behaving as thugs do. like Obama?
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 15, 2014 23:14:03 GMT -5
A robbery is not "petty theft". Perhaps what he stole was petty, but the robbery was not. Neither is it, in any jurisdiction I am familiar with, a "misdemeanor". Robbery is a felony almost anywhere you go. Minimizing the seriousness of what this criminal (whomever it was) did is as bad as those who minimize the seriousness of an officer shooting someone.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 11:33:47 GMT -5
So you honestly think had he been arrested- assuming this was a first offense- that he would be sent up the river for a felony over $50 bucks worth of cigars and pushing a clerk or whatever he did?
My point was it is unlikely for someone to attempt to fight the police over that- not like just he killed someone- I can see those kinds of people that would attempt to kill a cop to get away.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Aug 16, 2014 11:58:01 GMT -5
He was shoving around a store clerk 10 min earlier so yeah I think it is likely he was fighting.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 13:17:26 GMT -5
Shoved- not a punch thrown. So you think it is likely he would attack a cop and try for a gun? Doesn't make a lot of sense. For what reason? Just because he's a 'thug' and that's what 'thugs' do according to you? Guess we shall find out soon enough.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 16, 2014 13:49:31 GMT -5
So you honestly think had he been arrested- assuming this was a first offense- that he would be sent up the river for a felony over $50 bucks worth of cigars and pushing a clerk or whatever he did?
My point was it is unlikely for someone to attempt to fight the police over that- not like just he killed someone- I can see those kinds of people that would attempt to kill a cop to get away.
I can't honestly say what would happen in Missouri. Where I am, it is almost a certainty that he would have been sentenced to some sort of incarceration for the robbery. And yes. It is QUITE likely for someone to fight police when they know damn well they will be going to jail. It's not the value of the cigars that has one dang thing to do with it. It is the fact that he robbed someone. It wouldn't have mattered if all he had taken was a 75 cent candy bar. It was a robbery. Value of merchandise stolen has nothing to do with a robbery charge. Yes. He most likely would have gone to jail and yes - that's a dang good reason for a criminal to fight police - especially if he had a prior criminal record. I don't even know if the kid killed was the one who robbed the store, or if that person who did rob the store had a criminal record. I'm just saying it's not even a bit unusual for a criminal like that to fight to escape when they know being taken into custody is going to result in incarceration.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 16, 2014 13:55:02 GMT -5
Doesn't matter. It was still a robbery. The definition: the felonious taking of the property of another from his or her person or in his or her immediate presence, against his or her will, by violence or intimidation. Doesn't matter if he hit him or not - not one bit. Absolutely. Because he doesn't want to go to jail - which is very probable as a result of committing a robbery and being found guilty of it.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 14:35:30 GMT -5
But of course- you are overlooking the fact that the cop didn't stop him for a robbery-so there is a lot of assuming going on.
Doubt he would do any time here- they would plea it to misdemeanor theft. The facts are more in line with shoplifting. It is one thing if he had ordered the clerk to give him their wallet or to empty the register, it is quite another to shove someone as you are walking out the door with items off a shelf.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 16, 2014 15:12:54 GMT -5
I'm not overlooking that at all. If you are, at all, familiar with law enforcement, you would know that it's possible that WHILE he was getting the men out of the middle of the street, a call came across his body radio, stating there was a robbery in the vicinity, and gave a description of the offenders. The officer, seeing that the two subjects he is now engaged with, match the description and are in the exact vicinity of the robbery. Things escalate from there. It happens all the time, EVT. It's not unusual at all that an original "stop" turns into something more.
There was no shoplifting. There was no misdemeanor theft. There was a robbery. I realize you want to say and believe anything you can to make this Caucasian officer guilty of just blowing way some poor Black kid that wasn't doing one thing wrong other than sticking up his hands and obeying all commands. That may have been what happened....but I doubt it. If so, the officer should be punished as any other citizen would be. I don't know enough about the entire situation to know what happened and I'm reserving judgment until I know more. But what I do know - from actual experience - is that there just may be more to the story. Plus? I don't minimalize robbery and pretend it's the same thing as a 10 year old grabbing a pack of gum from the shelf while the clerk isn't looking.
No. It's not different. Not according to the law and not according to people who wish to live in a society where thugs don't get to go in anywhere, take what they want, and do harm to anyone in their way.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,077
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 16, 2014 15:26:25 GMT -5
I'm not overlooking that at all. If you are, at all, familiar with law enforcement, you would know that it's possible that WHILE he was getting the men out of the middle of the street, a call came across his body radio, stating there was a robbery in the vicinity, and gave a description of the offenders. The officer, seeing that the two subjects he is now engaged with, match the description and are in the exact vicinity of the robbery. Things escalate from there. It happens all the time, EVT. It's not unusual at all that an original "stop" turns into something more. There was no shoplifting. There was no misdemeanor theft. There was a robbery. I realize you want to say and believe anything you can to make this Caucasian officer guilty of just blowing way some poor Black kid that wasn't doing one thing wrong other than sticking up his hands and obeying all commands. That may have been what happened....but I doubt it. If so, the officer should be punished as any other citizen would be. I don't know enough about the entire situation to know what happened and I'm reserving judgment until I know more. But what I do know - from actual experience - is that there just may be more to the story. Plus? I don't minimalize robbery and pretend it's the same thing as a 10 year old grabbing a pack of gum from the shelf while the clerk isn't looking. No. It's not different. Not according to the law and not according to people who wish to live in a society where thugs don't get to go in anywhere, take what they want, and do harm to anyone in their way. GEL- i agree that this crosses the line to intimidation- but does it merit the use of lethal force, iyo?
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 16, 2014 16:03:12 GMT -5
In and of itself? No, not in my opinion. Couple that with attacking and attempting to obtain the weapon of a police officer and then attempting to flee the situation once that didn't work? You bet it does. Like I said, I don't know what happened. I'd have to wait till the facts come out before deciding what I think. Again, if this officer did something wrong, he should be punished.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 16:08:25 GMT -5
I'm not overlooking that at all. If you are, at all, familiar with law enforcement, you would know that it's possible that WHILE he was getting the men out of the middle of the street, a call came across his body radio, stating there was a robbery in the vicinity, and gave a description of the offenders. The officer, seeing that the two subjects he is now engaged with, match the description and are in the exact vicinity of the robbery. Things escalate from there. It happens all the time, EVT. It's not unusual at all that an original "stop" turns into something more. There was no shoplifting. There was no misdemeanor theft. There was a robbery. I realize you want to say and believe anything you can to make this Caucasian officer guilty of just blowing way some poor Black kid that wasn't doing one thing wrong other than sticking up his hands and obeying all commands. That may have been what happened....but I doubt it. If so, the officer should be punished as any other citizen would be. I don't know enough about the entire situation to know what happened and I'm reserving judgment until I know more. But what I do know - from actual experience - is that there just may be more to the story. Plus? I don't minimalize robbery and pretend it's the same thing as a 10 year old grabbing a pack of gum from the shelf while the clerk isn't looking. No. It's not different. Not according to the law and not according to people who wish to live in a society where thugs don't get to go in anywhere, take what they want, and do harm to anyone in their way. It's would be possible except for that the police already stated that is not what happened. Plus I don't maximize a minor robbery to the level that someone would rather risk grabbing a gun than answering for it. It is just a plain fact that people are arrested for robbery all of the time- someone resisting and getting shot over it would be the .01% rarity you are ready to ascribe to this situation. Could have happened- or he could have just been a pissed off asshole having a bad day and decided to fight with the cop. It's just not likely- not anymore likely than a police officer shooting someone for no reason.
Now if in your mind there is no difference between grabbing smokes off a shelf than mugging someone on the street- then I guess it is a good thing you are not a judge or anyone with the power of discretion. Sure-it can be charged the same- and so can (as I pointed out on other threads) an 18yo be prosecuted for the same crime as a 40yo that has sex with a 16yo. I suppose you see no difference in those crimes either- well that's ok. You are entitle to believe that if you want- just glad you aren't the one deciding the punishments.
I could care less which way this goes- if the cop shot him from a distance with his hands up, in the back, etc. then he needs to go to jail. If it turns out that it did not happen that way, that all of the witnesses are lying- then back to work he goes.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Aug 16, 2014 16:19:33 GMT -5
lol....there is no such thing as a "minor robbery" - particularly to the person being robbed. Of course, some robberies result in more serious injuries than this one, but there isn't any such thing as a minor robbery. As for someone grabbing a pack of smokes and running out of the store, that's shoplifting and has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 16:35:33 GMT -5
Sure it is- shoplifting becomes a robbery if a scuffle happens after the fact. Isn't that what happened? He grabbed some cigars and was going to walk out with them when the clerk got involved, right? If his intent was to shoplift vs. an intent to rob someone it would make the previous a minor robbery vs. one where, say, the man tackled you on the street and snatched your purse.
Anyway- forget it- I back up to my earlier point that it is irrelevant to whether he was shot with his hands up- scuffle or not.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 4:56:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2014 17:47:23 GMT -5
Sure it is- shoplifting becomes a robbery if a scuffle happens after the fact. Isn't that what happened? He grabbed some cigars and was going to walk out with them when the clerk got involved, right? If his intent was to shoplift vs. an intent to rob someone it would make the previous a minor robbery vs. one where, say, the man tackled you on the street and snatched your purse.
Anyway- forget it- I back up to my earlier point that it is irrelevant to whether he was shot with his hands up- scuffle or not. Intent is only relevant if a weapon is used. Shoplifting is shoplifting. Robbery is robbery. Once you have crossed over from "shoplifting" to "robbery" it's all "robbery". Doesn't matter if it's a pack of gum, or some lady's purse, or taking all the cash from the register. Robbery is robbery. As to his "hands up"... does anyone know if his hands STAYED up AND that he didn't make any threatening moves/statements/gestures until he was shot? That's what I'd like to know. I mean, I could put my hands up, and then get close to the person I was making feel safe by my "hands up" position... and then, once close enough, beat that crap out of them. There used to be a time when you could actually trust criminals. When they surrendered, that was it. That time has LONG passed.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 18:45:55 GMT -5
Intent is only relevant if a weapon is used. What in the hell is that supposed to mean?
Intent matters- most criminal laws rely on it. It would matter if the man was arrested for robbery and what would happen after.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 4:56:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2014 20:20:32 GMT -5
Intent is only relevant if a weapon is used. What in the hell is that supposed to mean?
Intent matters- most criminal laws rely on it. It would matter if the man was arrested for robbery and what would happen after. It means (pretty clearly) that intent is only relevant if a weapon is used. If one brings a weapon to shoplift they didn't MEAN to shoplift. They MEANT to rob. That's where the relevance of a weapon comes in to play between the two. If they shoplift without a weapon, then they shoplifted. Period. Robbery is robbery. Whether there was a weapon or not is irrelevant when comparing it to shoplifting. A weapon in robbery just escalates it to " armed robbery". Lack of a weapon doesn't decrease it to shoplifting.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Aug 16, 2014 23:22:44 GMT -5
What in the hell is that supposed to mean?
Intent matters- most criminal laws rely on it. It would matter if the man was arrested for robbery and what would happen after. It means (pretty clearly) that intent is only relevant if a weapon is used. If one brings a weapon to shoplift they didn't MEAN to shoplift. They MEANT to rob. That's where the relevance of a weapon comes in to play between the two. If they shoplift without a weapon, then they shoplifted. Period. Robbery is robbery. Whether there was a weapon or not is irrelevant when comparing it to shoplifting. A weapon in robbery just escalates it to " armed robbery". Lack of a weapon doesn't decrease it to shoplifting. I repeat- what the heck are you talking about?
I could shoplift while armed all day and it is still shoplifting unless I display that weapon or threaten someone with it- and it is irrelevant to my point anyway- in the real world intentions matter- and on a first offense he isn't going down for a felony robbery whether or not that the act may qualify. That was my point, I do not believe this incident had any bearing on what happened, as he had no reason to fear jail time over $50 worth of crap and a shove. I think it is much more likely he would fight with a cop because he got pissed off. So which way you gonna go on this?
|
|