St. Louis, Missouri Vs. The Police: Heaven Or Hell, Duel 1! Let's Rock!

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Language: JP EN FR DE
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » St. Louis, Missouri Vs. The Police: Heaven or Hell, Duel 1! Let's rock!
St. Louis, Missouri Vs. The Police: Heaven or Hell, Duel 1! Let's rock!
First Page 2 3 ... 32 33
Offline
Posts: 4027
By Blazed1979 2014-09-28 13:38:06
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daoming said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
Gun shot wounds - majority are in suspect's right arm. If a trained police officer was trying to kill someone you would think they would at least unload into the abdomen or the head.

Adrenaline is proven to affect accuracy when using a firearm, especially one that's not shoulder mounted (such as a handgun). He may have been aiming at center mass, but got the arms.

There's no department that I'm aware of that trains to shoot in the head, it's always center mass as to limit missed rounds and collateral damage.

Also, if a trained police officer draws their firearm and fires a round, they're not shooting to maim/disarm/scare/warn they're shooting to stop a threat, in other words, to kill.

I'm fairly certain S.W.A.T are trained for head shots, as are counter terrorism units.

The other two points are assumptions - first that the officer's adrenaline levels were effecting their actions is speculative at best. More realistically I imagine they are trained to not panic under situations and exercise restraint in the situation as best as they can, as per their training.

Second, that discharging a firearm is purely to execute lethal force to kill isn't necessarily true. There's a lot of documented cases of police officers discharging their firearms to subdue and stop the threat.
This officer discharged 7 shots as far as I am aware, the first 5 ended up in the suspect's arm.

Also as far as I am aware there was no autopsy. Why not? I want to know if the suspect was on any adrenaline enhancing and mind chemically altering drugs such as PCP.


EDIT: On the testimonies of witnesses - forensics disproved 3 of them. They said the officer shot the suspect from the back, forensics showed the bullets points of entry were all from the front.


Is it entirely implausible that the officer was acting accordingly and had no other choice? I'm not letting my disgust and loathing of police brutality sway my judgement on this. I really want to see some evidence that the officer was out for blood.

*Posts things on the forum hating the US*
[/u]

*Claims he knows how the police force in the US is trained*

Logic. I asked my uncle who is a cop and uses a standard issue glock, they aren't trained for headshots, the suspect can't give any information if they just went out and busted a cap in the person's head.

If by disagreeing with American foreign policy one is guilty of "hating the US" then pretty much everyone is guilty of hating the US at one time or another, including present and past US presidents.

"*Claims he knows how the police force in the US is trained*"
"Logic" - you keep using that word but I'm not certain you know what it means. For one can both hate something and understand it. However, I never implied that I hate the US or am an authority of how US police are trained. Another generic fallacy.

What I actually said was "I'm fairly certain S.W.A.T are trained for head shots, as are counter terrorism units."

Someone on the internet saying their uncle said no doesn't really give me much to go on. I've tried a few searches and couldn't come up with much. Again, if you could read you would see that my post was overwhelmingly speculative for a discussion and an invitation to be corrected by those who have invested more time into reading and researching the case.

But thanks for showing me I shouldn't waste time reading your posts anymore, so early into your post count. Took me a bit longer to establish Jet as a mindless drone, to his credit. You however, well its pretty clear from your first interaction with me.
Offline
Posts: 4027
By Blazed1979 2014-09-28 14:00:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
I'm aware of police brutality and how its more common than many would like to think, but on this case, after hearing the details, I'm with the cops.

-he robbed a store 30 mins before the police saw him walking in the middle of the street. The description of the suspect matched.
Has no bearing on why he was shot. He was walking in the street and told to move to the sidewalk. This incident did not start because of a robbery.

Quote:
-Police rolls down window to talk to him. Gets heated, officer tries to step out of car, suspect reaches through window and starts assaulting him.

-He flees, officers gives chase.

-When he catches up to him, suspect turns around and yells then charges officer.

After the initial interaction we don't know what happened because
a) there is no incident report that explains what happened. Only one generated 10 days after the shooting that lists the date and names of who came to the site. But nothing which states what happened, no list of witnesses.
b) different witnesses say different things
c) something happened with Brown in the window but all the witnesses are saying different things.

Quote:
-Gun shot wounds - majority are in suspect's right arm. If a trained police officer was trying to kill someone you would think they would at least unload into the abdomen or the head.
Head shots are not really sought after since that is not as easy to hit on a moving object compared to the center mass. However, 2 out of at least 6 shots were in the head. One into the top of his head, the shot that was fatal according to one medical examiner.

Quote:
-the witnesses that came forward for the most part have been shown to have given false testimony.
You'll have to provide a reference for this as I don't know of everyone being shown to give out false testimony. There was a false report by a reporter claiming that the police had 12 witnesses corroborating their version of event.

In fact there was an audio recording of the shots handed over to the FBI.

Quote:
-this teen was HUGE. He wasn't 5'8 110-150 lbs kid. He was over 6'3 if memory serves and close to 300 lbs.
So? It seems most of the shots came at a distance because there was no gunpowder residue on his body. We don't know about clothes because that medical report has not been released.

Quote:
Don't flame if you disagree, give me the updated details. I made my mind up about this case based on the coverage I watched on the mainstream media due to lack of timing. I could have been fed a load of ***, seeing as its from the mainstream media. So I'll gladly accept what I know to be wrong, but based on what I do know - the cop did nothing wrong.
At this point to me the major problems are how the police reacted to peaceful protests, how they have mislead, outright lied, and acted like power crazed asshats after this shooting. There is a problem with that department. Whether this shooting turns out to be "justified" or not.

I posted this on the previous page. It is a good overview from 6 weeks ago along with citations, photos, and video. The humor might not be to your taste

The police behavior is inexcusable. Intimidating journalists, using tear gas against them, getting suited up for WWIII and using heavy handed tactics - all of it terrible. I agree with you on that. I'm questioning whether the persona some media have attributed to Brown is accurate. I don't believe it is and I think this became politically charged from day 1.

Fact: The officer in question was assaulted in his car by an individual. Some say it was Brown, some say it was his friend. If it was his friend, I would imagine the police would have arrested him or brought him in for questioning right away.

Fact: The officer's gun was discharged inside the vehicle during the scuffle. Hypothesis 1: Officer discharged his weapon inside the vehicle because he was being overpowered. Hypothesis 2: Officer discharged his weapon inside the vehicle aiming for Brown or his friend for whatever reason (less likely). Hypothesis 3: The officer's gun went off as an accident, not intended by either the officer or Brown or his friend. In all 3 scenarios its more likely that the officer had some kind of physical fall out with Brown or his friend. In which case, Brown has already committed a felony.

Fact#2: The police didn't take Brown's friend (Dorion Johnson) testimony and as far as I know, still haven't taken his testimony. This could be the most damning fact in how Ferguson Police are dealing/dealt with the case as well as the most damning fact for Brown - as it means it was Brown who made the move for the officer's gun while he(or his upper torso was bent) was inside the vehicle.
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-28 17:02:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
If by disagreeing with American foreign policy one is guilty of "hating the US" then pretty much everyone is guilty of hating the US at one time or another, including present and past US presidents.

"*Claims he knows how the police force in the US is trained*"
"Logic" - you keep using that word but I'm not certain you know what it means. For one can both hate something and understand it. However, I never implied that I hate the US or am an authority of how US police are trained. Another generic fallacy.

What I actually said was "I'm fairly certain S.W.A.T are trained for head shots, as are counter terrorism units."

Someone on the internet saying their uncle said no doesn't really give me much to go on. I've tried a few searches and couldn't come up with much. Again, if you could read you would see that my post was overwhelmingly speculative for a discussion and an invitation to be corrected by those who have invested more time into reading and researching the case.

But thanks for showing me I shouldn't waste time reading your posts anymore, so early into your post count. Took me a bit longer to establish Jet as a mindless drone, to his credit. You however, well its pretty clear from your first interaction with me.

ROFL!!! OMG PLEASE TELL ME MORE ON HOW I KEEP USING THE WORD LOGIC. I really only used it once in my entire post.

Ok, make sure you put your kicking and screaming booties on.

Quote:
"*Claims he knows how the police force in the US is trained*"
"Logic" - you keep using that word but I'm not certain you know what it means. For one can both hate something and understand it. However, I never implied that I hate the US or am an authority of how US police are trained. Another generic fallacy.

I really don't think you understand. Logic is the understanding and usage of information and reasoning. You sir are beyond reasoning and think whatever you say is gold being shat out of your ***. You do not know how the police force in a foreign country is trained, otherwise you're going to be citing Ohio Revised Code Section 2901.01. I want it in all of its entirety repeated back to me, you're not allowed to use Google or any other source of online information.

In terms of what SWAT is trained, they're also trained for non-lethal takedowns as priority #1, lethal is if there is no other options and all humane and reasonable options have been exhausted, again the same rules apply to them as they are simply another part of law enforcement. They are trained mostly to carry rifles, more than likely they have been trained to go for the head in those situations such as a criminal using a hostage as a living shield, in such cases there's no other choice than to go for the head.

Also as stated above, my uncle showed me the Ohio Revised Code, which is still effective today. It details everything needed in every situation, such as dealing with juveniles, thugs, and the event of forced lethality.
____________________________________________________________

That's all fine and dandy if you don't want to read my posts, you're about as dumb and as *** ignorant as they come.
[+]
 Bahamut.Milamber
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: milamber
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-09-29 02:07:49
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
I'm aware of police brutality and how its more common than many would like to think, but on this case, after hearing the details, I'm with the cops.

-he robbed a store 30 mins before the police saw him walking in the middle of the street. The description of the suspect matched.
Has no bearing on why he was shot. He was walking in the street and told to move to the sidewalk. This incident did not start because of a robbery.

Quote:
-Police rolls down window to talk to him. Gets heated, officer tries to step out of car, suspect reaches through window and starts assaulting him.

-He flees, officers gives chase.

-When he catches up to him, suspect turns around and yells then charges officer.

After the initial interaction we don't know what happened because
a) there is no incident report that explains what happened. Only one generated 10 days after the shooting that lists the date and names of who came to the site. But nothing which states what happened, no list of witnesses.
b) different witnesses say different things
c) something happened with Brown in the window but all the witnesses are saying different things.

Quote:
-Gun shot wounds - majority are in suspect's right arm. If a trained police officer was trying to kill someone you would think they would at least unload into the abdomen or the head.
Head shots are not really sought after since that is not as easy to hit on a moving object compared to the center mass. However, 2 out of at least 6 shots were in the head. One into the top of his head, the shot that was fatal according to one medical examiner.

Quote:
-the witnesses that came forward for the most part have been shown to have given false testimony.
You'll have to provide a reference for this as I don't know of everyone being shown to give out false testimony. There was a false report by a reporter claiming that the police had 12 witnesses corroborating their version of event.

In fact there was an audio recording of the shots handed over to the FBI.

Quote:
-this teen was HUGE. He wasn't 5'8 110-150 lbs kid. He was over 6'3 if memory serves and close to 300 lbs.
So? It seems most of the shots came at a distance because there was no gunpowder residue on his body. We don't know about clothes because that medical report has not been released.

Quote:
Don't flame if you disagree, give me the updated details. I made my mind up about this case based on the coverage I watched on the mainstream media due to lack of timing. I could have been fed a load of ***, seeing as its from the mainstream media. So I'll gladly accept what I know to be wrong, but based on what I do know - the cop did nothing wrong.
At this point to me the major problems are how the police reacted to peaceful protests, how they have mislead, outright lied, and acted like power crazed asshats after this shooting. There is a problem with that department. Whether this shooting turns out to be "justified" or not.

I posted this on the previous page. It is a good overview from 6 weeks ago along with citations, photos, and video. The humor might not be to your taste

The police behavior is inexcusable. Intimidating journalists, using tear gas against them, getting suited up for WWIII and using heavy handed tactics - all of it terrible. I agree with you on that. I'm questioning whether the persona some media have attributed to Brown is accurate. I don't believe it is and I think this became politically charged from day 1.

Fact: The officer in question was assaulted in his car by an individual. Some say it was Brown, some say it was his friend. If it was his friend, I would imagine the police would have arrested him or brought him in for questioning right away.

Fact: The officer's gun was discharged inside the vehicle during the scuffle. Hypothesis 1: Officer discharged his weapon inside the vehicle because he was being overpowered. Hypothesis 2: Officer discharged his weapon inside the vehicle aiming for Brown or his friend for whatever reason (less likely). Hypothesis 3: The officer's gun went off as an accident, not intended by either the officer or Brown or his friend. In all 3 scenarios its more likely that the officer had some kind of physical fall out with Brown or his friend. In which case, Brown has already committed a felony.

Fact#2: The police didn't take Brown's friend (Dorion Johnson) testimony and as far as I know, still haven't taken his testimony. This could be the most damning fact in how Ferguson Police are dealing/dealt with the case as well as the most damning fact for Brown - as it means it was Brown who made the move for the officer's gun while he(or his upper torso was bent) was inside the vehicle.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 969
By Voren 2014-09-29 03:23:35
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
I'm fairly certain S.W.A.T are trained for head shots, as are counter terrorism units.

I have no idea about the extent of training for S.W.A.T. teams, and obviously neither do you considering you said "fairly certain". Movies don't portray everything. What I do know for certain as having trained with S.W.A.T. a few times is that their first target is center mass. The only person our team has that trains for head shots is the sniper team, and they only take the shot under certain conditions and only with authorization from the commander on scene.

Blazed1979 said: »
The other two points are assumptions - first that the officer's adrenaline levels were effecting their actions is speculative at best. More realistically I imagine they are trained to not panic under situations and exercise restraint in the situation as best as they can, as per their training.

I'll make a correction here. Adrenaline affects accuracy under certain circumstances, stress being one of them, but also depends upon the person. I've trained with people in a situation where we ran at a dead sprint for 30 yards, drew, and fired. Accuracy declined sharply. You can train to not panic all you want, but some times, in a perfect storm, things happen. I've seen a state trooper pump 11 rounds of .45ACP ball ammo into a suspect from 20ft away, one round hitting the suspect's neck, and the other rounds hitting arms, legs, abdomen (suspect lived, he was nicknamed spoungebob in county jail). I've also seen a hillbilly redneck country officer place 3 shots into a suspect from over 100ft distance and hit center mass every time. It's situational.

Blazed1979 said: »
Second, that discharging a firearm is purely to execute lethal force to kill isn't necessarily true. There's a lot of documented cases of police officers discharging their firearms to subdue and stop the threat.
This officer discharged 7 shots as far as I am aware, the first 5 ended up in the suspect's arm.

You proved my point. They shot to stop the threat. Just because the suspect didn't die from the wounds doesn't mean that the officers weren't aiming to kill. Officers didn't necessarily place shots into a suspect's limbs, that's just where the shots landed.

Blazed1979 said: »
Also as far as I am aware there was no autopsy. Why not? I want to know if the suspect was on any adrenaline enhancing and mind chemically altering drugs such as PCP.

Are you sure there was no autopsy, or just not one that's been released? There's a difference. Not everything needs to be released to the public, some things need to be saved for trial.

Blazed1979 said: »
Is it entirely implausible that the officer was acting accordingly and had no other choice? I'm not letting my disgust and loathing of police brutality sway my judgement on this. I really want to see some evidence that the officer was out for blood.

I despise corrupt police and the use of inappropriate force. I've stated that many of times, so I can agree with you there. What I want you to do though is stop speaking like you're an expert when you're not. You use conjecture and assumptions and try to argue with a person that's been in U.S. law enforcement for over a decade. I will admit freely that I'm not well versed on laws, policies, and procedures from all 50 states, but there are certain aspects that go across the board.
Offline
Posts: 4027
By Blazed1979 2014-09-29 03:53:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daoming said: »
nothing worth noting


Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
I'm fairly certain S.W.A.T are trained for head shots, as are counter terrorism units.

I have no idea about the extent of training for S.W.A.T. teams, and obviously neither do you considering you said "fairly certain". Movies don't portray everything. What I do know for certain as having trained with S.W.A.T. a few times is that their first target is center mass. The only person our team has that trains for head shots is the sniper team, and they only take the shot under certain conditions and only with authorization from the commander on scene.

Blazed1979 said: »
The other two points are assumptions - first that the officer's adrenaline levels were effecting their actions is speculative at best. More realistically I imagine they are trained to not panic under situations and exercise restraint in the situation as best as they can, as per their training.

I'll make a correction here. Adrenaline affects accuracy under certain circumstances, stress being one of them, but also depends upon the person. I've trained with people in a situation where we ran at a dead sprint for 30 yards, drew, and fired. Accuracy declined sharply. You can train to not panic all you want, but some times, in a perfect storm, things happen. I've seen a state trooper pump 11 rounds of .45ACP ball ammo into a suspect from 20ft away, one round hitting the suspect's neck, and the other rounds hitting arms, legs, abdomen (suspect lived, he was nicknamed spoungebob in county jail). I've also seen a hillbilly redneck country officer place 3 shots into a suspect from over 100ft distance and hit center mass every time. It's situational.

Blazed1979 said: »
Second, that discharging a firearm is purely to execute lethal force to kill isn't necessarily true. There's a lot of documented cases of police officers discharging their firearms to subdue and stop the threat.
This officer discharged 7 shots as far as I am aware, the first 5 ended up in the suspect's arm.

You proved my point. They shot to stop the threat. Just because the suspect didn't die from the wounds doesn't mean that the officers weren't aiming to kill. Officers didn't necessarily place shots into a suspect's limbs, that's just where the shots landed.

Blazed1979 said: »
Also as far as I am aware there was no autopsy. Why not? I want to know if the suspect was on any adrenaline enhancing and mind chemically altering drugs such as PCP.

Are you sure there was no autopsy, or just not one that's been released? There's a difference. Not everything needs to be released to the public, some things need to be saved for trial.

Blazed1979 said: »
Is it entirely implausible that the officer was acting accordingly and had no other choice? I'm not letting my disgust and loathing of police brutality sway my judgement on this. I really want to see some evidence that the officer was out for blood.

I despise corrupt police and the use of inappropriate force. I've stated that many of times, so I can agree with you there. What I want you to do though is stop speaking like you're an expert when you're not. You use conjecture and assumptions and try to argue with a person that's been in U.S. law enforcement for over a decade. I will admit freely that I'm not well versed on laws, policies, and procedures from all 50 states, but there are certain aspects that go across the board.


Noted and thank you for actually responding to the areas in question without going off tangent some raving lunatic.

Quote:
Voren said: What I want you to do though is stop speaking like you're an expert when you're not.

I can see how someone would think the below post is made by one who thinks he is an expert on the subject...

Quote:
Blazed started with: "Don't flame if you disagree, give me the updated details. I made my mind up about this case based on the coverage I watched on the mainstream media due to lack of timing. I could have been fed a load of ***, seeing as its from the mainstream media. So I'll gladly accept what I know to be wrong, but based on what I do know - the cop did nothing wrong."
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-29 06:53:43
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
daoming said: »
nothing worth noting

I'm sorry but you may just be legally HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE if you're going to just brush off cold facts.
Offline
Posts: 969
By Voren 2014-09-29 07:33:20
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.

You would also do well with not starting out a statement with "I'm fairly certain" when you don't have the experience or facts to back up what you're talking about.

I have admitted, on several occasions, that I can only confirm what the state of Oklahoma does or doesn't do in regards to laws and law enforcement with some things that do hold a broader base across most if not all states. All information I give can be easily confirmed by a simple google search.

In short, you make your statements sound as if it's fact, then when called on it you fall back on the "don't flame, I said I don't know and may be wrong" which is a chickenshit way to argue a point.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-29 07:42:42
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Not only that but when you're hammered with the facts you won't even acknowledge this and just keep spouting nonsense. Blazed you are not a *** 2 year old, grow up.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-09-29 07:45:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.

You would also do well with not starting out a statement with "I'm fairly certain" when you don't have the experience or facts to back up what you're talking about.

I have admitted, on several occasions, that I can only confirm what the state of Oklahoma does or doesn't do in regards to laws and law enforcement with some things that do hold a broader base across most if not all states. All information I give can be easily confirmed by a simple google search.

In short, you make your statements sound as if it's fact, then when called on it you fall back on the "don't flame, I said I don't know and may be wrong" which is a chickenshit way to argue a point.
Isn't that because the only 2 credible witnesses to the event are the police officer and the kid who got shot?

Last I checked, dead men tell no tales....
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-29 07:48:13
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.

You would also do well with not starting out a statement with "I'm fairly certain" when you don't have the experience or facts to back up what you're talking about.

I have admitted, on several occasions, that I can only confirm what the state of Oklahoma does or doesn't do in regards to laws and law enforcement with some things that do hold a broader base across most if not all states. All information I give can be easily confirmed by a simple google search.

In short, you make your statements sound as if it's fact, then when called on it you fall back on the "don't flame, I said I don't know and may be wrong" which is a chickenshit way to argue a point.
Isn't that because the only 2 credible witnesses to the event are the police officer and the kid who got shot?

Last I checked, dead men tell no tales....

Another reason why they try to reduce casualties, civilians and criminals alike. When the justice system is working properly, the defendant will have the ability to defend themselves, but that's if they're alive...
Offline
Posts: 969
By Voren 2014-09-29 07:51:37
Link | Quote | Reply
 
daoming said: »
Another reason why they try to reduce casualties, civilians and criminals alike. When the justice system is working properly, the defendant will have the ability to defend themselves, but that's if they're alive...

And also why I'm a big believer in talk down before take down.
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-29 08:21:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Voren said: »
daoming said: »
Another reason why they try to reduce casualties, civilians and criminals alike. When the justice system is working properly, the defendant will have the ability to defend themselves, but that's if they're alive...

And also why I'm a big believer in talk down before take down.

You can save more lives if you can get the guy to spill his guts, I mean if you just kill him, does he have accomplices? You can prvent more deaths if you keep him alive and get information.
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-09-29 08:22:35
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I came here for Al Sharpton...
[+]
Offline
Posts: 4027
By Blazed1979 2014-09-29 08:22:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.

You would also do well with not starting out a statement with "I'm fairly certain" when you don't have the experience or facts to back up what you're talking about.

I have admitted, on several occasions, that I can only confirm what the state of Oklahoma does or doesn't do in regards to laws and law enforcement with some things that do hold a broader base across most if not all states. All information I give can be easily confirmed by a simple google search.

In short, you make your statements sound as if it's fact, then when called on it you fall back on the "don't flame, I said I don't know and may be wrong" which is a chickenshit way to argue a point.
There's a difference between arguing and discussing. As for points, I never claimed to have one. In fact I went out of my way to say that I didn't in laymen terms that one such as yourself could comprehend. But its the internet and there's no real way to have an open discussion with people like you lurking around; people incapable of differentiating between an open discussion and an open debate.
I'm not here to argue. I've come to the conclusion that you DO want to argue. Good luck with that
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-09-29 08:23:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
[+]
Offline
Posts: 97
By daoming 2014-09-29 08:41:41
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Blazed1979 said: »
Voren said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
you would do well to not preframe me or my opinion. I'm not a FOX news anchor or Jet. I don't commit to a position and stand by it when the facts are at odds with it.

You would also do well with not starting out a statement with "I'm fairly certain" when you don't have the experience or facts to back up what you're talking about.

I have admitted, on several occasions, that I can only confirm what the state of Oklahoma does or doesn't do in regards to laws and law enforcement with some things that do hold a broader base across most if not all states. All information I give can be easily confirmed by a simple google search.

In short, you make your statements sound as if it's fact, then when called on it you fall back on the "don't flame, I said I don't know and may be wrong" which is a chickenshit way to argue a point.
There's a difference between arguing and discussing. As for points, I never claimed to have one. In fact I went out of my way to say that I didn't in laymen terms that one such as yourself could comprehend. But its the internet and there's no real way to have an open discussion with people like you lurking around; people incapable of differentiating between an open discussion and an open debate.
I'm not here to argue. I've come to the conclusion that you DO want to argue. Good luck with that

You don't have a point? Look up jackass, I might have to dig out every single post you've made and make one enormous post to prove that statement wrong. You walk around this forum thinking you know everything, and then when someone proves you wrong (Like myself on the Ohio Revised Code) you just play it off to look cool.
 Bismarck.Chiisaku
Offline
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
user: Matokoto
Posts: 4
By Bismarck.Chiisaku 2014-09-29 15:58:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
the media has seem to make people think what they say is going on is really what's going on. coming from someone who lives in the area... its not. do i agree with an 18yo being shot and killed.. of course not.. but does it justify people from all over st. louis coming in and stealing everything they can get their hands on. or how bout going into businesses and harassing the workers. there was very little "peaceful" protesting all along. and now police officers are being shot at. i know some police are corrupt. its everywhere in this country. but because of the few that are now every cop is bad. but since when has it been bad to enforce the law. you break the law you get punished. its as simple as that
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-24 10:01:18
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Report states that if you are threatened by violent protests, you shouldn't protect yourself by wearing armor or enforce a curfew if you are a police officer
By volkom 2014-10-24 10:09:52
Link | Quote | Reply
 

something about looting, throwing incendiary devices, shooting at police and destruction of property seems to be forgotten
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-10-24 10:13:38
Link | Quote | Reply
 
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-24 10:28:07
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-24 10:53:23
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
Agreed.

But do you honestly think this will prevent pointless protesting, which pretty much drums up the entire Ferguson protests?
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-24 10:54:18
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
Agreed.

But do you honestly think this will prevent pointless protesting, which pretty much drums up the entire Ferguson protests?

Pointless is relative, ineffective maybe, but I don't see these protests as pointless.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-24 11:00:29
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
Agreed.

But do you honestly think this will prevent pointless protesting, which pretty much drums up the entire Ferguson protests?

Pointless is relative, ineffective maybe, but I don't see these protests as pointless.
If there was actual police brutality that occurred, then the protests wouldn't be pointless.

Protesting for the sake of protesting is ineffective and pointless. All those "protesters" wanted to do is loot and pillage imo.
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-10-24 11:17:37
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
Agreed.

But do you honestly think this will prevent pointless protesting, which pretty much drums up the entire Ferguson protests?

Pointless is relative, ineffective maybe, but I don't see these protests as pointless.
If there was actual police brutality that occurred, then the protests wouldn't be pointless.

Protesting for the sake of protesting is ineffective and pointless. All those "protesters" wanted to do is loot and pillage imo.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-10-24 11:20:59
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Again, I'm not disagreeing with you.

I think that the Ferguson protests were pointless, even when it happened (because nobody knew what the facts were and were protesting by emotions, not by actual need for change).

Pointless is relative, and you may think that some protests are pointless in different times.
 Asura.Ackeronll
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
user: Ackeron
Posts: 4307
By Asura.Ackeronll 2014-10-24 11:23:00
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Jesus it's back from the dead!

They still have no clue what happened do they?

Other then a cop shot a guy that is.
 Ragnarok.Nausi
Offline
Server: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
user: Nausi
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2014-10-24 12:57:32
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Ragnarok.Nausi said: »
After the third autopsy now, the only use for this crisis is to drum up the black vote across the country.

If it gives some perspective and transparency to the way some police departments are allowed to operate, I'd call it a net gain either way.
Agreed.

But do you honestly think this will prevent pointless protesting, which pretty much drums up the entire Ferguson protests?

Pointless is relative, ineffective maybe, but I don't see these protests as pointless.
If there was actual police brutality that occurred, then the protests wouldn't be pointless.

Protesting for the sake of protesting is ineffective and pointless. All those "protesters" wanted to do is loot and pillage imo.

It's not pointless KN, it's a get out the vote strategy. Keep the black people angry and they'll show up to vote and bail out the democrats.







First Page 2 3 ... 32 33