As you know the grand jury did not indict Darren Wilson in the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. The protests and unrest have continued. Ferguson is a town of 26,000 people. The black community feels that Michael Brown was shot just because he was black. The grand jury however, went thru ALL the evidence which corroborated Officer Wilson's account of what happened that night.
So what is the solution to quell the feelings of the protesters?
Bring back segregation. That's right, have black cities, towns served by all black businesses and police. Then when a cop shoots someone, the issue will be authority figure versus civilian. When they loot the stores, the issues becomes the haves versus the have nots, which is what it has been all along. The white against black idea is a smokescreen blurring the real issues.
The haves and also the have mores have ruled the have less populations since the time of the serfs. It's not a unique white versus black issue. Powerful people have more than those with less power, and it is the powerful who rule over the others.
If you want equal rights, property status then you want socialism.
The protesters feel like the police can do whatever they want, whenever they want. When in fact the police follow rules and guidelines that govern how and when they can respond to a situation. Bias abuse exists sometimes but less times than people think.
Society does not believe each life has the same value, that's why poor people live in worse housing, get less quality education in the schools etc. Nobody wants to teach in schools in bad neighborhoods, because of anger and bad behavior of the people living there. Manners do not cost money, if the people behaved themselves it would be easier to get funding and businesses to help raise them up from poverty. Yet, their answer continues to be anger or apathy.
The answer is not violent protests, it does not solve the problems. Nobody wants to listen to a stick wielding looter or hear what he/she has to say. It just perpetuates the old stereotypes. For people to be heard, they need to educate, organize, lobby and vote for change, it is a slow process. If the US has another civil war, the outcome will be martial law or a fascist state to control the people. Neither of these is a desirable outcome.
The only the thing the violence in Ferguson has shown is there are people who do not know how to deal with their anger. Lashing out at others is angry, uncontrolled childish behavior more befitting of a two year old having a temper tantrum because he/she did not get what he/she wants. What is the response to that child? Seclusion/punishment. What can the answer be to unruly protesters? Seclusion in a jail cell and punishment.
Martin Luther King Jr. longed for the day when people would be judged on the basis of their character not their color. Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police. What does that say about his character? He was a thief, who arrogantly pushed the clerk away when asked to pay for the merchandise he was taking with him. He felt entitled to have whatever he wanted, living by his own rules, what kind of character is that? Was there any consideration or respect for anyone other than himself?
The video at the convenience store where the Cigarellos were taken without being paid for.
There was a shot fired within the car, the officers statement said Michael Brown was reaching in the car trying to take the gun away from PO Darren Wilson. IF there was no struggle IN the car, there would not have been a discharge from his gun, would there?
14:41 Big Mike's hands were filled with Cigarellos (the ones stolen from the convenience store).
What is disturbing is that there were two other black people who were shot and killed in that city, shot more times than necessary to subdue him.
Autopsy results - all the bullets entered from the front, he was NOT shot in the back, no gunpowder on his body, no bullets fired at close range, he was shot from a distance. No bullet in the back, which is not to say one was not fired at him that way, but he was not hit that way. One of the shots went down from his head and went down thru his collarbone which means he was lower down than the Officer doing the shooting. Either he was giving up or he was charging at the officer.
Impression: The cop told Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson to get out of the street (get on the sidewalk). They did not, and when they said something back to him, rather than obeying him. If a cop tells you to something, and you do not comply, they get pissed off. Officer Wilson's statement indicated that he had heard about a robbery at the convenience store recently and he thought Michael Brown could have been involved in that so he pursued the matter, and then the struggle ensued resulting in Michael Brown being fatally shot. Whether Michael Brown punched the officer and tried to get his gun, or if it was as the Officer testified is up to opinion. The forensic evidence indicates that Brown was shot from either 2 feet away or 35 feet away. His dead body lied 35 feet away from the squad car, and he was shot from the front NOT from behind.
UPDATE 12.24.14 Mike Brown's Mother speaks out.
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/12/23/michael-browns-mother-speaks-out-on-new-york-city-police-shootings/
[Edited on 11/28/2014 by gina]
[Edited on 12/24/2014 by gina]
That is just plain sick and twisted thinking Gina. 
The rioting was worse than I thought it would be. Really sad.
They knew a backlash was coming and did little or nothing to prevent the destruction. There was property being destroyed and I saw the police stand there and watch it happen. WTF? National guard troops could have been stationed outside of every business to prevent what happened and the police should have been arresting these thugs left and right. It's not like we don't have the manpower....use it!
Then we have Obama out saying that the response was "understandable." Come again? Businesses and property were being destroyed. Property owned by folks that had nothing to do with Brown getting shot. (some of them African-American business owners) How is that "understandable?" There is nothing at all "understandable" about that. I guess this behavior is something he's willing to make excuses for, and he's WRONG.
He said the anger was understandable, not the property damage and looting... try to actually listen to what he said...........
The rioting was worse than I thought it would be. Really sad.
They knew a backlash was coming and did little or nothing to prevent the destruction. There was property being destroyed and I saw the police stand there and watch it happen. WTF? National guard troops could have been stationed outside of every business to prevent what happened and the police should have been arresting these thugs left and right. It's not like we don't have the manpower....use it!
Then we have Obama out saying that the response was "understandable." Come again? Businesses and property were being destroyed. Property owned by folks that had nothing to do with Brown getting shot. (some of them African-American business owners) How is that "understandable?" There is nothing at all "understandable" about that. I guess this behavior is something he's willing to make excuses for, and he's WRONG.
Do you know the difference between a protest and a riot? Did Obama condone rioting? Or did he agree that peaceful protests could be productive?
Holder's a big help as well. He goes to Ferguson and (1) picks a side, then (2) accuses the police department of racism.
Thanks, Eric!
Rest easy, our Attorney General is a racial activist.
Holder's a big help as well. He goes to Ferguson and (1) picks a side, then (2) accuses the police department of racism.
Thanks, Eric!
Rest easy, our Attorney General is a racial activist.
From what I've seen & read, it seems like the prosecutor also picked a side. Some pretty sharp legal minds have questioned his approaches and actions.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/use-grand-jury
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
Was this ever proven?
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
Was this ever proven?
Yes. The store security cameras showed it was Brown who stole the cigars.
Then there's this from choir boy Ted. He's always good for a dose of bigotry.
That is just plain sick and twisted thinking Gina.
X2.
Your first sentence says it all. The grand jury (which is optional in MO if the DA has a backbone) heard ALL the evidence supporting Wilson. To that, I would add "as though it were all true." Because this was not a trial and the only side presented was the prosecution's, none of the evidence was challenged, no testimony was questioned, and no exhibits were authenticated. There were ample contradictions of statements and reports to warrant a trial on the facts of the case.
In places were a grand jury is required, a DA takes a case to the grand jury in order to GET an indictment. The prosecution's job is to prosecute "in search of the truth."
When that fails so deplorably as it did in Ferguson, I don't think anger and frustration should be characterized as "childish."
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
Was this ever proven?
Yes. The store security cameras showed it was Brown who stole the cigars.
Proven in a court of law? No. Was the security tape authenticated by objective parties? Was there questioning and rebuttal under oath of the store's witness? No.
[Edited on 11/27/2014 by cyclone88]
When that fails so deplorably as it did in Ferguson, I don't think anger and frustration should be characterized as "childish."
Provided there was any real "anger" at all. Check out the surveillance videos of the Ferguson Market break-in. Although many perpetrators had their faces covered, of the one's that didn't were mostly wearing watermelon smiles as they went in to help themselves.
The looks on smiling faces wasn't one of "no justice no peace," but more like "this is my lucky day." Boy, did they look angry!
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
Was this ever proven?
Yes. The store security cameras showed it was Brown who stole the cigars.
Proven in a court of law? No. Was the security tape authenticated by objective parties? Was there questioning and rebuttal under oath of the store's witness? No.
[Edited on 11/27/2014 by cyclone88]
So only things proven in a court of law are true? Seriously? Did you see the tape? If you did, you would know that it was Brown in the tape. Meanwhile, the DA did the right thing by going to a grand jury. I believe that he is required to do that in Missouri. And if the evidence was not good enough to get an indictment, there is no way there could have been a guilty verdict.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Was this ever proven?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes. The store security cameras showed it was Brown who stole the cigars.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proven in a court of law? No. Was the security tape authenticated by objective parties? Was there questioning and rebuttal under oath of the store's witness? No.
[Edited on 11/27/2014 by cyclone88]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------So only things proven in a court of law are true? Seriously? Did you see the tape? If you did, you would know that it was Brown in the tape. Meanwhile, the DA did the right thing by going to a grand jury. I believe that he is required to do that in Missouri. And if the evidence was not good enough to get an indictment, there is no way there could have been a guilty verdict.
We have all seen the tape but I am pretty sure no has proven it was the young man gunned down by the cop.
No one has said he was in the store. If this store was in his neighbourhood you would think someone would have come out and said yeah I saw him at the sev.
If police based their decisions on fuzzy videotape from a 7-11 camera we would all be in jail or dead.
We're the cigars found with him or in his backpack????
Worth watching, a matter of perspective.
wearing watermelon smiles
Nice...
wearing watermelon smiles
Nice...
Yep, I picked up on that one too. Priceless.
wearing watermelon smiles
Nice...
Yep, I picked up on that one too. Priceless.
He has pretty much become a troll. He has little to offer anymore.
So only things proven in a court of law are true? Seriously? Did you see the tape? If you did, you would know that it was Brown in the tape. Meanwhile, the DA did the right thing by going to a grand jury. I believe that he is required to do that in Missouri. And if the evidence was not good enough to get an indictment, there is no way there could have been a guilty verdict.
That's the point. The DA is NOT required to go to a grand jury to get an indictment in MO. Rather than admit the facts were contradictory and that a young man was DEAD because of an officer shooting and bring criminal charges, he tossed it to a grand jury.
Interesting that you leap from a no-bill by 12 grand jurors to a not guilty verdict by jurors at a trial, which would not necessarily have taken place in Ferguson, where evidence AND rebuttal are offerred.
It's all moot. I hope the Ferguson family gets some answers through a civil trial and law enforcement gets a hard look from federal investigators.
The watermelon comment (not made by you) makes me sick.
So only things proven in a court of law are true? Seriously? Did you see the tape? If you did, you would know that it was Brown in the tape. Meanwhile, the DA did the right thing by going to a grand jury. I believe that he is required to do that in Missouri. And if the evidence was not good enough to get an indictment, there is no way there could have been a guilty verdict.
That's the point. The DA is NOT required to go to a grand jury to get an indictment in MO. Rather than admit the facts were contradictory and that a young man was DEAD because of an officer shooting and bring criminal charges, he tossed it to a grand jury.
Interesting that you leap from a no-bill by 12 grand jurors to a not guilty verdict by jurors at a trial, which would not necessarily have taken place in Ferguson, where evidence AND rebuttal are offerred.
It's all moot. I hope the Ferguson family gets some answers through a civil trial and law enforcement gets a hard look from federal investigators.
The watermelon comment (not made by you) makes me sick.
The point I was making is that the grand jury has lower standard in reaching a decision. A trial needs to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A grand jury must only decide if there is enough evidence to charge a person with a crime. The grand jury hears the evidence and witnesses from the prosecution but does not hear from the defense. If they didn't feel there was enough to charge Wilson, there is no way a case could be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The looks on smiling faces wasn't one of "no justice no peace," but more like "this is my lucky day." Boy, did they look angry!
The watermelon comment (not made by you) makes me sick.
so does the tomahawk chop and the Cleveland Indians mascot , and the wasghington Redskins name, but it will never stop so you have to get used to it and keep on truckin....
The watermelon smile expression would apply exactly the same had the rioters been White, Hispanic, Asian, or from Saturn. Don't let it obscure the point that was made. Angry people normally don't have smiles plastered across their face.
If that makes me a racist, so be it. After all, who isn't? That word has been overused to the point of not even meaning anything anymore.
The watermelon smile expression would apply exactly the same had the rioters been White, Hispanic, Asian, or from Saturn. Don't let it obscure the point that was made. Angry people normally don't have smiles plastered across their face.
If that makes me a racist, so be it. After all, who isn't? That word has been overused to the point of not even meaning anything anymore.
In your mind, you are never wrong. Reality is somewhat different.
The watermelon smile expression would apply exactly the same had the rioters been White, Hispanic, Asian, or from Saturn. Don't let it obscure the point that was made. Angry people normally don't have smiles plastered across their face.
If that makes me a racist, so be it. After all, who isn't? That word has been overused to the point of not even meaning anything anymore.
That's quite a one size fits all statement you made in the first paragraph.
As far as your "After all, who isn't?" statement in paragraph 2 - sorry...you can speak for yourself, but you don't have the right to speak for others, and I would argue the point that you are wrong.
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
Was this ever proven?
all issues need a symbol and mike brown became it.....but sometimes symbols cloud the real issues. we become too focused on the symbol.
the real issues here is the state of different neighborhoods across this country. its about disproportionate profiling. its about economic opportunity. its about alot of things.
don't lose sight of the forest for the tree's.
That is just plain sick and twisted thinking Gina.
Twisted in what way? I am saying the real issues are poverty and class issues not racism. IF we took racism out of the equation, then the real anger and disgust would have to be launched against something else, which is that people do not like being poor, subjugated and oppressed.
Having authority figures who have more power and money than a person, who are of a different race is what fuels these struggles we see now. But the real issue is you have a large segment of society that is poor and oppressed, they happen to be more minority than white, but poverty is the real issue. That's why I said if you went back to segregation, that takes race out of it, the people are forced to see that it is poverty and inequality that is what they are battling.
I am not saying racism does not exist, it does, but if you go deeper, it is poverty itself that creates the contempt and the violence.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Brown stole cigars from a 7-11 before the altercation with police.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Was this ever proven?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes. The store security cameras showed it was Brown who stole the cigars.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proven in a court of law? No. Was the security tape authenticated by objective parties? Was there questioning and rebuttal under oath of the store's witness? No.
[Edited on 11/27/2014 by cyclone88]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------So only things proven in a court of law are true? Seriously? Did you see the tape? If you did, you would know that it was Brown in the tape. Meanwhile, the DA did the right thing by going to a grand jury. I believe that he is required to do that in Missouri. And if the evidence was not good enough to get an indictment, there is no way there could have been a guilty verdict.
We have all seen the tape but I am pretty sure no has proven it was the young man gunned down by the cop.
No one has said he was in the store. If this store was in his neighbourhood you would think someone would have come out and said yeah I saw him at the sev.
If police based their decisions on fuzzy videotape from a 7-11 camera we would all be in jail or dead.
We're the cigars found with him or in his backpack????
14:41 "Big Mike's hands had the Cigarellos in them", from Mr. Johnson who was with Big Mike at the time of the shooting.
