Author Topic: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown  (Read 366 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Machiavelli

  • News/Current Events and Sports Moderator Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Realist
Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« on: August 17, 2014, 03:20:39 PM »
David Clark Scott
The Christian Science Monitor
August 17, 2014

Quote
Michael Brown, aka "Big Mike," has been described as too "gentle" to play football. But a police report released Friday, and photos of Mike Brown flashing 'gang signs,' paint a different portrait of black teenager fatally shot Saturday, Aug. 9.

Was Michael Brown a "gentle giant," a cigar thief, or a gang member?

More
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools

-- Rudyard Kipling

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw

Offline LambChop

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 245
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2014, 03:53:43 PM »
And here we go again with the demonization of a victim.    This person was shot to death. Period.  He was a victim.  Period.

This is the same garbage thinking that prostitutes can't be raped.  Haven't we grown from that sort of thinking?  Guess not.

Offline massadvj

  • Editorial Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,011
    • Auktion Online
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2014, 04:05:06 PM »
At this point we don't really know whether Brown is a victim.  No one has been charged with shooting him.  What I see in the video is a big kid who seems quite comfortable using his weight to his advantage to steal cigars from a smaller, innocent shopkeeper whose only crime was opening a store to serve a neighborhood no other businessperson would touch.  Obviously, Brown didn't deserve to die because of that.  But he may have caused his own death by what he did subsequently.  We'll see what the investigation reveals.

In any event, this video is quite instructive because it reveals for the rest of us how the media distorts the truth to advance their agenda.
"She only coughs when she lies."

Offline LambChop

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 245
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2014, 04:20:14 PM »
At this point we don't really know whether Brown is a victim.  No one has been charged with shooting him.  What I see in the video is a big kid who seems quite comfortable using his weight to his advantage to steal cigars from a smaller, innocent shopkeeper whose only crime was opening a store to serve a neighborhood no other businessperson would touch.  Obviously, Brown didn't deserve to die because of that.  But he may have caused his own death by what he did subsequently.  We'll see what the investigation reveals.

In any event, this video is quite instructive because it reveals for the rest of us how the media distorts the truth to advance their agenda.

We don't know that he was a victim?  He's dead by gun shot.  His crime? Jay walking.
The officer was not stopping him for questioning of any crime.  He was not running away from a crime.
He was walking in the street and got snarky with a cop.

But hey, lets all spin this into another "thug" versus "good guy doing his job" story so we can all sleep better at night knowing there's nothing wrong with our system of justice.

Offline Machiavelli

  • News/Current Events and Sports Moderator Curmudgeon
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Realist
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2014, 04:36:12 PM »
This sounds like a bad shooting to me. It takes a lot to convince me that it's OK to gun down an unarmed person.
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools

-- Rudyard Kipling

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-- George Bernard Shaw

Offline speekinout

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,337
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2014, 04:44:49 PM »
This sounds like a bad shooting to me. It takes a lot to convince me that it's OK to gun down an unarmed person.

So if the story from Wilson and the unnamed commenter from the video are correct, that Brown, who was a pretty large guy, and had already attacked Wilson in his police car, was charging him and taunting him, then you think Wilson should have done what? Turn around and run away? Let himself get hit again?

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2014, 04:56:22 PM »
So if the story from Wilson and the unnamed commenter from the video are correct, that Brown, who was a pretty large guy, and had already attacked Wilson in his police car, was charging him and taunting him, then you think Wilson should have done what? Turn around and run away? Let himself get hit again?

We don't have Wilson's story.   But we can be pretty sure he's going to say what the unnamed commenter said, that he was in fear for his life.  Maybe he was, which is why he killed Brown.  Between four and six shots. 

But there are a couple of questions that make doubters like me wonder:

One is, why didn't he call for back up?  My nephews are cops, and they say that they never fail to call for back-up when an encounter with somebody, even if that means that the perp moves away from them or gets away. They do it for their own safety.

The other is, why did they let Brown's body lay on that pavement with no cover for FOUR HOURS?  In almost every other situation I can remember, the body is at least covered.  There were no ambulances called, so there was no sheet, and his body was hauled off in a non-descript SUV.  This one is really sticking in the craw of the black community in Ferguson (or so I read on Twitter).  Shouldn't somebody at least apologize to the family for this?
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline speekinout

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,337
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2014, 05:21:21 PM »
We don't have Wilson's story.   But we can be pretty sure he's going to say what the unnamed commenter said, that he was in fear for his life.  Maybe he was, which is why he killed Brown.  Between four and six shots. 

But there are a couple of questions that make doubters like me wonder:

One is, why didn't he call for back up?  My nephews are cops, and they say that they never fail to call for back-up when an encounter with somebody, even if that means that the perp moves away from them or gets away. They do it for their own safety.

The other is, why did they let Brown's body lay on that pavement with no cover for FOUR HOURS?  In almost every other situation I can remember, the body is at least covered.  There were no ambulances called, so there was no sheet, and his body was hauled off in a non-descript SUV.  This one is really sticking in the craw of the black community in Ferguson (or so I read on Twitter).  Shouldn't somebody at least apologize to the family for this?

We do have Wilson's story about the shooting. He's one of the two sources for the version that says Brown was charging toward him and didn't stop after the first shots (I don't know if those were warning shots or ones that hit him). Wilson was not chasing Brown.
And Wilson's version was given to a friend of his before anyone noticed the commentary on the tape, so we know those two stories were not connected.
And we know that another police car arrived on the scene within (I forget now - 1 or 2) minutes after the shooting.

I don't know why it took so long to get an ambulance there, but Brown was already dead, so that didn't change the outcome.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2014, 06:53:29 PM »
Well, there is one thing that's true, and it's not isolated to Ferguson, Mo.

Today's police forces are almost universally manned by trigger-happy cops who are taught not to de-escalate situations but to pursue confrontation.  That's due to this insane drug war and, to a lesser extent, the war on terror.  We see police reaching for their guns for the most superficial of reasons and that usually results in something dead.

The number of dogs-killed-by-cop has skyrocketed in the last five years.  Why is that?  Read a few of these encounters at "puppycide" and you'll see that police enter back yards or homes where the family pet instinctively barks to protect its territory and is gunned down by cops who, apparently, are frightened out of their wits at a barking dog.  What puzzles me is that UPS, the Post Office, Fed Ex and municipal employees deal with dogs every single day and have no need of guns. 

My cynical self tells me it boils down to a cop who has a gun and turns to his weapon as his first line of defense. That is due to the nature of law enforcement today, to the militarization of police departments, and to the generally low quality of police recruit.  Most of the shootings involve officers with less than ten years experience, which ought to tell everybody something.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2014, 06:56:46 PM »
We do have Wilson's story about the shooting. He's one of the two sources for the version that says Brown was charging toward him and didn't stop after the first shots (I don't know if those were warning shots or ones that hit him). Wilson was not chasing Brown.
And Wilson's version was given to a friend of his before anyone noticed the commentary on the tape, so we know those two stories were not connected.
And we know that another police car arrived on the scene within (I forget now - 1 or 2) minutes after the shooting.

I don't know why it took so long to get an ambulance there, but Brown was already dead, so that didn't change the outcome.

"Wilson's friend" is not an accurate source of Wilson's story.  He needs to tell it, or the Ferguson PD needs to tell it. If we're not going to believe anything that comes from Brown's friends or associates, we should, in fairness, discount anything that comes from "Wilson's friend." 

A police car arriving on scene two minutes after someone is shot is not back-up.

There is no dashcam video of anything that happened because the Ferguson PD doesn't have dashcams in any of its cars. Must not have had any money after spending it on upkeep  to that $300,000 MWRAP.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline katzenjammer

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,513
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2014, 07:20:46 PM »
Well, there is one thing that's true, and it's not isolated to Ferguson, Mo.

Today's police forces are almost universally manned by trigger-happy cops who are taught not to de-escalate situations but to pursue confrontation.  That's due to this insane drug war and, to a lesser extent, the war on terror.  We see police reaching for their guns for the most superficial of reasons and that usually results in something dead.

The number of dogs-killed-by-cop has skyrocketed in the last five years.  Why is that?  Read a few of these encounters at "puppycide" and you'll see that police enter back yards or homes where the family pet instinctively barks to protect its territory and is gunned down by cops who, apparently, are frightened out of their wits at a barking dog.  What puzzles me is that UPS, the Post Office, Fed Ex and municipal employees deal with dogs every single day and have no need of guns. 

My cynical self tells me it boils down to a cop who has a gun and turns to his weapon as his first line of defense. That is due to the nature of law enforcement today, to the militarization of police departments, and to the generally low quality of police recruit.  Most of the shootings involve officers with less than ten years experience, which ought to tell everybody something.

You are spot on Sink.  At this point, the only people that aren't seeing this for what it is, are those that don't want to see it (and hence, have to actually do something about it at some point).

Offline speekinout

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,337
Re: Ferguson shooting: What's known now about Michael Brown
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2014, 08:04:51 PM »
"Wilson's friend" is not an accurate source of Wilson's story.  He needs to tell it, or the Ferguson PD needs to tell it. If we're not going to believe anything that comes from Brown's friends or associates, we should, in fairness, discount anything that comes from "Wilson's friend." 

A police car arriving on scene two minutes after someone is shot is not back-up.

There is no dashcam video of anything that happened because the Ferguson PD doesn't have dashcams in any of its cars. Must not have had any money after spending it on upkeep  to that $300,000 MWRAP.

You won't believe Wilson's story unless you see him tell it? Then you can't believe Brown's story unless you see him tell it, and so you can never know anything.
Brown's "associate" who told their side of the story has a criminal record, he knew he committed a crime just minutes before the shooting, and he had some pretty outrageous claims - the cop grabbed Brown's neck from his seat in the car? Brown was shot in the back? - so it's pretty hard to believe anything he said at all. The only one we're sure saw the incident, and had no reason to make up a story, is the one who described Brown as going after Wilson and not stopping even after shots were fired (that he thought hit Brown).

Back-up cannot arrive in the middle of a fight. Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

It is too bad that Ferguson didn't have dash cams. I think there are too many police dep'ts that haven't put the appropriate priority on those. Some of those dep'ts are in quiet and safe areas where they don't expect to need them, but all it takes is one unfortunate incident to find out that all police dep'ts need them now.

I can understand why you might have a dim view of police dep'ts, esp. if you live in a place where their performance hasn't been so great. There have been some pretty ugly incidents recently, too. But I've met some very good cops, and have had friends who were good cops. So I'm inclined to want to know more about a situation before I decide the cops were the bad guys. Particularly if the situation involves a white cop, a black guy, and Al Sharpton. 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf