Missouri Police Officer guns down unarmed 18 year old

[Don Vito Corleone]

Google justice for treyskittles idiot.

Make ready, be ready. Have a plan and be ready. Don't be a victim. Survive the hoarde with whatever weapon you have.

I can't fucking wait. Bring it on.

You must be the person most anxious for a race war in the US since Charles Manson, and your plans are similarly well thought-out. "Stay frosty," indeed.

 

[spidey07]

You must be the person most anxious for a race war in the US since Charles Manson, and your plans are similarly well thought-out. "Stay frosty," indeed.

Yes. Very much so indeed. Go time.

 

[himkhan]

Go time is code speak for go hide under you bed with your menacing keyboard. :awe: These threads are like permaban fodder for you.

 

[brianmanahan]

I guess he expects Officer Wilson to just take one for the team, you know, trade one loss for the common good. I wonder if he intends to be one of the silver backs who help burn down the city and break s**t? Yes I said silver backs. People who act like f***ing Gorillas are not human beings.....they're animals.

Yes, you said silver backs. You seem proud of that. We're not.

Perknose
Forum Director

reported

Punk threadcrap posts like yours in support of another posters' racism get you what you deserve.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[Pipeline 1010]

Well, reporters in the past are different from reporters today.

Proof?

The idealistic reporters of the past observed, recorded, and retold. Reporters today create stories through their own direct actions, then record and retell it as if they were passive observants (which they weren't). It crosses the line into activist territory.

Cop Logic®: tell vague half truths and sell those as representative of all <insert stereotyped group here>. Then use that as a reason to treat said member of said group like shit and violate their rights.

I'd have to look back, I know there was an article that made Yahoo's news feed about reporters coming together and sharing techniques to "peacefully" antagonize police into giving them the reactions they desire and how to record and retell the event, in preparation for events after the grand jury decision.

Antagonize how? By taking pictures and asking Officer Go Fuck Yourself for their names? In other words, constitutionally protected free speech? Jesus I haven't heard a group of people whom the constitution pisses off more than cops.

Reporters today are not sacred people of great integrity deserving of higher praise above other individuals.

Neither are cops, but that doesn't stop you from treating yourselves as such.

You talk about attacks on reporters as if it's a mortal sin

Nice exaggeration there. "Mortal" sin. Who used these words? Who painted this as anything other than a violation of civil rights as enshrined in our constitution? Any attack on any law abiding citizen is a sin whether you feel like you can invent "legal" justification or not.

It's no more a sin than dealing with any other individual out there.

This is irrelevant drool. "Dealing" with somebody is not a sin. Depriving them of constitutionally protected rights is. No matter if they are a reporter or "any other individual".

What you have constructed with your argument is an attempted (but failed) justification as to why cops should get to violate the rights of reporters the same way they do of the "regular" protestors and it makes you look like a bad person. It is extremely unfortunate and unjust that someone of your beliefs gets to have government sanctioned authority over other human beings.

 

[shortylickens]

My point was the criminal justice systems affords more of a leeway to Wilson as opposed to Brown. I wish people would have more concern for equal treatment under the law.

The so called mobs are only calling for an indictment, not prison.

Umm, the mobs have been doing a LOT more than just that.

The cop may have got equal treatment if the general public had not been so loud and violent. Now the courts biggest concern is NOT stringing up an innocent man just appease the angry masses. Justice was ruined in the process.

 

[soundforbjt]

Umm, the mobs have been doing a LOT more than just that.

The cop may have got equal treatment if the general public had not been so loud and violent. Now the courts biggest concern is NOT stringing up an innocent man just appease the angry masses. Justice was ruined in the process.

An indictment is not "stringing up an innocent man", Their job is only to judge whether or not a charge/trial is justified/necessary.

 

[shortylickens]

An indictment is not "stringing up an innocent man", Their job is only to judge whether or not a charge/trial is justified/necessary.

And the mob was not looking for just an indictment of one man on one charge.

 

[ivwshane]

I don't know why anyone would be against wilson going to trial. What happened wasn't clear cut and it should be played out in court where the facts can be presented to a jury. He will most likely be acquitted for the exact same reasons he was indicted, not enough evidence either way. The verdict isn't the issue, it's the process.

 

[wgusler]

Umm, the mobs have been doing a LOT more than just that.

The cop may have got equal treatment if the general public had not been so loud and violent. Now the courts biggest concern is NOT stringing up an innocent man just appease the angry masses. Justice was ruined in the process.

See: Travon Martin Case. No charges, compelling evidence at the scene and eyewitness story matches the shooter. Then.... the media steps in and ..........Hang him he killed a little kid.

This whole thing is more of the same.

 

[cubby1223]

I don't know why anyone would be against wilson going to trial. What happened wasn't clear cut and it should be played out in court where the facts can be presented to a jury. He will most likely be acquitted for the exact same reasons he was indicted, not enough evidence either way. The verdict isn't the issue, it's the process.

You don't understand because you're capable of looking at it from just one possible viewpoint.

The process is precisely the important part. And allowing angry mobs (especially those not seeking truth) to dictate the process and hand down vigilante punishments prior to any guilt/innocence verdict, even before any honest collecting of facts, is wrong.

The question in this situation is "Which wrong am I more comfortable accepting?" At this particular junction in time, my first preference is to smack down the angry, destructive mobs and deal with law enforcement issues at later time.

If the mob stood for truth, calmness, and civility, I'd be more inclined to want a trial to take place. But this mob does not stand for any of those. They may claim they are in media statements, but actions most certainly speak louder than prepared statements.

 

[ivwshane]

Me wanting a trial has nothing to do with any angry mobs or outside influence, I haven't paid any attention to that and quite honestly I don't let people who aren't involved with the issue bother me. It's why I don't hangout at "expert ferguson" websites. I also don't care what the outcome is so long as the process was fair and honest nor do I care how people will react one way or another, justice is and should be blind to anything but the facts and only serves one purpose, to find the truth and react accordingly.

Continue on with your distraction😉

You don't understand because you're capable of looking at it from just one possible viewpoint.

The process is precisely the important part. And allowing angry mobs (especially those not seeking truth) to dictate the process and hand down vigilante punishments prior to any guilt/innocence verdict, even before any honest collecting of facts, is wrong.

The question in this situation is "Which wrong am I more comfortable accepting?" At this particular junction in time, my first preference is to smack down the angry, destructive mobs and deal with law enforcement issues at later time.

If the mob stood for truth, calmness, and civility, I'd be more inclined to want a trial to take place. But this mob does not stand for any of those. They may claim they are in media statements, but actions most certainly speak louder than prepared statements.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Me wanting a trial has nothing to do with any angry mobs or outside influence, I haven't paid any attention to that and quite honestly I don't let people who aren't involved with the issue bother me. It's why I don't hangout at "expert ferguson" websites. I also don't care what the outcome is so long as the process was fair and honest nor do I care how people will react one way or another, justice is and should be blind to anything but the facts and only serves one purpose, to find the truth and react accordingly.

Continue on with your distraction😉

Let me ask you this. You have been accused of having potentially committed a crime. As part of the system of legal protections we all enjoy you are not automatically subject to a ruinous trial but instead are given the right of a grand jury hearing to determine if there is sufficient basis for a trial. If the evidence warrants it then it goes to trial. If not then no. Now let's get rid of that process. I and another accuse you of rape. How deep are your pockets? I ask because you are "just going to trial" and there's no need to determine if the accusations have sufficient merit.

 

[Ichinisan]

Let me ask you this. You have been accused of having potentially committed a crime. As part of the system of legal protections we all enjoy you are not automatically subject to a ruinous trial but instead are given the right of a grand jury hearing to determine if there is sufficient basis for a trial. If the evidence warrants it then it goes to trial. If not then no. Now let's get rid of that process. I and another accuse you of rape. How deep are your pockets? I ask because you are "just going to trial" and there's no need to determine if the accusations have sufficient merit.

I would like to see ivwshane's answer to this question. :thumbsup:

 

[DCal430]

Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

 

[DCal430]

The only reason we won't see an indictment is if this so called grand jury is full of racist who support the murder of blacks.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

As always advocating injury or death to another person.

The only reason we won't see an indictment is if this so called grand jury is full of racist who support the murder of blacks.

So will the black jury members be considered racist as well?

 

[DCal430]

As always advocating injury or death to another person.



So will the black jury members be considered racist as well?

No, they would have been outnumbered by trash.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No, they would have been outnumbered by trash.

What if they vote "No Bill" based on the evidence and witness testimony??

Looks like we may find out their decision tomorrow.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/19/justice/ferguson-grand-jury-ruling/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Grand jury decision on Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson could come Friday

Also looks like their planning to release the evidence and witness testimony as well. I hope they redact the names to protect those that testified.

Prosecutor Robert McCulloch has said he plans to make public all evidence and testimony presented to the grand jury, but there is growing concern from some on how to deal with the identities of people who have testified, the sources say.

Concerns have also been raised that some witnesses could be put at risk once their testimony and identities become public, law enforcement officials said.

In some cases, witnesses might have testified differently under oath, providing different accounts than the ones they gave in media interviews, the official explained. Others may have provided testimony that may be interpreted as helpful to the officer's account of the August 9 shooting.

A spokesman for McCulloch's office said the prosecutor hasn't decided whether to redact names of witnesses. The spokesman declined to comment on possible timing of the grand jury decision.

 

[CZroe]

Me wanting a trial has nothing to do with any angry mobs or outside influence, I haven't paid any attention to that and quite honestly I don't let people who aren't involved with the issue bother me. It's why I don't hangout at "expert ferguson" websites. I also don't care what the outcome is so long as the process was fair and honest nor do I care how people will react one way or another, justice is and should be blind to anything but the facts and only serves one purpose, to find the truth and react accordingly.

Continue on with your distraction😉

IOW, you are oblivious to the fact that you ARE part of that angry mob. Angry mobs aren't organized. Each person THINKS they know enough to be angry and have expectations. You are no different. You want him to face trial, but don't think for a second that you are the only one and that you aren't echoing the same WRONG mentality as the rest of the angry mob.

 

[FerrelGeek]

They are not directly comparable as their opportunity is quite poor. You need to pick first world westernized nations with large non-majority populations and see how that is handled.

Japan is not in our shoes, and had a PM that said the particular demographic we're talking about here rioting if they don't get their way would be the downfall of America. Ironic, no?

Here's an example of a first world westernized country. Look what's happening in Sweden...
http://www.tlvfaces.com/muslim-gangs-take-control-55-zones-sweden-video/

 

[FerrelGeek]

Me wanting a trial has nothing to do with any angry mobs or outside influence, I haven't paid any attention to that and quite honestly I don't let people who aren't involved with the issue bother me. It's why I don't hangout at "expert ferguson" websites. I also don't care what the outcome is so long as the process was fair and honest nor do I care how people will react one way or another, justice is and should be blind to anything but the facts and only serves one purpose, to find the truth and react accordingly.

Continue on with your distraction😉

OK, so what happens if the grand jury says 'no indictment'? Will you be ok with that? Will you give them the benefit of the doubt that they've sifted through all the evidence and properly concluded that Wilson should not stand trial? What will satisfy you that justice has been served?

If this happens and the people of Ferguson (along with the bused in agitators who want to bring back the glory days of the '60s race riots) burn the town down, will you condemn their actions?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

I'd like to hear about your "other means".

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I don't know why anyone would be against wilson going to trial. What happened wasn't clear cut and it should be played out in court where the facts can be presented to a jury. He will most likely be acquitted for the exact same reasons he was indicted, not enough evidence either way. The verdict isn't the issue, it's the process.

I don't think many would be against Wilson going to trial provided the evidence and witness testimony before a grand jury provided probable cause that a crime was committed. If not, they should return a "No Bill" decision and no trial would be required.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Please let it be known regardless if this so called grand jury returns an indictment, it doesn't change this thug with a badge guilt. One way or another justice needs to be served, if not by a jury, then perhaps other means.

You are dumb. :|