. . . and were the exact same size, and had done the exact same things, he probably would be alive today; and if he were not alive, Darren Wilson certainly would be facing an indictment today. Does anyone here seriously doubt either part of that?
Really? Just pulled that right out of your ass did you?
I think race was not a factor in the shooting; it was only a factor in the media response to the shooting. So yes, I doubt that: if Michael Brown had been white, he’d still be dead and Wilson would not have been indicted.
Both parts.
A white man who assaulted a police officer, tried to steal his gun, and then charged him would be just as dead as Brown is, and the officer would be just as justified and not facing an indictment.
And we wouldn’t have people rioting and torching businesses and cars and demanding blood over it either.
Don’t drink here. This well is poisoned.
No, we don’t know that.
In fact, a single instance in the history of time of a similar event with a white victim negates your entire argument.
Has anyone here read the transcript of the evidence presented to the grand jury? I reserve judgement and opinion until I know the facts on which the decision was reached.
I don’t know how to answer a hypothetical accurately, but I think there is a general perception that a young and hostile black male is more dangerous and more likely to inflict physical harm than is a young and hostile white male.
Crime statistics back up this perception, and of course there is a certain reinforcing loop that occurs. Officers perceive more deadly intent and treat black individuals with a much more aggressive response ; individuals being treated differently have more cause to behave aggressively in return.
Mr Brown would be a nicer poster child for injustice had he not just finished robbing a convenience store and simply brushing aside a protesting owner.
Had he been white and been killed by a black officer, I don’t think there would be much sympathy for him from whites. While such a petty crime does not mean it’s OK that the individual be killed, I don’t think society has much fundamental sympathy for those whose actions betray a fundamental expectation of a law-abiding society, and who are willing to bully anyone who gets in their way.
Given how controversial and incensing a failure to indict was known to be in the present situation, I have to believe the grand jury had what they considered to be a good reason for doing so, something beyond a mere “let’s give the cop the benefit of the doubt.” Hence, yeah, they wouldn’t have indicted just because Michael Brown had been white.
:rolleyes: Do you really think the same evidence would have been presented to the grand jury if Brown had been white? It is obvious the prosecutors in this case had no serious interest in getting Wilson indicted.
This is a really silly OP.
No, of course you don’t know that. Nor do I. Police officers do shoot white people, often for pretty shaky reasons.
The case in South Carolina, where the cop went nuts and shot the guy in the ass for no reason? Sure, I can be convinced he would not have been shot had he been white. This case? Well, we don’t have a video, and if Wilson’s account is true I can totally see him shooting a white person.
Yeah, the “good reason” being “he shot a black guy and the prosecutor doesn’t want us to indict”. Probably with strong undertones of “and we need to make sure those black scum know their place and don’t get uppity”.
Grand juries are rubber stamps; in this case, a rubber stamp for a guy with a long history of shield racist cops for thuggery.
Here is much of it.
I am not sure the rioters have perused it carefully.
Just saw a news clip of a black Commissioner of something or other who was positive an injustice had been done, but when pressed for the nature of the injustice reminded the newsman she was “not a lawyer” (and therefore, apparently, should not be held to a standard of evaluating facts?).
It’s like the Zimmerman case: If Martin had been white, Zimmerman would have been arrested immediately, not when the police got around to it in response to public pressure, and his conviction would have been such a foregone conclusion that he almost certainly would have taken a deal.
I take it some sort of different evidence should have been presented.
What did you think was missing from the link I just posted?
What is it that makes it so obvious the prosecutors were whitewashing?
Maybe the Feds and Mr Holder forgot to look over their shoulder?
I don’t think there’d have been a grand jury proceeding if Brown had been white, because there wouldn’t have been an angry mob demanding blood in what should have been an open-and-shut case.
Or like the OJ Simpson case?
If OJ had been black, he’d have gone to the big house for sure.
The only thing that saved him was being so darn white, basically. (Skin tone aside.)
If Martin had been white, would there have been “public pressure” to arrest Zimmerman?
I think anyone of any race who assaulted a cop would run serious risk of death.
I seriously doubt both the OPs statements. This case just became the darling of the news cycle because of the unrest. There were hundreds of equally important stories they could have been reporting but they chose not to, stories where people of different colors interact in unfortunate ways. It’s a crapshoot whether the news will take any notice of a particular event.
The extreme disappointment on all the reporters faces when there was no more riots was the most interesting part of the verdict announcement. Months of whipping the public into a frenzy, wasted.