As has been pointed out, when you are reduced to editing my responses to make yourself feel better, I win.
I think you’ve been playing with yourself, again.
You think about that a lot, do you?
So you claim, but we’ve seen no evidence of it yet.
Based on your past performances, you don’t have the skillset required to recognize evidence.
You’re being very generous to doorhinge by describing his contributions as “arguing.”
Even calling them “contributions” is generous.
Pssst, you forgot to add “hahahaha”. How can anybody tell your rapied wit just won the exchange now ?!
Even using the pronoun “them” is generous, since it’s really one note repeated.
No matter what your point of view on this or any other issue, you have to admit that the man has a point. 
They are (normal writing is illegible more than 6" from my face), but not half as thck as Smapti , I think.
A shame, since he seems rather reasonable and even likeable on other threads, but utterly clueless in this one.
STOP SHOOTING VIDEO IN PORTRAIT MODE!!
Or did he mean it was a bad shooting?
In this case, I think I’m totally on board with the prosecutor’s decision to delay the release of the body cam footage until [possibly] the end of this week. Per the story, they’re still investigating, including interviewing witnesses.
I’m mindful of the way witness stories were published in the Michael Brown shooting, often before official interviews. There was even, in the Brown case, a “witness” who came forward to collaborate Officer Wilson’s story with what was almost surely a complete fabrication. That witness was able to put her story together using Wilson’s own account, which had been widely reported prior to her deposition, and her testimony was in fact presented to the grand jury. Witnesses buttressing the opposing narrative were given the same opportunity; I’m not saying that happened, but it was certainly made possible, because both accounts were part of a national dialogue for days (at least) before all the witnesses were officially deposed.
Some intriguing aspects of this story include the relationship between University of Cincinnati and City of Cincinnati police departments (possibly strained?), and the lawsuit-prompted Collaborative Agreement under which CPD seems to have operated between ~2002 and ~2007, and which, according to Police Chief Blackwell in the article, still seems to inform the “way we police” in the city.
I think I agree with waiting for the grand jury to finish. It’s going to be released, and it’s going to be released soon.
If they’re already planning for “community reaction”, it must be really, really, really not good.
Missed the edit window: CPD was operating under court supervision until mid-year 2007, when they transitioned into full implementation of the “problem oriented policing” required by the collaborative agreement. On first read, this looks like a good faith effort (however it was prompted) to reform use-of-force procedures, remove racial biases and strengthen cooperation between CPD and the communities they police.
The Ohio ACLU was guardedly optimistic after the first 5 years under the agreement, but I haven’t found anything recent.
But wait, according to Smapti, we as citizens have NO RIGHT to demand or require changes in policing procedures!
According to Steophan, if we were to do such, the immediate next step will be anarchy.
Are we talking “closed captioning in Comic Sans” level of really, really, really not good ; or even worse ?
(Post shortened. Underline added.)
In the Brown case, CNN and other media outlet repeatedly found “witnesses” who were willing to say something/anything on camera. “Hands up, don’t shoot” was the most popular theme. And that alleged fact proved to be simply a figment of the imagination of Brown’s accomplice, which was then repeatedly repeated ad nauseam. The media outlets didn’t seem to care if the “witnesses” could possibly have seen what they say they saw. It did make for good television. :smack:
The FBI and State Police investigations proved that many of the most popular Brown-related media and internet stories were based on a combination of horseshit and bullshit.
Who is this witness you believe collaborated Officer Wilson’s story?
And if you’re not saying that happened, what are you saying/implying happened?