Dude. There’s an endless banquet of snark to be visited upon Smapti, and you’ve got your nose stuck in the leftover creamed corn.
No, anyone who acts as inappropriately in a social environment as **doorhinge **might have a problem. It isn’t clear if he agrees or not; he’s not coherent or on topic.
No idea what *your *problem is, but no interest in finding out either.
You don’t need my help, you’re doing fine. 
That recent story, the one where the guy waited at the bottom of the stairs for the two robbers and after shooting them once, executed them with a second shot. Was he charged?
No, you’re being a fucking moron with the reading comprehension of a dead shrew.
Which, incidentally, is probably why you keep asking Loach questions that he’s already answered…
I was under the impression that some sort of altercation definitely took place at the cop’s vehicle. Are people saying that he just saw Michael in the street and started shooting without any lead-up?
I do think it’s entirely possible this could have been a situation where lethal force was not necessary. But I’m not going to assume that, given the victims immediate actions leading up to this incident. We know the guy was a violent criminal, we have it on video. I’m not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt over the police. I’m not assuming the cop did everything right here, but I’m sure not going to assume he’s a murderous, racist scumbag, either.
Harry Whittington mistakenly approached a hunting party without notifying them that he was approaching them. A bird broke cover and Cheney shot at it. IIRC, Harry Whittington explained the incident by saying, “Accidents do and will happen.”
Biden, on the other hand, is Obama’s go-to-guy on firearm safety. Just fire rounds into the air, I’m the VP. If the VP does it, it’s not illegal. :smack:
- I don’t think there is a firm handle on this, yet. The officer alleged that there was a scramble for his gun. I think eyewitness accounts have varied so far, so I’m inclined to without judgement until we see more corroborating evidence.
- The robbery, while coloring his character a bit, does not, by itself, lead to the conclusion that he was so violent that he needed to be shot down. I’m sure the officer didn’t go out looking to shot someone that day. That’s just insane. But given the situation, i.e. against and unarmed suspect, I can’t see why he went for his gun unless Brown was charging him with intent to injure.
I think it’s very possible that there was some sort of scuffle and the police officer, in a rage, brought out his pistol.
Sea kelp. It’s suppose to have a calming effect on people who feel a breeze coming from their internet connection. Just sayin’
We all know that, rather disgustingly, he was convicted of murder. Punishing the victims of crime is really something that needs to be stopped - and anyone being burgled or assaulted is a victim of crime.
Anyone who’s attacking you, or in your property without permission, should be considered an imminent threat, and dealt with accordingly. That doesn’t mean lethal force is necessarily ideal, but it certainly should be acceptable.
As for my guess to what happened in the case we’re discussing, I imagine the cop was trying to detain or arrest Brown, and he resisted. At which point he’s committed a violent crime against the police officer, so if the cop felt the need to defend himself he was fully entitled to. But that’s only a guess, and there will presumably be much more information becoming available soon.
I guess I’m judgier than you, as I find the kind of behavior exhibited in the surveillance video to color his character quite a lot. It does not seem unlikely to me that he physically threatened the cop, particularly as he was walking down the middle of a street right after robbing a store, irrationally drawing attention to himself. I think if you get physically violent with the police, even if you are unarmed (and, of course, the cop didn’t know he was unarmed) you shouldn’t be terribly surprised if you end up dead, regardless of what color you are.
Maybe that isn’t what happened, maybe it is. I just think these folks insisting that this poor boy was ruthlessly and without provocation gunned down by the evil police man are grasping at straws. The more information that comes out, the less likely that scenario seems to become.
See below story – defender followed your advice and is in jail.
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303654804576347891729253696?mobile=y
If that is your takeaway from this then your choice to not own a firearm is an excellent one. Please continue to not own one in the future.
John Oliver had a good piece on Ferguson: John Oliver on Ferguson, Missouri and police militarization (VIDEO).
This sums up exactly my position on the case at the moment.
Fuck there are a lot of morons that post in here (and to save people the trouble, no I’m not excluding myself from that list).
The weed doesn’t mean anything. He could have smoked it a week prior. And even if he had been high at the time of the incident, “Reefer Madness” is fiction. If anything, it would make him more docile.
Bolding mine.
KABLAM
“That’ll teach those damn kids to step on my lawn!”
Oh my God he smoked pot??? That changes everything!!!
There is a difference between shooting someone until they stop moving, and shooting someone until they stop moving, then walking over and shooting them again. The first is self-defense. The second implies premeditation and malice.
The “good innocent little boy who was about to go to college” narrative is going up in a puff of smoke, isn’t it?