Jump to content

Police Issues and Racial Profiling Protest Discussion


lego

Featured Posts

  • Replies 616
  • Created
  • Last Reply
RainingOnMe

Very sad that all the violence is going on. The message of what the people wanted to show is the opposite of what they're doing; they're showing that they are rebellious and violent people if they don't get justice, not that justice is the right thing and that justice can be peaceful. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
boobtank

The riots have nothing to do with Michael Brown, IMO. He was a criminal, and there is evidence that he fought against the officer and tried to gain control of the gun.

Rather, this is only a catalyst to release decades old tension that have built up on the community. Additionally, I don't believe the police or military handled the response well. Their aggression only increased resistance, rather than deescalate the situation.

I agree with the first line but please explain the so called 'evidence' you say that was used in this trial? There was no evidence that he tried to gain control of the gun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gov Hooka

I agree with the first line but please explain the so called 'evidence' you say that was used in this trial? There was no evidence that he tried to gain control of the gun.

wrong. michael brown's blood covered the officer's gun and it's been corroborated by witnesses and the officer's account that when Michael Brown reached for the officer and got in a tussle with him for his gun, the officer let out two shots with one hitting Mike Brown in the hand. confirmed by evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is bull****. Even if the guy did try to get the police officers gun, even if he was running at the officer, firing multiple shots into him is way more than just self-defense if you are a police officer- especially in the head. Two shots in the head, six shots in him total, right? To face no charges while being on paid leave is offensive.

 

 I can't imagine he will be able to continue working on that police force, and any police force he tries to work on he will face some serious issues from the public unless he goes to work any predominantly white city.

 

The sad thing is the people of Ferguson and people around the country protested for months. They caused a fuss because this is something they face, something they notice in society, and something that is important to them. Yet despite all these faces and all these people telling their leaders "Hey, this is what we see happening to us," people think that it's not an issue and they don't want to change. They just want to bring out the riot gear then wag their finger at the public when they pop off. 

(The Onion wrote an one-point article about this: http://www.theonion.com/articles/heavy-police-presence-in-ferguson-to-ensure-reside,37528/)

 

The people who have caused damage to the town are being awful; local businesses should not have to suffer. But the people ignoring the injustice that occurs to instead focus on the emotionally charged outburst of a letdown people are missing the point. 

These people are oppressed. The people in the position of power don't understand what it means or what these people go through. Even a black man who has never had a run-in with the police knows what this struggle is like, but the people running things don't want to listen. It's ridiculous.

 

That being said, Brown was a criminal. He deserved to at least be arrested. We know he robbed a store earlier that night. He's not completely innocent, and I'm one of the people that believe he most likely did get violent with the officer. Still, he should have served time for theft, not ended up dead. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine who is an attorney said this:

 

 

A grand jury isn't like a regular jury. They needed 9 to vote to indict. It's also a closed process with no judge and no defense attorney. The prosecutor presents the evidence for indictment (basically an amped up process for signing a criminal complaint that's used in specific instances. In MN state court we use grand juries for first degree murder charges). They had to conclude that there was probable cause to believe that Officer Wilson committed one of the charges brought against him--that it was more likely than not that he had committed the crime. This is a fairly low benchmark in the criminal realm. Not getting an indictment is statistically rare--fifethirtyeight gives a Bureau of Justice Statistics number that says "U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them." Grand jurors get to participate in the process--they can ask the witnesses questions and get up to examine the physical evidence during the proceedings. The fact that this proceeding didn't result in an indictment is objectively absurd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im glad they went with the evidence and didn't allow themselves to be pressured into an indictment. Kudos to the black witnesses that corroborated the officers story as well. The jurors and witnesses were under a lot of pressure to indict, but they did the right thing. Id rather have riots than someone be indicted for a crime he didn't commit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pink sushi

I actually agree with the verdict. :fat: It's not like he was some completely innocent person or something. He ROBBED a store.....and there's evidence he used force with the officer and tried to gain control of his gun.

Did he deserve to die? No, but it ended up being an unfortunate consequence of his actions. Maybe he just should not have robbed that store. :roll: I don't think a police officer should spend years in jail for defending himself against someone like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fabian5000

I actually agree with the verdict. :fat: It's not like he was some completely innocent person or something. He ROBBED a store.....and there's evidence he used force with the officer and tried to gain control of his gun.

Did he deserve to die? No, but it ended up being an unfortunate consequence of his actions. Maybe he just should not have robbed that store. :roll: I don't think a police officer should spend years in jail for defending himself against someone like this.

agree, it's not about the race, it's mostly an unfortunate consequence 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with the verdict. :fat: It's not like he was some completely innocent person or something. He ROBBED a store.....and there's evidence he used force with the officer and tried to gain control of his gun.

Did he deserve to die? No, but it ended up being an unfortunate consequence of his actions. Maybe he just should not have robbed that store. :roll: I don't think a police officer should spend years in jail for defending himself against someone like this.

This 100%. The fact that anyone believes otherwise just baffles me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One problem is that first impressions are lasting. The original story was an anti-police fiction. Mike Brown was a good boy who was gonna be an engineer (only later did we hear about the convenience store robbery). He was stopped for jaywalking and shot in the back for disobeying the officer (he actually attacked the officer in his car and was shot in the front).

 

Black people distrust the police and are willing to believe the worst. I think police abuse their authority, hassle them about petty things, sometimes are brutal, but they don't typically shoot people for no reason.

 

It's rare for Grand Juries not to indict - but I've also heard this case only went to Grand Jury because of political pressure, and never would have based on the evidence alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...