Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/08/15 02:04:58
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Looks like overall it went fairly well last night. No riots and no crazy cop antics. A couple idiots being idiots in the crowd; but nothing that couldn't have happened on any other night.
2014/08/15 09:26:57
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
So it looks like when police dress normally and serve the public, as opposed to dressing up like Call of Duty characters and acting like an invading force, it doesn't inflame tensions? Crazy.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2014/08/15 09:41:47
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Like having a white police force dress like an army looking like they are itching to use excessive force on people that have gathered to protest a white police force using excessive force.
It's already stupid to show up to protest looking like you are itching to drop the hammer. It's doubly stupid if that is what the protest was about in the first place...
2014/08/15 09:45:39
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Ouze wrote: So it looks like when police dress normally and serve the public, as opposed to dressing up like Call of Duty characters and acting like an invading force, it doesn't inflame tensions? Crazy.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2014/08/15 12:45:39
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Ouze wrote: So it looks like when police dress normally and serve the public, as opposed to dressing up like Call of Duty characters and acting like an invading force, it doesn't inflame tensions? Crazy.
It's too bad they couldn't have known that in Nevada with Bundy.
2014/08/15 13:40:28
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Ouze wrote: So it looks like when police dress normally and serve the public, as opposed to dressing up like Call of Duty characters and acting like an invading force, it doesn't inflame tensions? Crazy.
It's too bad they couldn't have known that in Nevada with Bundy.
Too bad these two situations aren't remotely related.
Drop it already.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2014/08/15 14:29:15
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Ouze wrote: So it looks like when police dress normally and serve the public, as opposed to dressing up like Call of Duty characters and acting like an invading force, it doesn't inflame tensions? Crazy.
When they start acting like CoD characters problems begin; no one wants tea bagged on the ground, or being told by random people that they slept with your mother
2014/08/15 15:51:38
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Well, that totally justifies the officer shooting him. Carry on everyone.
Obviously it doesn't outright justify a police officer shooting him, however it does justify the police interaction that lead up to his death. The key thing here will be just what did happen during that interaction that resulted in a dead kid, and some pissed off people rioting/looting and actin' the fool.
2014/08/15 16:10:46
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Well, the whole thing would be a lot less grainy with salt if the very first statement released by the police would have been something along the line of "an officer investigating a robbery was involved in a shooting, we are investigsting the situation".
Releasing it now just reeks of trying to cover your ass.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: I am afraid things have gone a bit too far to be solved by releasing footage of him robbing a store.
This information should have been made available as part of a properly worked out package of info before the rioting started, not several days later.
I think it is just another sign of a seriously jacked up leadership problem at that department.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/08/15 16:18:47
2014/08/15 16:19:16
Subject: Re:Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Dreadclaw69 wrote: When they start acting like CoD characters problems begin; no one wants tea bagged on the ground, or being told by random people that they slept with your mother
Well played, sir. You get an exalt for that one!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/15 16:21:36
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2014/08/15 16:24:25
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
d-usa wrote: I think it is just another sign of a seriously jacked up leadership problem at that department.
Considering the change in situation as soon as they relieved that jackass... Yep, I think you're right.
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
2014/08/15 17:01:02
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 563
Defense of Justification
Section 563.046
August 28, 2013
Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.
563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60)
Effective 1-1-79
That just looks horrible to me... especially 2(b).
Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 563
Defense of Justification
Section 563.046
August 28, 2013
Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.
563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60)
Effective 1-1-79
That just looks horrible to me... especially 2(b).
2a is worse than 2b. 2b is just saying that if you are trying to flee and are using a gun (or knife, or bomb, or car, or what have you) the cops are justified in using deadly force back. It doesn't mean that if you are just running away that they can shoot you.
Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 563
Defense of Justification
Section 563.046
August 28, 2013
Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.
563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60)
Effective 1-1-79
That just looks horrible to me... especially 2(b).
2a is worse than 2b. 2b is just saying that if you are trying to flee and are using a gun (or knife, or bomb, or car, or what have you) the cops are justified in using deadly force back. It doesn't mean that if you are just running away that they can shoot you.
Eh... it's the " reasonably believes " or " attempts to commit " seems awfully nebulous.
Maybe it's just the norm and I'm over-reading it.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/08/15 17:19:38
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 563
Defense of Justification
Section 563.046
August 28, 2013
Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest.
563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60)
Effective 1-1-79
That just looks horrible to me... especially 2(b).
2a is worse than 2b. 2b is just saying that if you are trying to flee and are using a gun (or knife, or bomb, or car, or what have you) the cops are justified in using deadly force back. It doesn't mean that if you are just running away that they can shoot you.
I think you are slightly over reading it (not to say you are wrong). You can also get into the whole discussion of "reasonable" and how it applies to law enforcement.
That language is fairly standard from state to state.
Well, that totally justifies the officer shooting him. Carry on everyone.
These riots are based on peoples' reactions to the media narrative of the big bad police officer shooting a sweet little boy. Now it's obvious he was actually a thug. This doesn't change the lethal force issue, but it certainly calls into question the media narrative that started this whole thing.
Ensis Ferrae has it - it's not that the robbery alone justified his shooting. Rather, the media narrative suggests that a sweet little boy was randomly attacked by a police officer. We now know that this is absolutely not the case. We can talk about the disparity of force issue, and try to hash out whether or not the shooting itself was justified, but this thug definitely "invited the man into his life" by committing violent crimes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/15 19:34:59
Well, that totally justifies the officer shooting him. Carry on everyone.
These riots are based on peoples' reactions to the media narrative of the big bad police officer shooting a sweet little boy. Now it's obvious he was actually a thug. This doesn't change the lethal force issue, but it certainly calls into question the media narrative that started this whole thing.
Ensis Ferrae has it - it's not that the robbery alone justified his shooting. Rather, the media narrative suggests that a sweet little boy was randomly attacked by a police officer. We now know that this is absolutely not the case. We can talk about the disparity of force issue, and try to hash out whether or not the shooting itself was justified, but this thug definitely "invited the man into his life" by committing violent crimes.
Nice to see it didn't take long for Nugg to show up and drop the Thug.
Is Thug still code for "black criminal"?
Anyway, it doesn't change anything in this situation other than give some people peace of mind knowing that another "thug" is off the streets and that he had it coming.
2014/08/15 19:46:39
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Well, that totally justifies the officer shooting him. Carry on everyone.
These riots are based on peoples' reactions to the media narrative of the big bad police officer shooting a sweet little boy. Now it's obvious he was actually a thug. This doesn't change the lethal force issue, but it certainly calls into question the media narrative that started this whole thing.
Ensis Ferrae has it - it's not that the robbery alone justified his shooting. Rather, the media narrative suggests that a sweet little boy was randomly attacked by a police officer. We now know that this is absolutely not the case. We can talk about the disparity of force issue, and try to hash out whether or not the shooting itself was justified, but this thug definitely "invited the man into his life" by committing violent crimes.
Nice to see it didn't take long for Nugg to show up and drop the Thug.
Is Thug still code for "black criminal"?
Anyway, it doesn't change anything in this situation other than give some people peace of mind knowing that another "thug" is off the streets and that he had it coming.
I didn't drop the thug - the police officer did.
Anyway, maybe it doesn't change anything if you're in the habit of thinking with your heart. However, for those of us exercising critical thinking, knowing that the deceased was a violent criminal calls the media narrative into question.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/15 19:46:54
He was a suspect in the theft of Swisher Sweets from a convenience store
To:
NuggzTheNinja wrote: knowing that the deceased was a violent criminal calls the media narrative into question.
Is a bit of a stretch there methinks...
Edit:
I certainly wouldn't call it "critical thinking". In fact, going from "he was a suspect in a theft" and turning it into "I KNOW he was a violent criminal thug" seems more like emotional reasoning than critical thinking.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/08/15 20:03:08
2014/08/15 20:01:08
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Anyway, maybe it doesn't change anything if you're in the habit of thinking with your heart. However, for those of us exercising critical thinking, knowing that the deceased was a violent criminal calls the media narrative into question.
Violent criminal? Critical thinking?
A man with no criminal record and one alleged petty robbery that had nothing to do with his interaction with the law officer that ended up taking his life is a violent criminal? All you are doing is substituting the "media narrative" you don't like (innocent black kid gunned down by white cop) with the one you do like (ruthless violent criminal that probably deserved it).
But I'm sure you can rest easy knowing that the town of Ferguson is so much safer now that this violent scourge has been rid from the streets.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2014/08/15 20:02:35
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
"The initial contact between the officer and Mr. Brown was not related to the robbery," Thomas Jackson, the police chief, said during a news conference Friday afternoon.
Rather, it stemmed from the fact that Brown and his friend were "walking down the street blocking traffic," Jackson said.
Keep in mind that the robbery occurred approx 10 minutes earlier... but...
The robbery is apparently not relevant to why he was stopped. However, it could be relevant to why the suspect reacted in the way he did.
— johnny dollar (@johnnydollar01) August 15, 2014
Maybe it gives a little insight as to what was Brown thinking...the guy who committed a felony robbery probably has good reason to get away from the officer and reacted in someway.
Now... does it prove the shooting was justified? Not yet...
Does it prove it was unjustified homicide? Not yet either...
But, whereas the cop's initial story last Monday seemed implausible earlier, the background facts about the robbery, and Brown's apparent casual familiarity with violence, sorta makes his story plausible.
Not proven, but plausible.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/08/15 20:04:31
Subject: Violent protest erupts in Ferguson, MO over deadly police shooting
Anyway, maybe it doesn't change anything if you're in the habit of thinking with your heart. However, for those of us exercising critical thinking, knowing that the deceased was a violent criminal calls the media narrative into question.
Violent criminal? Critical thinking?
A man with no criminal record and one alleged petty robbery that had nothing to do with his interaction with the law officer that ended up taking his life is a violent criminal? All you are doing is substituting the "media narrative" you don't like (innocent black kid gunned down by white cop) with the one you do like (ruthless violent criminal that probably deserved it).
But I'm sure you can rest easy knowing that the town of Ferguson is so much safer now that this violent scourge has been rid from the streets.
I'm not saying that the shooting was justified. That would require reviewing tapes of the shooting incident itself. However, I am saying that the media narrative painting him as a sweet little boy is bs.
Whembly has it - This isn't about proof, it's about plausibility. The media paints a picture of a sweet little boy so his behaving in a way that would justify shooting would seem implausible. In reality, he is a violent criminal who had just committed a robbery, making his behavior justify shooting him far more plausible. This is not proof that the shooting was justified - we don't have enough information yet to make that call.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/15 20:06:13
In common law, assault is the act of creating apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact with a person.[1]
I know where you are getting your own "media narrative" from.
He was a suspect because he matched the description of the guy in the video. The cop doesn't know it was him, we don't know it was him. And it doesn't change anything about his encounter with the cop.
The only thing it does is let people justify it in their mind because, to quote you, the unarmed person gunned down by the cop was a violent criminal thug.
Yet you are accusing everybody else of thinking with their heart and not being rational...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NuggzTheNinja wrote: In reality, he is a violent criminal who had just committed a robbery, making his behavior justify shooting him far more plausible. This is not proof that the shooting was justified - we don't have enough information yet to make that call.
I would point out how incredibly fascinating it is to watch you type "we don't have enough information yet to make that call" immediately after repeating that you know, as a fact, that the unarmed guy that was shot was 100% without a doubt a violent criminal thug even though the police has only called him a suspect in that robbery. But please, tell us more about how we are the emotional ones here.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/15 20:11:05
and 
WIP
