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.

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Assuming Brown did pay, does that negate the obvious assault in the portion of the video we have seen? Would someone who does that not be correctly described as 'violent', and since assault is criminal, well, maybe the label would still fit?

Talk about "forging a narrative...".

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals. I have a hard time believing that the majority of people here have not pushed someone at some point in their lives.

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Assuming Brown did pay, does that negate the obvious assault in the portion of the video we have seen? Would someone who does that not be correctly described as 'violent', and since assault is criminal, well, maybe the label would still fit?

Talk about "forging a narrative...".

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals. I have a hard time believing that the majority of people here have not pushed someone at some point in their lives.

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals.

Just throwing this in. His actions indicates he is capable of violence

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Assuming Brown did pay, does that negate the obvious assault in the portion of the video we have seen? Would someone who does that not be correctly described as 'violent', and since assault is criminal, well, maybe the label would still fit?

Talk about "forging a narrative...".

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals. I have a hard time believing that the majority of people here have not pushed someone at some point in their lives.

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals.

I would point out to you that CptJake specified that EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T COMMIT ANY OTHER CRIME WHATSOEVER pushing someone equals assault and makes you a violent criminal.

But if you couldn't be arsed to read it the first time I doubt you would bother to actually read his argument now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

Just throwing this in. His actions indicates he is capable of violence

As do yours.

As do mine.

Strong-arm robbery is a term used to describe a situation where the offender used any degree of force to complete the act. Strong-arm robbery is technically a term used to describe the crime of "Robbery by sudden snatching."

"Robbery by sudden snatching" means the taking of money or other property from the victim's person, with intent to permanently or temporarily deprive the victim or the owner of the money or other property, when, in the course of the taking, the victim was or became aware of the taking. In order to satisfy this definition, it is not necessary to show that:

The offender used any amount of force beyond that effort necessary to obtain possession of the money or other property; or

There was any resistance offered by the victim to the offender or that there was injury to the victim's person.

Physical assault takes place when an individual or a group provokes and attacks a person physically, with or without the use of a weapon, or threatens to hurt that person. Work-related aggression happens through the use of force or threats to a non-consenting victim on the work premises or in the context of the victim’s work.

The following are examples of physical assault.

Provocation: insults, death threats.

Intimidation: making a fist, pushing, stalking, stealing/throwing objects.

Brutality: attacks, struggles, fights.

Punches and injuries: bites, bruises, injuries, dislocations, fractures.

Assault with a weapon.

Armed robbery (with a firearm or using force or the threat of force).

 d-usa wrote:
I would point out to you that CptJake specified that EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T COMMIT ANY OTHER CRIME WHATSOEVER pushing someone equals assault and makes you a violent criminal.

But if you couldn't be arsed to read it the first time I doubt you would bother to actually read his argument now.

I'm not commenting on this in regard to the case, I'm commenting on the fact that you see a video like that and try to excuse it as just 'pushing' that a majority of people all do. Which as indicated my by use of smilies is laughable, IMO.

You need to work on your reflexes, because stuff is going over your head...

 d-usa wrote:
You need to work on your reflexes, because stuff is going over your head...

Guardians of the Galaxy was a good movie, I like the reference.

pushing someone equals assault and makes you a violent criminal.

Pushing + Physical intimidation + theft makes you a violent criminal. You seem to see those three things and leave it at "He just pushed him"

 d-usa wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Assuming Brown did pay, does that negate the obvious assault in the portion of the video we have seen? Would someone who does that not be correctly described as 'violent', and since assault is criminal, well, maybe the label would still fit?

Talk about "forging a narrative...".

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals. I have a hard time believing that the majority of people here have not pushed someone at some point in their lives.

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

If that push is an obvious assault and makes him violent criminal then I guess almost all of us are violent criminals.

I would point out to you that CptJake specified that EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T COMMIT ANY OTHER CRIME WHATSOEVER pushing someone equals assault and makes you a violent criminal.

But if you couldn't be arsed to read it the first time I doubt you would bother to actually read his argument now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

Just throwing this in. His actions indicates he is capable of violence

As do yours.

As do mine.

I'd venture to say pushing the diminutive clerk around in a strong arm robbery followed up with fracturing bones in the officers face pretty much cements in place the credentials for being tagged a violent criminal.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Pushing + Physical intimidation + theft makes you a violent criminal. You seem to see those three things and leave it at "He just pushed him"

Let me try to summarize one last time, just for the off-chance that you actually didn't read the entire conversation there and just decided to chirp in on a random comment.

Me: I saw some reports that seem to show that he actually paid for the cigars and there was no robbery.
CptJake: It doesn't matter. Even if he didn't steal them, he would still be a violent criminal who assaulted people for pushing the clerk.
You: Yeah, Pushing + Stealing makes you a criminal.
Me: He said that pushing, WITHOUT STEALING, makes you a violent criminal anyway.
You: Pushing + Physical intimidation + theft makes you a violent criminal. You seem to see those three things and leave it at "He just pushed him"

If you want to jump into the middle of a discussion to argue whatever you think it is I am saying, then be my guest. But I'm going to call you out for not knowing what it is you are actually arguing against.

I'm not saying that pushing a clerk out of the way while stealing something =/= assault, so I have no earthly idea where you are getting that idea from.

Now if you want to counter "pushing without anything else going on doesn't make you a violent criminal" with "pushing while stealing makes you a violent criminal" for a third time and completely ignore the point then I guess I can't stop you.

I don't know if shoving means violent but it is like bullying I see at school.

You're right, and I did chirp in at a random comment without reading the rest of the conversation like I should have.

My apologies

Relapse wrote:

I'd venture to say pushing the diminutive clerk around in a strong arm robbery followed up with fracturing bones in the officers face pretty much cements in place the credentials for being tagged a violent criminal.

Congratulations on not being able to actually read as well.

Is this thing even on? Do letters show up on the other side of the interweb pipes when I'm pushing them on my keyboard?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
You're right, and I did chirp in at a random comment without reading the rest of the conversation like I should have.

My apologies

Thanks, and sorry for getting butthurt about it. It's just a tad bit frustrating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: also for the record.

There was a couple YouTube videos this morning that appear to show Brown paying for the cigars before he left and was confronted by the clerk and then pushed him out of the way. A couple places started to talk about that and questioned the "did he steal" story and mentioned that the store didn't call 911 and that a bystander who noticed it called. That is where my "there are some stories that seem to indicate..." came from.

I haven't seen anything else to back that up since then.

 d-usa wrote:

Relapse wrote:

I'd venture to say pushing the diminutive clerk around in a strong arm robbery followed up with fracturing bones in the officers face pretty much cements in place the credentials for being tagged a violent criminal.

Congratulations on not being able to actually read as well.

Is this thing even on? Do letters show up on the other side of the interweb pipes when I'm pushing them on my keyboard?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
You're right, and I did chirp in at a random comment without reading the rest of the conversation like I should have.

My apologies

Thanks, and sorry for getting butthurt about it. It's just a tad bit frustrating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: also for the record.

There was a couple YouTube videos this morning that appear to show Brown paying for the cigars before he left and was confronted by the clerk and then pushed him out of the way. A couple places started to talk about that and questioned the "did he steal" story and mentioned that the store didn't call 911 and that a bystander who noticed it called. That is where my "there are some stories that seem to indicate..." came from.

I haven't seen anything else to back that up since then.

I feel so accomplished!

The details of the incident aside, this isn't about a single killing. A spark doesn't start a fire in isolation. Fixating on how to classify the fact the guy shoved someone at some store earlier or if he stole petty items or not is just the kind of distraction that really serves to underline why the anger behind these events is so fierce.

Any confirmation on the cop's injuries anywhere?

 Ouze wrote:
Any confirmation on the cop's injuries anywhere?

I've been checking, but haven't found anything beyond " somebody said".

 Ouze wrote:
Any confirmation on the cop's injuries anywhere?

Not yet.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Any confirmation on the cop's injuries anywhere?

Not yet.

Physical assault takes place when an individual or a group provokes and attacks a person physically, with or without the use of a weapon, or threatens to hurt that person. Work-related aggression happens through the use of force or threats to a non-consenting victim on the work premises or in the context of the victim’s work.

The following are examples of physical assault.

Provocation: insults, death threats.

Intimidation: making a fist, pushing, stalking, stealing/throwing objects.

Brutality: attacks, struggles, fights.

Punches and injuries: bites, bruises, injuries, dislocations, fractures.

So, pushing? check. Intimidation? Check

Kind of like Brown's actions in the video? So, even without the theft, he could have been charged for assault for the actions in that video?

Color me shocked.

http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

That really was the nail in the coffin...

 d-usa wrote:


There was a couple YouTube videos this morning that appear to show Brown paying for the cigars before he left and was confronted by the clerk and then pushed him out of the way. A couple places started to talk about that and questioned the "did he steal" story and mentioned that the store didn't call 911 and that a bystander who noticed it called. That is where my "there are some stories that seem to indicate..." came from.

I haven't seen anything else to back that up since then.

I've only seen amateur video analysts trying to make money out of pixels so far. Given the store's statement "A customer called 911, we didn't in this case--please don't loot/burn our store, we would like to stay in business"....and the fact that Mike Brown's friend flat out stated that Mike Brown stole the cigarillos, I'm inclined to believe he did indeed steal them.

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

That guy has too many pictures of himself on his page.

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday and I paraphrased it for other people so didn't have to read it:

"I don't know what happened, but these other people that don't know what happened know less about what happened than I do so let me explain how they are wrong." -Author of that article

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday and I paraphrased it for other people so didn't have to read it:

"I don't know what happened, but these other people that don't know what happened know less about what happened than I do so let me explain how they are wrong." -Author of that article

The sad thing is he's basically right.

 Hordini wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday and I paraphrased it for other people so didn't have to read it:

"I don't know what happened, but these other people that don't know what happened know less about what happened than I do so let me explain how they are wrong." -Author of that article

The sad thing is he's basically right.

Unless, of course, it's acceptable to people to see a tiny old man grabbed by the collar and shoved around by someone, let alone a person the size of a mountain.

One thing I am wondering about, though is how it is that they couldn't tell by entry and exit wounds if the hands were raised or not.

Pushing + Physical intimidation + theft makes you a violent criminal. You seem to see those three things and leave it at "He just pushed him"

his action was battery. It gives indication that, when stopped, his response would be extremely aggressive.

Sounds like a good shoot.

Protip. Don't fight with cops. Don't die.

Edit: since I've been suspended once for saying the rioters should be shot I'll just say, the rioters should be dealt with, with all means necessary. Time to end this.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

notice how no one has found that clerk and talked to him? or how he didn't call the police after the incident? or how the huffington post pulled its "story" about witnesses confirming the police's story?

There's a lot of things with this that doesn't add up

 Grundz wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

notice how no one has found that clerk and talked to him? or how he didn't call the police after the incident? or how the huffington post pulled its "story" about witnesses confirming the police's story?

There's a lot of things with this that doesn't add up

Considering what's going on, it's no wonder the clerk isn't talking. He probably doesn't have that strong of a death wish.

 Grundz wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Yup, everybody I know has shoved a store clerk before intimidating him with my stature and leaving with an item I didn't paid for.

notice how no one has found that clerk and talked to him? or how he didn't call the police after the incident? or how the huffington post pulled its "story" about witnesses confirming the police's story?

There's a lot of things with this that doesn't add up

Hey, that clerk is probably terrified right now. If he says anything bad or casts Michael Brown in an unfavourable light, the store will almost certainly be looted/burnt down, if it hasn't already happened. And maybe he didn't call the police because a customer did that for him? No point in making duplicate calls as far as I'm aware.

 Hordini wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday and I paraphrased it for other people so didn't have to read it:

"I don't know what happened, but these other people that don't know what happened know less about what happened than I do so let me explain how they are wrong." -Author of that article

The sad thing is he's basically right.

Except he isn't. He's no different than the people he's claiming are so wrong.

I've read plenty of other stuff by this guy and all the same tripe; smug intellectual dishonesty masquerading as moral righteousness.

Relapse wrote:
Unless, of course, it's acceptable to people to see a tiny old man grabbed by the collar and shoved around by someone, let alone a person the size of a mountain.

Please show me where anyone said this was even remotely acceptable.

Until then, enjoy this:

One thing I am wondering about, though is how it is that they couldn't tell by entry and exit wounds if the hands were raised or not.

We discussed this a length a couple of pages ago.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

ATXMILEY wrote:
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/08/18/dont-know-happened-michael-brown-stop-pretending/

Pro Michael Brown protesters OWNED BIATCH(/Sarcasm)

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook yesterday and I paraphrased it for other people so didn't have to read it:

"I don't know what happened, but these other people that don't know what happened know less about what happened than I do so let me explain how they are wrong." -Author of that article

The sad thing is he's basically right.

Except he isn't. He's no different than the people he's claiming are so wrong.

I've read plenty of other stuff by this guy and all the same tripe; smug intellectual dishonesty masquerading as moral righteousness.

Relapse wrote:
Unless, of course, it's acceptable to people to see a tiny old man grabbed by the collar and shoved around by someone, let alone a person the size of a mountain.

Please show me where anyone said this was even remotely acceptable.

Until then, enjoy this:

One thing I am wondering about, though is how it is that they couldn't tell by entry and exit wounds if the hands were raised or not.

We discussed this a length a couple of pages ago.

Thanks for letting me know, I didn't feel like slogging through a crapload of pages hunting.

BTW, are you seriously trying to tell me that a fair number among those protestors are not trying to excuse what was done to the clerk? From what I've been reading quite a few seem to be.