Look, we all know that if Michael Brown had been white . . .

[toubab]

If some white asshole I never heard of before stole some cigars and got into a confrontation with a cop and got his ass shot and killed, does anybody on this fucking board think I would or should give a crap about it? Anybody think I would or should start a protest about it, or burn down a few buildings because of it? Fuck you, if you do.

 

[mark_j]

Oh, & since you replied to my comments, too, "mark", let me respond to yours...

Yes, I wanted an indictment. Last I checked, Brown died as a result, so murder seems like an easy (& easily-proven) charge. I know people who never went to college who could've gotten a conviction on that (myself included).

Well then, Mr. Lawyer, since the state could not come up with enough evidence to even charge him with that it seems as if this is a moot point. None of the evidence supported that charge or even a lesser one. If I recall right there were 5 other charges that could have been levied and none of them had enough supporting evidence to warrant an indictment. So now what are you going to charge the cop with? Littering?

I don't want a lynching; Too public & might take too long. I say, "Eye for an eye," let him die the same way the man he killed did...

I see, so lets just throw due process and just about every other rule of a law abiding society out the window and the next time we catch a criminal doing something illegal, we just take 'em out behind the courthouse and shoot 'em.

Also, I see nothing wrong with a little damage to community property; Heck, some cities do that when teams win a sports Title, not to mention the city's already worse by losing MB & letting this officer continue to "roam free" (& probably keep his job).

But it WASN'T community property. It was private businesses and such. Further what gives you the right to destroy it anyway, community or not? As far as the sports team analogy, when the Hawks won the SB and the fan celebration got a little out of hand and damaged some city property the fans also set up a fund to accept donations to pay for the repairs. And as I recall they more than made up for any damages.

 

[mark_j]

If some white asshole I never heard of before stole some cigars and got into a confrontation with a cop and got his ass shot and killed, does anybody on this fucking board think I would or should give a crap about it? Anybody think I would or should start a protest about it, or burn down a few buildings because of it? Fuck you, if you do.

It wouldn't have gotten more than a half paragraph in the local news if that. That is the real tragedy. No one would have given a shit, given those circumstances.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101:

I don't see what this has to do with the case in point, because the latter happened in MO and involved persons not in the military service.

Exactly what I was saying... But last I knew, MO was a state (relatives lived there decades ago), & all involved were citizens. That means in the US States, they have to follow federal laws, & (I believe) that Congress, Presidents, etc. can choose to punish them for breaking laws at any level (federal, state. etc.). You said Obama has/had no power, & I refute(d) that.

You didn't refute anything; all you did was to repeat the same erroneous statement using slightly different words. As the president, Obama has no authority to enforce state laws, or to pardon those convicted under them. Murder under the circumstances of this case would have been a state crime. The gov. of MO has that authority, but he has none regarding federal laws, even involving crimes committed in MO. The two systems are parallel.

Not only did they consider more, but different. (As you said, plenty of bogus claims.).. Which means we don't know the amount or content of what they considered. Yet there you go again, listing things like you're sure they considered those things (& perhaps only those), not to mention "eyewitnesses" (who were almost-surely not "disinterested")... Anyway, the jury finally announced their opinion was there was no probable cause. (I likewise refuse to believe all of them actually felt that way, or that such would be the case to even any dozen who saw & heard the exact same evidence they did.)

If you want to know more about those bogus claims, you can look them up. Google is our friend. Since you and I know very little about the evidence presented and the Grand Jury knows very much, I prefer to let them interpret it and make the decision to indict or not.

Oh, & since you replied to my comments, too, "mark", let me respond to yours...

Yes, I wanted an indictment. Last I checked, Brown died as a result, so murder seems like an easy (& easily-proven) charge. I know people who never went to college who could've gotten a conviction on that (myself included).

I don't want a lynching; Too public & might take too long. I say, "Eye for an eye," let him die the same way the man he killed did... Also, I see nothing wrong with a little damage to community property; Heck, some cities do that when teams win a sports Title, not to mention the city's already worse by losing MB & letting this officer continue to "roam free" (& probably keep his job).

There is no doubt that MB was shot by Wilson but there is also such a thing as justifiable homicide and the Grand Jury looked at and heard all the evidence and decided this was one of those cases.

Do you really think the city of Ferguson is worse off for losing MB? I don't. I think the world is a better place without him and I would say the same thing about any thug of any race or gender.

 

[ElleryQueen]

More than the side of that LIVING, free man.

Should you represent all Brown supporters, that would not be even remotely true.

Nor does it disprove it. Wilson still gets to live, so call it a tie when he gets to live the rest of that life behind bars.

It's called the burden of proof. If you want to suggest that the incident is racially motivated, then the burden lies on you.

Very familiar with the phrase, but also familiar that it has no place in this situation/case.

I asked very clearly:

Are you insisting he wouldn't have asked two white boys to get out of the street? Do you believe a racist is capable of ignoring the safety of "one of his own"?

It was asked in response to the insistence that this issue is racially motivated. So yeah, how he would treat "one of his own" has everything to do with this matter. Most racist believe in the unity of their race, that all its members should stick together. For Wilson to turn his back on the safety of two white boys in the street is a failure both as a racist and a police officer. Therefore, ignoring would suggest tunnel vision more than racism.

Two weeks before this happened, doubt any friends of Wilson could've expected/said he was the type of guy to kill anyone in this situation, regardless of their race.

Way to shoot yourself in the foot. This is an admission that there's no reason to suggest a racial motivation behind the stop.

The only thing we can do now is not be surprised when he does it a second time; He should lose that chance by being limited to inside some building, be it a jail, his house, etc.

By your admission, there's no proof he did anything wrong. Yet you would punish him for it.

Shoe-tying. Seriously, gun-holstering: How you keep this mistake (Wilson's) from happening in the first place.

Just when I thought your posts couldn't get any more foolish.

In the legal world, bootstrapping has two definitions. In this case, the applicable definition is circular logic. You wish to say that the shooting of Michael Brown is racially motivated so that you can prove the shooting of Michael Brown is racially motivated.

Current, & related.

Related how?

Then, you quote a lot of what I said, followed by more of what I said outside the quote-box, but no response... Perhaps your way of admitting you agree with it.

Look at it again. You'll see no absence of a close, as well as no signs of editing. Learn to read.

Besides that, it's there to be used as a contrast to the following quote.

Actually, no double-standard. That was a statement of my understanding of the law (stated that way, beginning with the admittance it was not certainly the law, but what "I think" it to be).

And since you clearly don't get it, you claim that it's okay for someone to shoot Wilson in cold blood and receive no jail time, yet simultaneously admit that such an act is murder and that he should go to jail. That's a double standard.

As for ignorance of the law, that may be true, but the same was shown by the jury's failure to indict

For the jury to indict, the prosecution would have to show one the following:

Wilson only stopped Brown and Johnson because of their race.
Brown did not reach for Wilson's gun during the struggle in the cruiser, or gave Wilson reason to believe he had.
Wilson fired on Brown after he put his hands up in surrender or yelled a surrender.

By your admission, there is no evidence that this was racially motivated. The county and independent autopsies confirm that Brown's hand was, at the very least, near Wilson's gun when it discharged in the cruiser, providing Wilson reason to believe Brown was reaching for it. These autopsies also reveal that Brown could not have put his hands up in a surrender position, a detail supported by at least seven grand jury witnesses. The eyewitnesses played during the news calls - the ones who said Brown put his hands up in surrender - all agree that he did not orally express surrender.

There is no proof Wilson did anything wrong. At the worst, everything following Brown's punches was a justifiable misunderstanding: Brown's hand was blocked and landed in near Wilson's firearm and Brown staggered towards Wilson after getting shot, which becomes reaching for a handgun and charging Wilson when we factor in the stress of the situation and Wilson's disoriented state of mind after receiving strikes to the head.

as well as the fact that Obama's reacting speech (which I watched every second of) didn't include what I believe to be his right to use his legal power to overrule them & indict, among (perhaps) other things.

I'll defer to BoxLicker101, since he did a splendid job of explaining how much you got wrong.

I did... Same way I stopped drinking and smoking: Never started.

The first step is always denial.

 

[Wrong Element]

The only people receiving my sympathy is Wilson and his family, but predominantly the man himself. They've all been put through hell because people made him into a monster for doing his job correctly, and his own colleagues, who he must ask to watch his back when he's on the streets, didn't believe in him. I really hope his family stood by him.

Holy shit. In lieu of "Happy Thanksgiving," I hope you kill yourself without delay. What a moral zero.

 

[KingOrfeo]

#CrimingWhileWhite.

 

[Balladeer08]

I don't see anyone who has gotten the correct, game show answer to the title of this thread.

IF MICHAEL BROWN HAD BEEN WHITE......






He would have been Michael White.


That wasn't so difficult, was it? 8)

 

[KingOrfeo]

It is very important to keep this in mind.

 

[KingOrfeo]

If some white asshole I never heard of before stole some cigars and got into a confrontation with a cop and got his ass shot and killed, does anybody on this fucking board think I would or should give a crap about it?

You wouldn't, but you should.

 

[Kitty]

I don't see anyone who has gotten the correct, game show answer to the title of this thread.

IF MICHAEL BROWN HAD BEEN WHITE......






He would have been Michael White.


That wasn't so difficult, was it? 8)

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/images/smilies/indiff.gif

 

[NYC_Man]

I don't see anyone who has gotten the correct, game show answer to the title of this thread.

IF MICHAEL BROWN HAD BEEN WHITE......






He would have been Michael White.


That wasn't so difficult, was it? 8)

http://www.kboing.com.br/fotos/imagens/49d0b78359ac2.jpg

 

[Skiddles2014]

Should you represent all Brown supporters, that would not be even remotely true.



It's called the burden of proof. If you want to suggest that the incident is racially motivated, then the burden lies on you.



I asked very clearly:



It was asked in response to the insistence that this issue is racially motivated. So yeah, how he would treat "one of his own" has everything to do with this matter. Most racist believe in the unity of their race, that all its members should stick together. For Wilson to turn his back on the safety of two white boys in the street is a failure both as a racist and a police officer. Therefore, ignoring would suggest tunnel vision more than racism.



Way to shoot yourself in the foot. This is an admission that there's no reason to suggest a racial motivation behind the stop.



By your admission, there's no proof he did anything wrong. Yet you would punish him for it.



Just when I thought your posts couldn't get any more foolish.

In the legal world, bootstrapping has two definitions. In this case, the applicable definition is circular logic. You wish to say that the shooting of Michael Brown is racially motivated so that you can prove the shooting of Michael Brown is racially motivated.



Related how?



Look at it again. You'll see no absence of a close, as well as no signs of editing. Learn to read.

Besides that, it's there to be used as a contrast to the following quote.



And since you clearly don't get it, you claim that it's okay for someone to shoot Wilson in cold blood and receive no jail time, yet simultaneously admit that such an act is murder and that he should go to jail. That's a double standard.



For the jury to indict, the prosecution would have to show one the following:

Wilson only stopped Brown and Johnson because of their race.
Brown did not reach for Wilson's gun during the struggle in the cruiser, or gave Wilson reason to believe he had.
Wilson fired on Brown after he put his hands up in surrender or yelled a surrender.

By your admission, there is no evidence that this was racially motivated. The county and independent autopsies confirm that Brown's hand was, at the very least, near Wilson's gun when it discharged in the cruiser, providing Wilson reason to believe Brown was reaching for it. These autopsies also reveal that Brown could not have put his hands up in a surrender position, a detail supported by at least seven grand jury witnesses. The eyewitnesses played during the news calls - the ones who said Brown put his hands up in surrender - all agree that he did not orally express surrender.

There is no proof Wilson did anything wrong. At the worst, everything following Brown's punches was a justifiable misunderstanding: Brown's hand was blocked and landed in near Wilson's firearm and Brown staggered towards Wilson after getting shot, which becomes reaching for a handgun and charging Wilson when we factor in the stress of the situation and Wilson's disoriented state of mind after receiving strikes to the head.



I'll defer to BoxLicker101, since he did a splendid job of explaining how much you got wrong.



The first step is always denial.

Well you sure are an ignorant cunt, aren't you?

 

[NYC_Man]

. . . and were the exact same size, and had done the exact same things, he probably would be alive today; and if he were not alive, Darren Wilson certainly would be facing an indictment today.

fuck you


Michael was asking for it
If any other person was in his place (regardless the race) it would have still ended the same way. If some low life decides to bully a clerk and takes stuff without paying, gets into a confrontation with a police officer and on top of that try to get his gun then that person is asking to get shot.

His parents portrayed Michael as an angel, they claim they taught him good manners, how to act around cops..etc. Well a good mannered angel doesn't go to some guys store, bully him and take his food away If you want something then work for it, or be a window shopper, not a robber.

If they had some dignity they would have apologized to the clerk about their son's action. Nobody deserves to die over a pack of cigarettes but don't make stupid decisions when confronting a cop


Btw, did you hear about the white 20 year old boy that got shot by a black officer in Utah? The white 20 year old was unharmed. Where were this so called civil right leaders or the media for that matter, or Erid Holder, or Obama

 

[KingOrfeo]

If some low life decides to bully a clerk and takes stuff without paying, gets into a confrontation with a police officer . . .

You do realize those two events were unconnected? Wilson did not know Brown had swiped some cigars from a convenience store.

 

[NYC_Man]

You do realize those two events were unconnected? Wilson did not know Brown had swiped some cigars from a convenience store.

lets have it your way then

Do you know the purpose of a sidewalk?


Cop tells you to walk the side walk and not where cars are supposed to be then you do that
Am i right or am i right?

 

[KingOrfeo]

lets have it your way then

Do you know the purpose of a side walk?


Cop tells you to walk the side walk and not where cars are supposed to be then you do that
Am i right or am i right?

Yes, you should do that. But not doing it should never get you shot, no matter how big an asshole you're being.

 

[Kitty]

lets have it your way then

Do you know the purpose of a side walk?

lol he was J walking and it got the cop's attention, yes, yes, yes. As much as it sucks to say, I am very tough love. And we all must take accountability, even for the worst and smallest things. Because the smallest things can result in the worst. Hence, this: guy dead after stealing stupid cigarettes while having the nerve to J walk and not having a getaway car lol

HOWEVER...he still didn't need to get shot.

 

[NYC_Man]

lol he was J walking and it got the cop's attention, yes, yes, yes. As much as it sucks to say, I am very tough love. And we all must take accountability, even for the worst and smallest things. Because the smallest things can result in the worst. Hence, this: guy dead after stealing stupid cigarettes while having the nerve to J walk and not having a getaway car lol

HOWEVER...he still didn't need to get shot.

The situation is so simple, you are told to use the sidewalk, you use the side walk
You want to make things harder, sure go ahead but dont complain then when you get into a fight with the police and your ass gets shot

 

[RobDownSouth]

The situation is so derp, you are told to derp the sidewalk, you derp the side walk
You derp to derp things derpier, sure go ahead but dont derp then when you derp into a derp with the police and your derp gets derp :rolleyes:

Oh boy, another derptard who feels cops should function as judge, jury, and executioner.

Immediate ignore.

 

[NYC_Man]

Oh boy, another derptard who feels cops should function as judge, jury, and executioner.

Immediate ignore.

I didn't say that

sure go ahead, like i care

 

[unregistered]

 

[Balladeer08]

Back to the OP, if Michael Brown were white, he'd be dead too.

I'll disagree.

If Michael Brown had been white, he probably wouldn't have been living in that neighborhood. You can't just change the skin color without changing everything. He'd have had different parents. He'd have been raised differently. Lots of little changes, making it unlikely to add up to the same outcome.

Which is what makes this thread so silly to me.

To me, the title translates to "If things were different, they wouldn't be the same".

Well, duh.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Kitty]

I'll disagree.

If Michael Brown had been white, he probably wouldn't have been living in that neighborhood. You can't just change the skin color without changing everything. He'd have had different parents. He'd have been raised differently. Lots of little changes, making it unlikely to add up to the same outcome.

Which is what makes this thread so silly to me.

To me, the title translates to "If things were different, they wouldn't be the same".

Well, duh.

You lost me at bold. It's true. You have to reconsider the characteristics if you reconsider the race to reconsider the situation. BUT how would he have been "raised differently?" That is a loaded statement.

Let's start with, different from..what?
And then, what would be so different? Do you know the white household? Or are you just referring to TV? I can tell you without fucking blinking, it's no different. White chicks get knocked up as kids, too. White boys do drugs too. Thug and fight, too. In fact, by the age 23 over 30% of them will be locked up, and over 40% for blacks. It's not very different. I'm sick of your fairy-tale mentality. >.<

The DIFFERENCE is, white men like Michael Brown (yes, they exist: the petty shoplifters who do drugs, mhmmmm) get charged and prosecuted AT STATE LEVEL for the SAME THINGS black men get prosecuted for at FEDERAL LEVEL.

Stop pretending it would have been the same. Cops are MUCH more patient with their own kind, no matter the kind.