Michael Brown Case

[dogman6126]

You're a smart guy but there's more to the human brain than the left hemisphere and hopefully in time you'll tap that side of your brain and see beyond the walls of academia

Dude, your assuming something about me that you don't know about. You say that I'm hanging far to heavy on academia and logic instead of...what? Emotion? Seriously? I've literally been told by some of the people that I debate with on a personal level that one bias I have is I tend to romanticize humanity in my considerations as well as applying to much value to emotional considerations. But that was suggested by a hard utilitarian, so not exactly an unbiased perspective . However it does demonstrate your assumption as opposed to actually considering me and my argumentations.

 

[muir]

Dude, your assuming something about me that you don't know about. You say that I'm hanging far to heavy on academia and logic instead of...what? Emotion? Seriously? I've literally been told by some of the people that I debate with on a personal level that one bias I have is I tend to romanticize humanity in my considerations as well as applying to much value to emotional considerations. But that was suggested by a hard utilitarian, so not exactly an unbiased perspective . However it does demonstrate your assumption as opposed to actually considering me and my argumentations.

This is the problem i think you are having...

Because you are young and have a lot to learn you don't yet know how little you know

So you think people who know more than you are 'assuming' things that they know when in fact they know them; just because you do not know does not mean they do not know

Also instead of asking in a more humble way about something like what the alternative is to academia and logic you instead aggressively and arrogantly mock that which you don't yet even have any conception of

This is what is known as the 'arrogance of youth' and you have it in spades; but the graveyards, real or metaphorical, are full of the graves of arrogant youths

 

[dogman6126]

This is the problem i think you are having...

Because you are young and have a lot to learn you don't yet know how little you know

So you think people who know more than you are 'assuming' things that they know when in fact they know them; just because you do not know does not mean they do not know

Also instead of asking in a more humble way about something like what the alternative is to academia and logic you instead aggressively and arrogantly mock that which you don't yet even have any conception of

This is what is known as the 'arrogance of youth' and you have it in spades; but the graveyards, real or metaphorical, are full of the graves of arrogant youths

You see, that argument might have been valid if you hadn't said an alternative to logic. That implies that your saying that it's better to be illogical than logical. I'd really like to see who thinks that's a good rule of thumb besides you, lol. Also it would have been more effective if you had actually come up with a counter argument to what I said earlier.

I think your bringing this up as a way to discredit me because you can't come up with a counter argument to your logical fallacy that I pointed out earlier. Which is a really low and immature blow for you to attempt. Really its shameful on your part to assume someone doesn't know simply because they are young.

 

[cvp12gh5]

We're not really talking about michael brown...

People are killed by the cops all the time but their stories don't receive this attention; this story is receiving attention because it is the spark that has ignited a tinder box that was waiting to go up

The tinderbox is public frustrations at police brutality and the spark has ignited in the black community who are often subject to police brutality

Micheal's story is just one in many

Regardless of the specifics of his case it is igniting tensions that were getting ready to light up anyway because the police are being militarised and are increasingly brutalising the public

Why do you think it's receiving so much attention? Do you think the coverage of this case works for or against the militarization of police? What type of judgements do you think are being formed by viewers?

 

[muir]

Why do you think it's receiving so much attention? Do you think the coverage of this case works for or against the militarization of police? What type of judgements do you think are being formed by viewers?

First of all i think even the mainstream journalists are now becoming very conscious of how oppressive the powers that be are becoming; things that were considered 'conspiracy theory' a few years back are now being openly reported in the mainstream news which is fantastic progress

I think that how the state will try and spin the situation is exactly how Lark said above; lark has expressed his own statist, pro-fabian sentiments.

The state will try and appeal to the middle class and say that the militarised police are needed to protect them from the poor black horde

But this is nonsense as many of the protests in recent years have been carried out by the middle class

So clearly both the middle class and the working class are both getting shafted and it's really time for them to join together and challenge the top echelons of society

So how the public will perceive things depends on to what extent they are aware of the wider situation

So people are still completely brainwashed and believe everything their government and the 6 o'clock news tells them; those people will drink the kool aid that a militarised police is required for 'national security' but those who have now realsied the government is upto no good and lies compulsively are now very concerned that the balance of power between peopela nd government is tipping dangerously away from the people especially with recent revelations of the extent of government surveillance of its on people as well as worrying changes in law such as the NDAA

Here's a clip discussing how the Obama regime is now saying the founding fathers were 'extremists'

basically they are tellig their police and militray that any people who challenge the government are 'extremists' but that's nonsense because the whole spirit of american democracy is that if a government becomes tyrannical the people have a right to overthrow it

[video=youtube;BpdrgYEinaE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpdrgYEinaE[/video]

 

[Eventhorizon]

Why do you think it's receiving so much attention? Do you think the coverage of this case works for or against the militarization of police? What type of judgements do you think are being formed by viewers?

I think this is again dividing the country. If no one believes there can be a real and factual investigation isnt it this that is really the problem?

Had this been a white person, would the nation be talking about it? Lets take look back at OJ Simpson. Did people riot even knowi g that clearly he had committed murder? Had a black police officer shot Brown would we be talking about this?

Federally mandated video camera's on all police officers. Lets end this.

 

[cvp12gh5]

First of all i think even the mainstream journalists are now becoming very conscious of how oppressive the powers that be are becoming; things that were considered 'conspiracy theory' a few years back are now being openly reported in the mainstream news which is fantastic progress

Yes, but doesn't this statement go against your theory of the corporate elite controlling mainstream media? If they did control the media then this wouldn't be possible, would it?

The state will try and appeal to the middle class and say that the militarised police are needed to protect them from the poor black horde

State equals government, which you believe is controlled by the elite mentioned above. I have been watching the reporting being done on the militarization of the police force in Ferguson and the majority (if not all) of it has been negative. If the elite are pushing for m.o.p. and they control the media, then why would they let such reporting go on?

But is nonsense as many of the protests in recent years have been carried out by the middle class

And they use swat teams.

SWAT Team Deployed at New Hampshire Pumpkin Festival RIOT | Truth Revolt
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/swat-team-deployed-new-hampshire-pumpkin-festival-riot

So how the public will perceive things depends on to what extent they are aware of the wider situation

Unfortunately, I think there are people that will perceive this specific situation based on how they feel about the African American community. It turns it into a race issue. Even though I believe it has nothing to do with race.

So people are still completely brainwashed and believe everything their government and the 6 o'clock news tells them; those people will drink the kool aid that a militarised police is required for 'national security' but those who have now realsied the government is upto no good and lies compulsively are now very concerned that the balance of power between peopela nd government is tipping dangerously away from the people especially with recent revelations of the extent of government surveillance of its on people as well as worrying changes in law such as the NDAA

I see nothing wrong with SWAT teams. I think they are at times necessary. My concern is more with how law enforcement is carelessly using them. They are meant for high risk situations (which I believe was warranted in Ferguson and the pumpkin festival) but are being used in situations that do not warrant their presence, or situations where their "mission/raid" was carried out incorrectly (example: raiding the wrong home) and as a result, causing harm to innocent people. Top of the line planning and 100% accuracy (on location of suspect) should be paramount. It doesn't seem to be happening and this needs to be looked into. Something needs to change in that regard.

But I do feel that this type of organization attracts a certain personality, that is why mental and emotional evaluations should be the number one consideration when evaluating each candidate. An investigation should be conducted on each individual. Detailed past histories, concentrating on any type of violence or aggression they might have been exhibited at any point in their life. If they neglect to implement these type of requirements , they are opening the door to a handful of psychotics that are less interested in legal tactics and more interested in fulfilling their fantasy of killing someone with a big boy gun and getting away with it.

Edit: I think I read somewhere that congress was trying to pass a swat transparency law that would require swat teams to supply detailed reports on when and why they are deployed, weapons used, people hurt, mistakes, successes; every minute detail. These reports would need to be supplied every six months if the law is passed. We'll see what happens.

 

[cvp12gh5]

Federally mandated video camera's on all police officers. Lets end this.

Yes. And any good cop out there would agree.

 

[muir]

Yes, but doesn't this statement go against your theory of the corporate elite controlling mainstream media? If they did control the media then this wouldn't be possible, would it?

Their control is strongest at the top of the pryamid and weakest at the bottom

Then of course there is the fact that the marxists want us to become dissolusioned with the curreny system so that wer then reject it in favour of what they will suddenly present us with when the global economy hits a brick wall (coming soon)

State equals government, which you believe is controlled by the elite mentioned above. I have been watching the reporting being done on the militarization of the police force in Ferguson and the majority (if not all) of it has been negative. If the elite are pushing for m.o.p. and they control the media, then why would they let such reporting go on?

They want to create a strong sense that everything is failing under capitalism so that when the global economy hits the next crisis (very soon) they will then say to people: ''look at how capitalism has failed...what we need now is a state-socialist marxist planned econoym that we will control...now just sit back and let us run things''

And they use swat teams.

SWAT Team Deployed at New Hampshire Pumpkin Festival RIOT | Truth Revolt
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/swat-team-deployed-new-hampshire-pumpkin-festival-riot

Yeah because the marxist el-ite want to destroy the middle class

Unfortunately, I think there are people that will perceive this specific situation based on how they feel about the African American community. It turns it into a race issue. Even though I believe it has nothing to do with race.

No its much wider then race which is why there are people of all backgrounds protesting around the world in various ways

People getting caught up in race issues are only seeing reality very narrowly

I see nothing wrong with SWAT teams. I think they are at times necessary. My concern is more with how law enforcement is carelessly using them. They are meant for high risk situations (which I believe was warranted in Ferguson and the pumpkin festival) but are being used in situations that do not warrant their presence, or situations where their "mission/raid" was carried out incorrectly (example: raiding the wrong home) and as a result, causing harm to innocent people. Top of the line planning and 100% accuracy (on location of suspect) should be paramount. It doesn't seem to be happening and this needs to be looked into. Something needs to change in that regard.

Its doing two things

Firstly it is getting the public used to being brutalised by the authorities

Secondly it is getting the SWAT teams used to buitalising the public

This is all preparation for when the global economy hits the skids

But I do feel that this type of organization attracts a certain personality, that is why mental and emotional evaluations should be the number one consideration when evaluating each candidate. An investigation should be conducted on each individual. Detailed past histories, concentrating on any type of violence or aggression they might have been exhibited at any point in their life. If they neglect to implement these type of requirements , they are opening the door to a handful of psychotics that are less interested in legal tactics and more interested in fulfilling their fantasy of killing someone with a big boy gun and getting away with it.

You don't seem to understand....they WANT psychotic bullies

They want people who they can use to bully and disarm the public in the event of a crisis (like an economic collapse)

Edit: I think I read somewhere that congress was trying to pass a swat transparency law that would require swat teams to supply detailed reports on when and why they are deployed, weapons used, people hurt, mistakes, successes; every minute detail. These reports would need to be supplied every six months if the law is passed. We'll see what happens.

There will be global events within the next six months that will sweep all that out the way

 

[muir]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/...ops-into-occupying-armies-and-were-the-enemy/

Police expert: War on terror has turned our cops into occupying armies — and we’re the enemy

Travis Gettys
14 Nov 2014 at 11:45 ET

The war on terror has essentially turned police into occupying armies in some American communities, said a police and criminology expert. Thomas Nolan, an associate professor of criminology at Merrimack College and former senior policy analyst with the Department of Homeland Security, said the focus of police work had shifted greatly since he was a Boston police officer in the 1980s and 1990s.
“I remember it being drilled into me as a police officer, as a sergeant and then as a lieutenant: partnership, problem-solving, and prevention – the three Ps,” Nolan said Wednesday during a panel sponsored by the American Constitution Society.

He said police were heavily trained to form alliances to help them to better serve and protect communities, and he said those relationships clearly don’t exist in Ferguson, Missouri.
While the war on drugs is frequently cited as a major factor in the breakdown of civil liberties and police-community relations, Nolan said a more recent shift was largely to blame.
“In the early 2000s, particularly after 9/11, we saw a paradigm shift from community policing and problem-oriented principles to the war on terror, and we became Homeland Security police,” said Nolan, who has worked in the federal agency’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.
He said this shift toward “homeland security” had quickly destroyed the relationships police had worked nearly two decades to build.
“I think what has happened as a direct result of that, is that those relationships that we forged, and worked so hard to attain and to maintain in the late 1980s and early 1990s, began to erode because the police were seen, particularly in communities of color, as an army of occupation,” Nolan said.
“If you dress police officers up as soldiers and you put them in military vehicles and you give them military weapons, they adopt a warrior mentality,” he continued. “We fight wars against enemies, and the enemies are the people who live in our cities – particularly in communities of color.”
At the same time domestic police began to focus on homeland security, the Department of Defense began selling surplus military weapons and gear to American police departments without much public debate.
“We weren’t included in the discussion, we didn’t know anything about it, and I think Ferguson has brought that into the glare of the public spotlight,” Nolan said.
The 27-year police veteran said officers make him feel unsafe when he walks around his own diverse neighborhood in Boston.
“I see the police conducting themselves in a highly militaristic fashion on routine patrol activities — and I know that’s what they’re doing because I come from that world,” Nolan said. “What I experience and what people on the street experience is a palpable, tangible sense of fear, and that is that we are unsafe if police need semiautomatic rifles to protect us and to keep us safe.”
He said Americans have found themselves in danger from their own police officers because they did not object to previous abuses – and he said the police response to the Boston Marathon bombing proves the situation can only get worse.
“What we saw in that aftermath was the unilateral suspension of the United States Constitution, and particularly the Fourth Amendment,” Nolan said.

“We saw for the first time that I can recall in the United States of America house-to-house searches,” he continued, “and what I said to some colleagues of mine, who work in the news media, that when we fail to object to what’s going on now, and we did, we forfeited our right to do so in the future — and we have.”
Watch this video excerpt of Nolan’s remarks posted online by American Constitution Society:

<em>[video=youtube;ijdMvM8FwXY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijdMvM8FwXY[/video]

 

[Eventhorizon]

Ok so its over. I do not like the parents statement though. Your son was not the good little boy you tried to bs the media into believing and you know it. If you really care anything about the system you would keep your mouths shut.

 

[sassafras]

Police officer walks after shooting an unarmed teenager six times. The saddest thing is, I wasn't expecting anything different.

I'm usually all about peace, but i'm glad people aren't taking this sitting down. People have had enough.

At the same time, I see this chaos very clearly as an excuse to give the police even more power.

 

[Eventhorizon]

As a note when a police officer shoots someone, the intent isnt to disable them. The officer said he feared for his life as Brown hit him in the face several times while in his car. The officer went for his gun and it was discharged in his car. This is likely what prompted Brown to rethink his plan and he left. The officer exited the car, told Brown to stop and get on the ground. Brown turned and advanced on the officer. He was told to stop and get on the ground, he did the opposite. Brown is dead because of Browns actions.
End story.
With exception of the uncivilized people in Ferguson who think the answer is to steal and destroy. With exception of news stations like CNN who are deliberately inflaming the situation.

I fing hate this planet sometimes.

 

[dogman6126]

Police officer walks after shooting an unarmed teenager six times. The saddest thing is, I wasn't expecting anything different.

I'm usually all about peace, but i'm glad people aren't taking this sitting down. People have had enough.

At the same time, I see this chaos very clearly as an excuse to give the police even more power.

You must not have watched the broadcast. They explained the evidence. I can tell you didn't watch that part because they explain he was shot at 12 times, not 6. You should hear the story of what happened. Maybe that will change your mind.

 

[sassafras]

You must not have watched the broadcast. They explained the evidence. I can tell you didn't watch that part because they explain he was shot at 12 times, not 6. You should hear the story of what happened. Maybe that will change your mind.

I have watched the broadcast. You have misjudged my meaning. 12 shots were fired, but he was not shot 12 times. I have seen the injuries the officer has sustained. I know the laws that protect police officers in cases like this. It has not changed my mind.

 

[dogman6126]

I have watched the broadcast. I have seen the injuries the officer has sustained. It has not changed my mind.

What about how the kid charged the officer at the end? They found his bloodlike 25 feet behind where the kid stopped and I don't think it was splatter. Only way tocover that distance inso short of time is to charge. All shoots where when Brown was facing the officer. The kid had already punched the officer in the car. What do you think he was gonna do if he covered that distance to the officer? Probably tackle the officer, so the outcome would have either been the same or a dead officer instead. Yes it's very sad that this kid died, but if he wouldn't have stolen and then wouldn't have tried to fight a police officer over a gun, and then didn't turn to charge the officer again, then he wouldn't have died. He had many chances to prevent this. No one should blame the officer for self defense

 

[cvp12gh5]

As a note when a police officer shoots someone, the intent isnt to disable them. The officer said he feared for his life as Brown hit him in the face several times while in his car. The officer went for his gun and it was discharged in his car. This is likely what prompted Brown to rethink his plan and he left. The officer exited the car, told Brown to stop and get on the ground. Brown turned and advanced on the officer. He was told to stop and get on the ground, he did the opposite. Brown is dead because of Browns actions.
End story.
With exception of the uncivilized people in Ferguson who think the answer is to steal and destroy. With exception of news stations like CNN who are deliberately inflaming the situation.

I fing hate this planet sometimes.

If I committed strong armed robbery, punched a cop in the face a couple of times and then tried to take his gun, I would be surprised if I wasn't shot. People are only considering the end result instead of looking at the sequence of events that lead up to the final outcome.

Don't do illegal shit. Don't punch an officer and try to take his gun. Don't get shot. How difficult is that to understand?

 

[SpecialEdition]

The thing I am thinking of now is that the guy who was robbed by this Michael Brown has now had his store torn to shit and looted.
It's fucking chaos down there.

There are a lot of emotional reactions rolling around but Jesus Christ people DO love an excuse to get out of control and other people love to watch it.

 

[SpecialEdition]

I mean look at this poor guy. His place is torn to shit when he already had to endure a robbery. Now people are rioting and causing MORE damage than the guy who fucked up in his own actions and got shot. This is the result!

People are fucking animals. Play the race card all you want but don't be a fucking scum bag and expect to be treated like anything other than a scum bag, unless you get other scum bags rising up to cause a shit ton more damage that will overshadow what happened in the first place.

I'm actually disgusted.

 

[sassafras]

What about how the kid charged the officer at the end? They found his bloodlike 25 feet behind where the kid stopped and I don't think it was splatter. Only way tocover that distance inso short of time is to charge. All shoots where when Brown was facing the officer. The kid had already punched the officer in the car. What do you think he was gonna do if he covered that distance to the officer? Probably tackle the officer, so the outcome would have either been the same or a dead officer instead. Yes it's very sad that this kid died, but if he wouldn't have stolen and then wouldn't have tried to fight a police officer over a gun, and then didn't turn to charge the officer again, then he wouldn't have died. He had many chances to prevent this. No one should blame the officer for self defense

I do not deny that Brown's actions contributed to this situation. I do not think he is innocent. The problem I have and what I have always had is that police officers are trained to kill and can expect the institution clean up any snafus rather than do everything in their power to diffuse the matter with non-lethal force. The laws that protect officers are tilted too much in their favour. It takes very little for an officer, who is a trained soldier of the law, to cite self defence whereas an untrained civilian in the exact same situation is expected to exhaust every avenue under duress.

The problem is, these riots are only going to give more power to the police if the chaos gets so out of control that they need to take actual military action to reign it all in.