...and then we have idiots like these.

I posted the same thing, worded a little differently a few posts above. It is amazing how some deny the obvious and dispute the experts if the position they support is not the one shown. Supposedly, the riots were largely caused by Brown being shot in the back, on his knees, hands in the air in full surrender. The reality doesn't seem to matter.

except that all shots were forward facing,,

and the fact that the shots were to his arm and not his torso

except the fatal one to the TOP Of this 'HUGE' 'MANs'head


the walking backwards theory is totally possible,,,lol
totally IMPROBABLT though,,,lol

lets make some distinctions

there were PROTESTS< because an unarmed male (for those who cant use the word 'teen' to describe someone 18 and just out of high school..lol)

was shot dead in the street, and then the cop was whisked away and protected from identification while the victim was displayed across the news stealing some cigarettes from a convenience store

the protests were about the HANDLING of an unarmed teen being shot dead in the street by a cop after a history of racial tension and injustice in THAT COMMUNITY,,,

the RIOTING and LOOTING (for all I know a very intentionally planned diversion) was criminal elements taking advantage of a peaceful and understandable protest,,,

I didn't say or mean he was walking backwards, excuse me I'm guessing here, he was facing the officer but refusing to comply with commands.

Why would you doubt this? Why would you doubt this more than the surrendering story?

He had just grabbed and shoved a tiny old man.

He had just brutally assaulted a uniformed officer in his squad car.

Charging an officer becomes probably at this point. What kind of person punches a uniformed officer in the face? He has already indicated he has a reckless disregard for his own safety and his life the moment he punched an officer in the face. And to whatever degree he values his life, it's looking very much like his immediate response to any kind of threat is to physically attack the threat, no matter how horrible his actions (the old man) or foolish (punching the officer). At this point he has no reason not to charge and again assault the officer.

(duplicate)

This is absolutely not true. These are not the factors which have incited such passion, which has energized so many people.

There were protests because people BELIEVED that he was shot dead simply for refusing to obey a police officer.

People BELIEVED he was totally innocent.

People believed he had NOT just physically assaulted an officer, and broken his eye socket.

People believed that it was a fact that he was kneeling, and that it was a fact that he was clearly surrendering.

People believed that it was a casual execution of a black man by a white police officer in a city where the whites have all political power and the blacks have no political power.

Many people believed that this was a 'child', a harmless innocent. They were lied to. That brutal adult is no child.

People were lied to. They believed the lies. They acted on their beliefs. These lies were a greater contributor to these protests than some concern about 'protecting the person who received death threats'.

Oh, and your last point is misleading also - the protests started before the video was shown.



Are you sure? I've seen that claim, but seen no evidence. Maybe its YET ANOTHER LIE being told about the Ferguson situation, intended to inflame peoples emotions.



I agree that criminal elements were being opportunistic. Its shameful that people leading the protests are making excuses for the looters, saying its 'an expression of anger'. That's BS. It's an expression of greed and opportunism.

But what is this talk of planned diversions? Who planned this diversion, and what is it intended to divert our attention from?

I find it more doubtful that after someone has RETREATED, after seeing UP CLOSE that there is a gun,, that they then would turn around and CHARGE after the shooting started,,


especially after already having run at an alleged 300 pounds and having weed (a pretty mellowing drug) in their system,,,,

than I do that someone would try to get away from someone with a gun and then turn and try to give up to avoid being killed,,,,

yes, I find the first scenario more doubtful,, call me crazy,,,

I wouldn't sweat the dead turd.

Ghetto hos be steady pumpin out mo rabid rats who'll take fat boys place today.

Did you watch the video of this ******* in the store?

He also 'retreated' in the store, but only after making two distinct acts of intimidation, and only after being sure he had successfully cowed the tiny old man.

If that old man had tried to stand up for himself again, it would be consistent for the aggressive 300lb man to stop 'retreating' and once again attack the old man.

His MO, demonstrated so far, is: Attack first. If successful, walk away. If not successful, then attack again - threaten, hurt, intimidate, and attack until it is safe to walk away.

You speak of making wise tactical decisions, but NOTHING this fool did that night was a wise tactical decision. While is possible he might eventually make a wise tactical decision, its possible he could surrender, its foolish to think it likely. Anyone who was so sensible and so sane to be predisposed to surrendering would NOT have punched an officer in the face to begin with. Think about that. The very act of brutalizing an officer tells you something about this persons thought process. Which act is more consistent with the mind of the person who brutally attacked an officer? The person who kneels down to surrender? Or the person who charges?

Of course, this is false dilemma, and we aren't covering all the possibilities. I'm not certain he charged. He may have just started walking slowing back, while verbally taunting, threatening. (Also justifies shooting in this case). There are other possibilities. I'm just saying hypothetically, given those two choices, its pretty obvious which one is more consistent with this guys previous behaviour and demonstrated values (including degree of valuation of his own life) and demonstrated mindset.


You bring up weed, which shows how much you want to justify your position. While weed generally mellows many people out, compared to their usual mental state, he had JUST attacked the officer. I mean, come ON, OBVIOUSLY he was not in a mellow state of mind! The fact that weed 'often' mellows 'most people' is obviously totally irrelevant to his probably actions at this point, he just DEMONSTRATED how not-mellow he was at this moment.

yep, he pushed the old man in the store,, he didn't try to kill him, and then he left

he punched the officer, and then he tried to get away

why, after actually being SHOT AT, would he charge back, after running ,,,? Makes no sense to me

there was no MO, of returning in the midst of gun fire,,lol,,,

I'm not sure what motivates you to make comments like this, but comments like these are why the anti-racist rabble-rousers are able to get so many followers. They paint a picture of white america seeing no value for the lives of black people. They tell their black followers that they need to ally themselves with their particular ideologies or agendas, because of the threat posed by white people, and white culture - and they use comments like this to justify this.

In my view, this person brought their own death on themselves by attacking that officer; I'm not crying over him. But every newborn's life is precious, including the lives of people born into poverty and into a criminal environment. And while he brought his death on himself, his death still causes pain for his friends and his family. No one can replace him for them.

wow, that was unexpected

we aren't gonna agree about this situation, but thank you for speaking up about the comments,,,

He brought to bear several orders of magnitude of threat in response to the 'threat' presented by the little old man. When he was satisfied the man was fully cowed, he stopped.



Only after his attack-first tactics were successful.



It may be that he tried to get the gun, and failed - this could be murderous intent. It seems likely that he was trying to knock the cop unconscious or render him a non-threat by brutalizing him.



Because: when he feels threatened, he attacks. Its that simple. Intentional thought has little to do with this. Sensible tactics has little to do with it. Reason, sensibility, sanity.... he just attacked a uniformed police officer! This act alone demonstrates a disregard for sensible tactics. If he was going to act with a sensible regard for his own life, he would not have attacked the officer in the first place.




I think we can all agree it would be senseless for him to charge, but it was also senseless for him to attack the officer.



There was an MO of attacking a person who was known to be armed, and one we can presume would use deadly force to protect himself. I don't spell this out each time, but this is what I mean by 'attacking a uniformed police officer'. When you do this, you are attacking someone who you KNOW is (a) armed (b) is trained to use their weapon (c) is ready to use it in self defence (d) has a trained, coordinated team of similar people available by radio (e) has state sanctions and state protections

Anyone who punches a cop in the US has shown either a death wish or a complete inability to make good tactical judgements in the moment.



Also, I do not know that he was already shot at. I'd heard that one shot was discharged during the first attack/struggle-for-the-gun, but I don't know if this is true and even if it is, an accidental discharge is not the same as "I'm being shot at right now".

It seems likely to me that all six of the wounds he suffered were from one set of gunshots, fired all together.

still doesn't make sense to me that he charges at an officer who has pulled and started to fire a gun

especially

after already having put DISTANCE between he and this same officer that he had allegedly assaulted,,,

Ms, your beyond hope.

Maybe blacks should cleanup their own behavior and actions first then maybe comments like this wouldn't be made.

But all the Wounds were in the front!
If he were running away,they'd be in his back!