so,you still believe the Police is about to "Serve And Protect"?
Maybe,but not the Man on the Street!

They are there to enforce the Law enacted by some Sleazebag Politicians,against the Citizenry!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-lava/when-did-to-serve--protec_b_4174736.html

In 1856, the U.S. Supreme Court (South v. Maryland) found that law enforcement officers had no duty to protect any individual. Their duty is to enforce the law in general. More recently, in 1982 (Bowers v. DeVito), the Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit held, "...there is no Constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen. It is monstrous if the state fails to protect its residents... but it does not violate... the Constitution." Later court decisions concurred: the police have no duty to protect you.


so,the Police are between two Fires,Damned if they do,Damned if they don't!
The old Catch 22!

Certain people don't know a damn thing about what they are running out of their mouth except their preprogrammed agenda. They haven't been in the same situation but they are suddenly an expert on the situation.

Maybe they should try giving CPR to a Strong Armed Robbery suspect along with a police officer AFTER being violently attacked by him, trying to save the man who just committed a crime and assaulting me. I still have pictures of my cuts, bruises and swollen body parts.

and your right, ANY first responder Law Enforcement, Fire or Medical's first priority is their own safety, not the safety of others. That is what is taught in each of the Fire and Law Enforcement academies and EMT\Paramedic schools.

You nailed it Lpdon, those 3 are a disgrace to humankind. They are the Scum of The Earth. We would be better off if they would eat **** and die. You can add pelosi and Harry Reid to that list.

Yea.....

I think you are leaving out Feinstein!

Boxer.

I guess, the truth hurts. The race baiters have nothing to say now.

"Botox-Face" Pelosi!

I have mentioned before,, 1 sexual assaults, and 1 attempted (Where our fight resulted in him running off and me running the OTHER WAY)

, would that count as 'strong arm'?

your experience is unfortunate, as was mine, but it still doesn't change how I feel about the Wilson/Brown experience,,,

I am sorry for your situation, I really am, one thing I hate more then anything are rapists and child abusers but you WERE able to get away. Even if you weren't and you were in fear of your life you could have used whatever force necessary to stop the situation.

This is a different situation, its a situation where its your job to take a criminal into custody. The situation you aren't able to get away and it's a fisticuffs with someone high on drugs who just committed a crime and knows he's screwed if the cops get them. Fight or flight kicks in and they WILL do ANYTHING to get away and I have seen some weird crap and attempts.

Evidence shows Brown was in the cops car attacking the officer. Most officers have three guns in the front seat of their car, the one on their hip, a shotgun and a backup gun on their person or quickly accessible in the front seat (and I just found out that most State Troopers and Sheriff's Deputies have fully automatic weapons in their trunks here in Nevada) not to mention the numerous other weapons on the officers person Brown was in proximity to.

In just about every poll taken an overwhelming majority thought Wilson was justified, not to mention the African Americans who sat on the grand jury.

Maybe you should watch this video. This African American woman is right. The only one to blame is Brown.

http://rightwingnews.com/culture/video-black-womans-bold-statement-sure-enrage-ferguson-protesters/

Again, there was no football field between the officer and brown. This would indicate that the distance was closed (like, by Brown running back). There is no way a police officer (unless he was an Olympic shooter) could land that many shots on a moving target with a pistol at 100+ yards.

How would adrenaline not explain charging at someone? You mentioned it makes people panic and do stupid things. You assume Brown was of sound mind. He had proven from his violent behavior he was not. A person of sound mind would not attack an armed officer, attempt to disarm him, and expect not to be met by deadly force. I would also find it difficult to believe he was not under an adrenaline rush either, further increasing the possibility of making illogical decisions.

Just saying...

I don't need to watch it. there are Millions of people in America, at any given time you can speak to many people and someone will agree with us,, whatever their race


Perhaps it was my blame to be in a strangers home and sleeping on his couch,, maybe that made me 'complicit' by a poor choice

but it still doesn't alleviate his RESPONSIBILITY in making the choice of REACTING/ACTING in a manner that harmed me

Brown was responsible for his irresponsibility
his irresponsibility should have resulted in him being detained/arrested

his irresponsibility did NOT deserve a death penalty,,,,

my opinion wont change unless some video emerges showing that he did indeed and miraculously turn and 'charge'

my experiences and opinions aren't shaped by what others choose to believe

I haven't spoken to ANYONE on the grand jury to hear the process they went through,,, Zimmerman was acquitted 'unanimously' as well, but we later learned there was quite a bit of 'persuading' happening in the process and not a case of everyone just believing it was the case,,,,


I do not believe there was a need to escalate to killing the suspect after he fled

I do not believe that after he fled he suddenly turned and just 'charged' either,,,,

,,I do not even see the point in rehashing beliefs about that one incident as that officer was NEVER going to be charged and never will be

the bigger picture is the abuse of power and the corruption within certain police departments that has been given a free pass for too long,,,

the police officer landed only half of his shots

the police officer gave chase (that explains a closed distance)

I agree he behaved illegally, irresponsibility, and stupidly

I still will not believe that when he was within reach of the gun he ran away but when the gun was being fired at him he decided to go towards the shots,,,

unless video shows otherwise,,,and I doubt that video is forthcoming

they were NEVER going to charge that officer, they hired him from a corrupt department in the first place and they strongly BLUE WALL(?) Each other,,,

they leaked that video at the store
they leaked a story about an orbital socket blowout
they lied about the distance of the crime scene
the prosecutor presented more evidence for the defense than he did to try to get an indictment
and then to add insult to injury his conference to explain the finding further disparaged his OWN witnesses

,,,,,,,people are not going to change their mind , its not worth recapping,, I just hope that its the first step in changes being made,,,

No, that is absolutely what a hate crime is no matter how you may try to twist and spin.

Wow, will surprises never cease, but then the meaning is not what is implied or one would never commit in that direction.

Grand Jury, a term with which you seem to be totally unfamiliar. Do you actually know what a grand jury is?

It would seem the answer to the question would be a resounding, NO.

Ah yes, the old asset forfeiture law for those subject to the "color" of law. Victimless crimes that end up producing victims from those very ones subject to the color of law. Another symptom of a "society" so inept as to not understand what is occurring but so objectively believing in the authority of another justifying the crime. The travesty is: Which action was actually the crime?

The real fun of the game is the lawful seizure of assets from the actual perpetrators of the crime from one that understands the law and can stand "sui juris".