Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The St Louis police chief has criticized the Ferguson police's SWAT and militarization tactics and the Governor is replacing Ferguson's SWAT with State Police. Ferguson is mismanaging the investigation (smells of a cover-up) and their response to the protests.
Ok, you make a great point. If the justice system needs to work; we should let it. The several eyewitnesses have given their story so why haven't the police. If the officer was justified in this shooting....then where is the explanation. It seems that most times something like this happens, the police are right there with their side of the story. The silence is disturbing at best
If this event had taken place at night, in more isolation, without such clear eye-witnesses---there would have been nothing but a grieving family. There would have been a cursory investigation, and a complete police cover-up and sanctioning of the teen's shooting.
I watched the video. they were repeatedly asked to leave. They argued and delayed over and over again.
At some point, the police don't have time to be patient.
Yeah, and I have been repeatedly asked to leave a public space, provide id, etc.. by police. I never do. Only cowards listen to LEO's when they attempt to override your rights.
James Pasco is not a police chief - he is a Washington gun lobbyist, cigarette industry lobbyist, and lobbyist for the Fraternal Order of Police police union.
I watched the video. they were repeatedly asked to leave. They argued and delayed over and over again.
At some point, the police don't have time to be patient.
The right to assemble peaceably is enshrined in the Constitution. Asking someone to "leave" is not an exception. The rioting in this affair last night was by the men in blue. They are in way over their heads and Nixon made the right decision to relieve them of their duties.
I agree with you because this is what several eyewitnesses have said. This kid was standing several feet away from the officer when he was shot. He was dead on the pavement with no firearm. It doesn't matter if there was a previous scuffle with the LEO.....he was shot while unarmed and hands in the air.
I have to believe the story provided by the several witnesses is true because.........if it wasn't; the police would surely have come out immediately with the officers explanation. They would have had a response to the witnesses story in order to repudiate it if the story was false. Instead we get " it will take several weeks to complete the investigation" I say BS! It will take several weeks to come up with anything they can to mitigate the officers negligence and poor decision to shoot Mike Brown
See, this line of reasoning doesn't make sense. What the heck do you want?
You want the police to say "Yep! Our guy unjustifiably shot this little boy. Here he is....You people handle his punishment."
The police can't come comment on this case. Particularly if it was unjustified.
I guess ignorance is bliss. Good Lord people. THINK
See, this line of reasoning doesn't make sense. What the heck do you want?
You want the police to say "Yep! Our guy unjustifiably shot this little boy. Here he is....You people handle his punishment."
The police can't come comment on this case. Particularly if it was unjustified.
I guess ignorance is bliss. Good Lord people. THINK
If anybody else executed someone with witnesses all around, they would be thrown in a jail cell BEFORE the investigation...
Regardless, cops DO NOT police their own. Look at the case of Kelly Thomas... the would never give the guy the same punishment as a murder that doesn't carry a badge.
Why? Because the police ordered it. You obey a LEO's instructions. They were clearing the restaurant and the area.
with the circumstances in particular, you obey the LEO's instructions. If they want you to move, you move.
The officer was patient. He asked nicely, repeatedly. At some point they will cuff and stuff you.
Now, if they would have CHARGED the reporters with a crime, then yes. I'm with you. They simply detained them and later released. The same that they would do to anyone that didn't comply with their instructions.
This wasn't a normal, business as usual day. The reporters were out of line and the police acted correctly in handling them. Like I said, if they would have actually charged them, then I would have disagreed with that.
You really believe this. The reporters were doing their job and charging the batteries on their equipment. The store was not in any danger at all. If it was I am sure they would have shut down the store. The officer overstepped his boundaries pure and simple. You do not obey a police officer command if that command is unlawfull. You seem willing to give up other peoples constitutional rights with any after thought. I bet your also fan of the Patriot Act. The fact that your cool with them being detained but not arrested makes your logic even more scary. You would love living in China.
Not a police chief, and hardly a "ripping." This is an Executive Director of the Fraternal Order of Police, the same national organization that is providing legal counsel to the as-yet-unnamed shooter.
The representative engages in an ad hominem attack, builds a strawman position for the President, uses false equivalency and vagueness, admits that he lacks information about what is happening, and refuses to comment about whether the officer should be identified, stating instead, "I would leave any statements on that to his defense."
I hardly think it is controversial to suggest that people have a right to peaceably assemble, express themselves, petition the government, and that the press has a right to engage in reporting. Apparently the Fraternal Order of Police has a different view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jareb
Ok, you make a great point. If the justice system needs to work; we should let it. The several eyewitnesses have given their story so why haven't the police. If the officer was justified in this shooting....then where is the explanation. It seems that most times something like this happens, the police are right there with their side of the story. The silence is disturbing at best
Civilian homicide suspects are typically arrested when they are located, if there is probable cause to believe they committed a crime. The eyewitness testimony establishes probable cause to believe that this officer committed a crime. His identity is known to police, and it appears that his whereabouts are known, as well. Why is he not arrested?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
