Michael Brown was Murdered

[Tigerbelle 5,299]

21 hours ago, aubearcat said:

Huh? Okay, this is getting bizarre. If you and belle think cops sit around and think about all the people they can kill because of their race and shield others because of their race, there’s nothing left to discuss. You haven’t addressed the fact that the police were there because of repeated complaints from local business owners. There were multiple cops there because of Garner’s previous actions. Garner became non-compliant. It became physical and he died as a result. 

If you really believe that Panteleo would’ve acted differently if Garner was white, that’s unbelievable. Panteleo was going to do what he was going to do regardless. 

I suppose all the UTCs I received as teenager was because of my privilege. Or maybe all the times my friends and I taken out of the car and searched was also because of privilege. Perhaps the police didn’t realize we were white and forgot to give us our free pass. I also forgot to accuse the state’s first black female trooper who was known as “The Black Widow” (a nickname she loved) of racially profiling me for stopping me and giving me a citation.  Or maybe I just deserved a ticket for what I was doing  

 

Another really stupid post. You should educate yourself on what white privilege actually is before making any more comments about it.You don't know what it is either. That's very obvious. And because you don't get it you feel you can twist things and make ridiculous insinuations. What's even worse is that you are actually making excuses for cops who are actively racist, and use their power and authority to abuse people of color. It's a fact that there are racists in EVERY profession including law enforcement so don't even try to go further with kind of whining.  The factual evidence that people of color have a much different experience than white people should not even be debated because it has been proven many times over. Your inability to admit it doesn't change the fact that it exists. It just means you are ignorant.

Here's a tutorial. Expand your knowledge on the subject instead of making it about you.

https://www.cpt.org/files/Undoing Racism - Understanding White Privilege - Kendall.pdf

 

 

 

[aubearcat 2,132]

5 hours ago, Tigerbelle said:

Another really stupid post. You should educate yourself on what white privilege actually is before making any more comments about it.You don't know what it is either. That's very obvious. And because you don't get it you feel you can twist things and make ridiculous insinuations. What's even worse is that you are actually making excuses for cops who are actively racist, and use their power and authority to abuse people of color. It's a fact that there are racists in EVERY profession including law enforcement so don't even try to go further with kind of whining.  The factual evidence that people of color have a much different experience than white people should not even be debated because it has been proven many times over. Your inability to admit it doesn't change the fact that it exists. It just means you are ignorant.

Here's a tutorial. Expand your knowledge on the subject instead of making it about you.

https://www.cpt.org/files/Undoing Racism - Understanding White Privilege - Kendall.pdf

 

 

 

Okay , take care. 

[aubiefifty 16,695]

i am not going to judge the police in this thread.when gunfire or violence breaks out andwhile  most are running to freedom the police are running towards the threat. they also on a daily basis see the absolute filth and worst of people  every single day. they have to make snap judgements too often in a limited amount of time. and knowing government as i do i believe they do not get training in a timely manner if at all. while i do not agree with the eric garner thing i refuse to assume aubearcat is anyway evil or even a bad guy. he has already stated he does not sit around waiting for some cat of color to screw up so he can ruin their lives.  most want to protect and serve and help their fellow man. they  put their lives on the line every single day. i think it would be a mistake to judge aubearcat for making any statements in the heat of an argument. again, i will pray for his safety and give him the benefit of the doubt like i do anyone until they prove me wrong.

[I_M4_AU 7,762]

20 hours ago, aubearcat said:

use-of-force instructor

I was an instructor in an industry that had very dynamic events (not nearly as dynamic as law enforcement), but we set up scenarios that we could evaluate the students in their decision making.  As the scenario developed, we could see if the students followed protocol and would gig them if they didn’t.  There was always a trigger to the event and I would think, in law enforcement, the trigger to the most dynamic situations would be the arrest.

So, having said that, is the police officer (knowing he is about to arrest someone) watching the reactions of that person to determine his next course of action?  If the perpetrator gives up without resistance and they put the handcuffs on them, the situation would be in control.  However, if there was resistance would the police officer have to react to what he determined to be the threat and his experience and training would have to determine the level of force to be used?

Do you use encounters like the Michael Brown case and others to breakdown the do’s and don’t in your instruction?  Both in the level of force aspect and escalation aspect?  Sometimes the escalation is drawn out, like the Michael Brown case (more time to think and analyze) and other times it escalates quickly, like the recent PHL shootings.  I would guess the cops you instruct have varying degrees of experience.  Needless to say, it must be a very challenging job and I thank you for doing that job and being an instructor. 

[aubearcat 2,132]

44 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I was an instructor in an industry that had very dynamic events (not nearly as dynamic as law enforcement), but we set up scenarios that we could evaluate the students in their decision making.  As the scenario developed, we could see if the students followed protocol and would gig them if they didn’t.  There was always a trigger to the event and I would think, in law enforcement, the trigger to the most dynamic situations would be the arrest.

**We do of course have a lot of discretion  Many times my thoughts on that is just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should always do something (ie arrest, citation,...etc)

So, having said that, is the police officer (knowing he is about to arrest someone) watching the reactions of that person to determine his next course of action?  If the perpetrator gives up without resistance and they put the handcuffs on them, the situation would be in control.  However, if there was resistance would the police officer have to react to what he determined to be the threat and his experience and training would have to determine the level of force to be used?

**As Police Officers we are trained to be one level or at the minimum, the same level of force as the offender and you can enter the level of force continuum at any level, meaning, you don’t have to be at a lower level to go to a higher level. For example, a situation can, in an instance, change from verbal directions to intermediate weapon or God forbid a deadly force situation. The ideal situation is to de-escalate every situation to it’s lowest level.

 

Do you use encounters like the Michael Brown case and others to breakdown the do’s and don’t in your instruction?  Both in the level of force aspect and escalation aspect?  Sometimes the escalation is drawn out, like the Michael Brown case (more time to think and analyze) and other times it escalates quickly, like the recent PHL shootings.  I would guess the cops you instruct have varying degrees of experience.  Needless to say, it must be a very challenging job and I thank you for doing that job and being an instructor. 

** Different scenarios are presented to give an officer a base level reaction to be able to react with the most appropriate actions with the least amount of reaction time. It’s similar to an athlete being able to run a play without having to sit down and thinking about the complexities of the play and scheme. Many times we have seconds or milliseconds to make life altering decisions. Wilson’s case was investigated by a Holder lead DOJ and he was cleared of wrongdoing. Ferguson PD was criticized for departmental practices but Wilson was not found to be wrong in that particular case. As far as Garner, I  believe Panteleo was reacting to Garner’s passive resistance and tried to get a much bigger man to the ground. There’s nothing in his actions to say he had intentions at that time or previously to kill anyone. I’ll also add this, I earned a BA from AUburn in Criminal Justice and am a few hours short of a Masters from Cincinnati. I’ve had to study race and the CJ system a lot. I do know there are ISOLATED instances of bad/racist/sexist...etc cops but I don’t think it’s some rampant problem. Those problems exist in society as a whole so of course law enforcement is not free of that but I can say unequivocally, I’ve never witnessed it.

 

[Tigerbelle 5,299]

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men?fbclid=IwAR19K3ST4X-UsT5Ho73RnP8T1YXur2nNzQHe3fCdonjxRxjghKXjq_3ParA

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

19 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

He stole cigars and assaulted the owner a diminutive Pakistani or Indian.  That’s been stipulated already.

What is not being stated that he was in the store before that incident and he and another clerk were on video making an exchange...weed (Brown) for the cigs (clerks). For whatever reason Brown gave the cigs back to the clerk to hold. It’s on video. He came back again before the police incident and then he roughed up the other clerk (different guy) and took the cigs. Note I’m not condoning any of it but all of the facts should be stated.

Clearly Brown had been doing “exchanges” with the clerks and was coming back to retrieve the cigs. I think it’s fair to say that the clerk he got into it with had no knowledge of the type of activity that was going on in the store and Brown wasn’t leaving without the cigs because the other clerks got their weed. So yes the clerk stated he stole because he had no knowledge of the events hours earlier with the other clerks. The workers and Brown stole. 

[I_M4_AU 7,762]

5 hours ago, Tigerbelle said:

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men?fbclid=IwAR19K3ST4X-UsT5Ho73RnP8T1YXur2nNzQHe3fCdonjxRxjghKXjq_3ParA

What a purposefully misleading headline.

In Chicago alone the gang violence, this year, kills more African Americans than the police for 2019:

About the victims

For the previous 365 days

The majority of the victims of homicide in Chicago are young, black men. 

Race/ethnicity

Black, not hispanic (278)

Not known (214)

White, not hispanic (30)

Hispanic (6)

Asian (3)

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-chicago-homicides-data-tracker-htmlstory.html

 

This link shows deaths by police so far this year.  93 white killed by police and 59 African Americans.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

 

 

 

 

[alexava 6,973]

3 hours ago, WarEagle1983 said:

What is not being stated that he was in the store before that incident and he and another clerk were on video making an exchange...weed (Brown) for the cigs (clerks). For whatever reason Brown gave the cigs back to the clerk to hold. It’s on video. He came back again before the police incident and then he roughed up the other clerk (different guy) and took the cigs. Note I’m not condoning any of it but all of the facts should be stated.

Clearly Brown had been doing “exchanges” with the clerks and was coming back to retrieve the cigs. I think it’s fair to say that the clerk he got into it with had no knowledge of the type of activity that was going on in the store and Brown wasn’t leaving without the cigs because the other clerks got their weed. So yes the clerk stated he stole because he had no knowledge of the events hours earlier with the other clerks. The workers and Brown stole. 

Does this make any difference about his character to you? More important, does it change how anyone could have acted any differently? I mean if you work out a trade with narcotics or anything else, you need to take your goods while the person you made the deal with is there to authorize it. Otherwise you are stealing. If you have to take something by force, you stole it. 

Emptying a gun into anyone certainly raises questions. However one fact remains and I believe it’s undisputed. There was an altercation where this suspect reached into the vehicle causing the gun to discharge 2x. To me, without any video evidence to show a clear overuse of force, that justifies the shooting. It might not justify 12 or 15 shots. 

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

12 hours ago, alexava said:

Does this make any difference about his character to you? More important, does it change how anyone could have acted any differently? I mean if you work out a trade with narcotics or anything else, you need to take your goods while the person you made the deal with is there to authorize it. Otherwise you are stealing. If you have to take something by force, you stole it. 

Emptying a gun into anyone certainly raises questions. However one fact remains and I believe it’s undisputed. There was an altercation where this suspect reached into the vehicle causing the gun to discharge 2x. To me, without any video evidence to show a clear overuse of force, that justifies the shooting. It might not justify 12 or 15 shots. 

As i stated i am not justifying it. Yes, i do think context is important in that there was clearly wrong doings going on with others and not just Mike Brown in that situation. I stated the workers and Mike Brown were stealing. How is that not correct? No it doesn't excuse Mike B. putting hands on the clerk but it was described as a strong arm robbery. C'mon really. lol. I think it makes a difference in how it was described considering he had no weapon and the clerk was "pushed".  Again, he was very wrong but when you sent out an alert of strong arm robbery that implies some sort of weapon was involved IMO. He went back to get his "exchange". I just believe that when looking at any case all factors should be presented and not be one sided. 

Do i think he mouthed off to the officer: Yes

Do i think he thought he was big and bad and fought with the officer: Yes

I only dispute the fact that at a certain point he was no longer a threat(without a gun) to the officer due to the autopsy and evidence. One of the bullets entered into the top of his head. That means his head was bending down. After being shot 3 or 4 times and then bending down and being shot in the top of the head...how is a person still a threat? I only contend that it's just excessive. It actually took me a while to come to that conclusion b/c i do believe Brown has to take a larger majority of accountability for his own death. At this same time i just don't agree with the excessive force in this situation. 

[TitanTiger 20,469]

The officer who choked Eric Garner has been fired.

https://apple.news/A828KQDNOSjGl3oV3mV9ZsQ

[PUB78 1,354]

23 hours ago, Tigerbelle said:

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-08-15/police-shootings-are-a-leading-cause-of-death-for-black-men?fbclid=IwAR19K3ST4X-UsT5Ho73RnP8T1YXur2nNzQHe3fCdonjxRxjghKXjq_3ParA

Pretty simple solution to this, don’t break the law and do what the police officer tells you.

[AU64 10,122]

On 8/18/2019 at 2:28 AM, Tigerbelle said:

Another really stupid post. You should educate yourself on what white privilege actually is before making any more comments about it.You don't know what it is either. That's very obvious. And because you don't get it you feel you can twist things and make ridiculous insinuations. What's even worse is that you are actually making excuses for cops who are actively racist, and use their power and authority to abuse people of color. It's a fact that there are racists in EVERY profession including law enforcement so don't even try to go further with kind of whining.  The factual evidence that people of color have a much different experience than white people should not even be debated because it has been proven many times over. Your inability to admit it doesn't change the fact that it exists. It just means you are ignorant.

Here's a tutorial. Expand your knowledge on the subject instead of making it about you.

https://www.cpt.org/files/Undoing Racism - Understanding White Privilege - Kendall.pdf

 

 

 

Sorry belle but you need to travel to Kentucky and West Va. and explain to those people about how "white privilege" is helping them.   I appreciate your empathy for the underprivileged but assigning guilt to others because you seem to feel some......you don't have that right.  In fact, in some parts of this country now, being white is a major disadvantage due to quotas, subsidies and special programs for non-whites, paid for by poor whites. 

[alexava 6,973]

4 hours ago, WarEagle1983 said:

As i stated i am not justifying it. Yes, i do think context is important in that there was clearly wrong doings going on with others and not just Mike Brown in that situation. I stated the workers and Mike Brown were stealing. How is that not correct? No it doesn't excuse Mike B. putting hands on the clerk but it was described as a strong arm robbery. C'mon really. lol. I think it makes a difference in how it was described considering he had no weapon and the clerk was "pushed".  Again, he was very wrong but when you sent out an alert of strong arm robbery that implies some sort of weapon was involved IMO. He went back to get his "exchange". I just believe that when looking at any case all factors should be presented and not be one sided. 

Do i think he mouthed off to the officer: Yes

Do i think he thought he was big and bad and fought with the officer: Yes

I only dispute the fact that at a certain point he was no longer a threat(without a gun) to the officer due to the autopsy and evidence. One of the bullets entered into the top of his head. That means his head was bending down. After being shot 3 or 4 times and then bending down and being shot in the top of the head...how is a person still a threat? I only contend that it's just excessive. It actually took me a while to come to that conclusion b/c i do believe Brown has to take a larger majority of accountability for his own death. At this same time i just don't agree with the excessive force in this situation. 

Strong armed robbery implies there was no weapon involved. It doesn’t really imply it. It’s the very definition of it. https://www.defendyourcase.com/theft_crimes/strong_armed_robbery/

 

i did say he was excessive in emptying his clip. 

You said earlier you fear what can happen to you in a police confrontation. I do empathize with that. We have seen numerous shootings that were probably not necessary. But other than Tamar Rice I haven’t seen one that the victim didn’t do something to cause it. And by something,I don’t mean a twitchy eye or nervous flinch. I mean an all out stupid attempt to flee or fight or reach for a weapon. I mean be cool, show your hands and follow orders. You might get your feelings hurt, I know I have. I just don’t see a reason to be afraid in general..

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

1 hour ago, alexava said:

Strong armed robbery implies there was no weapon involved. It doesn’t really imply it. It’s the very definition of it. https://www.defendyourcase.com/theft_crimes/strong_armed_robbery/

 

i did say he was excessive in emptying his clip. 

You said earlier you fear what can happen to you in a police confrontation. I do empathize with that. We have seen numerous shootings that were probably not necessary. But other than Tamar Rice I haven’t seen one that the victim didn’t do something to cause it. And by something,I don’t mean a twitchy eye or nervous flinch. I mean an all out stupid attempt to flee or fight or reach for a weapon. I mean be cool, show your hands and follow orders. You might get your feelings hurt, I know I have. I just don’t see a reason to be afraid in general..

I mostly agree with you but there’s been plenty of cases where complying and black men are dead. Fleeing = no threat to me. You simply can’t just shoot people because they’re running away from you. A police officer in SC recently was convicted of murder for shooting a guy for running and then trying to cover it up. If it wasn’t on video he would’ve gotten off. No, people shouldn’t run but that’s not a threat. That’s pure murder. 

But I certainly understand your points and I’m greatly appreciate that we can have a civilized conversation about it because I think more conversations should be had even though it is a tough conversation to have. 

I don’t want to fear the police; nor have to have conversations with my sons about what they have to do when approached by an officer. We can do all the right things and still end up and jail or killed because it’s been done. Again, thanks for understanding. 

 

[alexava 6,973]

23 minutes ago, WarEagle1983 said:

I mostly agree with you but there’s been plenty of cases where complying and black men are dead. Fleeing = no threat to me. You simply can’t just shoot people because they’re running away from you. A police officer in SC recently was convicted of murder for shooting a guy for running and then trying to cover it up. If it wasn’t on video he would’ve gotten off. No, people shouldn’t run but that’s not a threat. That’s pure murder. 

But I certainly understand your points and I’m greatly appreciate that we can have a civilized conversation about it because I think more conversations should be had even though it is a tough conversation to have. 

I don’t want to fear the police; nor have to have conversations with my sons about what they have to do when approached by an officer. We can do all the right things and still end up and jail or killed because it’s been done. Again, thanks for understanding. 

 

I just haven’t seen many cases where people have done “all the right things “ and still get dead.