Sounds alot like the dismissal of the plight of those in Ferguson amounts to blaming the victims for their plight.

tennyson wrote:

As far as the chant, yes, I do believe it was used literally and still is by some. It did provoke nationwide violence. It was NOT a good thing. The protests were fine when they were non-violent, but I stand by my eralier comment that the people in Ferguson have had the power in their hands (voting and getting therir own representatives in a position to make change) but have abdicated that power and responsibility. 


 

I did.

BYOB wrote:

tennyson wrote:

BYOB wrote:

Although some witnesses state that Brown held his hands up at shoulder level with his palms facing outward for a brief moment, these same witnesses describe Brown then dropping his hands and “charging” at Wilson. - said Common Sense


So in other words, everyone was right. It sounds like he most likely put his hands up for a brief moment, then charged back towards the officer. It still doesn't change the fact that an unarmed kid is dead for possible shoplifting, when other non-lethal force could have been used. It sounds like crappy choices on the part of both Mr. Brown and Mr. Wilson. The chant "hands up, don't shoot" may have started out having a literal meaning, but it quickly morphed into a metaphor for other widespread occurances where the issue of excessive force is in play. If you still take it literally, then you don't get it.


(I have no idea why my computer all of a sudden would only type in Italics, but now it's normal again. ?)

 

You certainly have your right to your opinion, but my take is number one he was NOT shot because he may have been involved in a grocery store incident. I don't even believe the officer knew it when this occured from what I had read. The moment that Brown grabbed for the officers gun, the whole dynamics of the situation would have changed from the officers perspective. 

As far as the chant, yes, I do believe it was used literally and still is by some. It did provoke nationwide violence. It was NOT a good thing. The protests were fine when they were non-violent, but I stand by my eralier comment that the people in Ferguson have had the power in their hands (voting and getting therir own representatives in a position to make change) but have abdicated that power and responsibility. 

I make these statements not to defend the overall action of the police. The report paints a picture of a culture that needs to changed. If you read the report, howeve, just as much (I actually think more) blame goes to the city officials who pushed the police to generate revenue. That should not be the purpose of the force. 


 

The entire incident started because Mr. Brown was accused of shoplifting by a shopper at the store. Odd that no one ever determined if the kid actually did it or not. While alot of people seem to think that what starts an incident doesn't matter, I happen to think starting points are very important to a story. I tend not to skip the first couple of chapters when I read a book, that is if I want to fully understand it. It is important to know these things if you want to try to understand someone's frame of mind. People's actions follow their thoughts. It is possible that the kid did not steal anything, was accused by the store owner, got mad, left, then got mad again when he was stopped by Mr. Wilson. If Mr. Wilson did not know that Mr. Brown was involved in a possible shoplifting, then he severly over-reacted when he almost hit the kids with his vehicle because they were jay walking, which then escalated the situation. Is it also possible that Mr. Brown did not try to take Mr. Wilson's gun? Yes. He could have gotten scared that it was being drawn on him so close, so he could have reached out to push it away because he was scared of getting shot. While I don't agree with the actions Mr. Brown took, I also don't agree with the actions Mr. Wilson took.
He had the upper hand - he was in an SUV. At any time, while he was still in the vehicle, he could have stepped on the gas to remove himself. After Mr. Brown started running away, Mr. Wilson could have waited for back-up in his SUV. The whole thing was unneccesary due to the over-reactions from them both, IMO.

And I would respectfully disagree that the slogan was what sparked nationwide violence. I believe it is the sometimes excessive use of force on unarmed people for infractions that do not warrant punishment by death. i.e. - selling loose cigarettes, jaywalking, shoplifting, running, carrying merchandise you plan to buy through a store, etc., etc. Officers have non-lethal options available to them for a reason. And before anyone says it, no, I do not think cops are always in the wrong. But sometimes they are.

As far as voting goes, I do agree that the people of Ferguson do have some power to elect who they want, but the police are not elected. They also stay on the force while many politicians come and go. Maybe we should start electing police, or at least the chief. I also agree that the police should NOT be generating revenue.

I don't believe Wilson stopped him because of the incident at the grocery store. Can you point me to something in the testimony that contradicts this ?  The incident seems to have changed dramatically when Brown reached  (according to the investigation and forensics) for the officers weapon during their initial engagement. 

Everywhere a majority population abdicates their vote as well as getting involved and be an active part of their local community they wind up doing a disservice to themselves and their community. Hopefully this will turn the tide in that regards. 




 

Last edited by tennyson (3/22/2015 9:58 am)

tennyson wrote:

BYOB wrote:

tennyson wrote:

You certainly have your right to your opinion, but my take is number one he was NOT shot because he may have been involved in a grocery store incident. I don't even believe the officer knew it when this occured from what I had read. The moment that Brown grabbed for the officers gun, the whole dynamics of the situation would have changed from the officers perspective. 

As far as the chant, yes, I do believe it was used literally and still is by some. It did provoke nationwide violence. It was NOT a good thing. The protests were fine when they were non-violent, but I stand by my eralier comment that the people in Ferguson have had the power in their hands (voting and getting therir own representatives in a position to make change) but have abdicated that power and responsibility. 

I make these statements not to defend the overall action of the police. The report paints a picture of a culture that needs to changed. If you read the report, howeve, just as much (I actually think more) blame goes to the city officials who pushed the police to generate revenue. That should not be the purpose of the force. 


 

The entire incident started because Mr. Brown was accused of shoplifting by a shopper at the store. Odd that no one ever determined if the kid actually did it or not. While alot of people seem to think that what starts an incident doesn't matter, I happen to think starting points are very important to a story. I tend not to skip the first couple of chapters when I read a book, that is if I want to fully understand it. It is important to know these things if you want to try to understand someone's frame of mind. People's actions follow their thoughts. It is possible that the kid did not steal anything, was accused by the store owner, got mad, left, then got mad again when he was stopped by Mr. Wilson. If Mr. Wilson did not know that Mr. Brown was involved in a possible shoplifting, then he severly over-reacted when he almost hit the kids with his vehicle because they were jay walking, which then escalated the situation. Is it also possible that Mr. Brown did not try to take Mr. Wilson's gun? Yes. He could have gotten scared that it was being drawn on him so close, so he could have reached out to push it away because he was scared of getting shot. While I don't agree with the actions Mr. Brown took, I also don't agree with the actions Mr. Wilson took.
He had the upper hand - he was in an SUV. At any time, while he was still in the vehicle, he could have stepped on the gas to remove himself. After Mr. Brown started running away, Mr. Wilson could have waited for back-up in his SUV. The whole thing was unneccesary due to the over-reactions from them both, IMO.

And I would respectfully disagree that the slogan was what sparked nationwide violence. I believe it is the sometimes excessive use of force on unarmed people for infractions that do not warrant punishment by death. i.e. - selling loose cigarettes, jaywalking, shoplifting, running, carrying merchandise you plan to buy through a store, etc., etc. Officers have non-lethal options available to them for a reason. And before anyone says it, no, I do not think cops are always in the wrong. But sometimes they are.

As far as voting goes, I do agree that the people of Ferguson do have some power to elect who they want, but the police are not elected. They also stay on the force while many politicians come and go. Maybe we should start electing police, or at least the chief. I also agree that the police should NOT be generating revenue.

I don't believe Wilson stopped him because of the incident at the grocery store. Can you point me to something in the testimony that contradicts this ?  The incident seems to have changed dramatically when Brown reached  (according to the investigation and forensics) for the officers weapon during their initial engagement. 

Everywhere a majority population abdicates their vote as well as getting involved and be an active part of their local community they wind up doing a disservice to themselves and their community. Hopefully this will turn the tide in that regards. 




 

I agree. If that slogan had been used by a few extremists in an environment of complete harmony and justice, it would have been ignored.
However, a frayed relationship exists between the police and poor & minority communities in some areas.
These incidents of police force occurr in a virtual tinderbox, and we would be wise to acknowledge this fact.

Look, I'm not arguing that Mr. Wilson and police in general are evil awful people, nor am I arguing that the Mike Brown's of the world are angels that never do anything wrong. I just believe that response should be as equal as possible to to what is being responded to. And as an officer of the law, you have the obligation, by nature of your job choice, to adhere to that.

I find it ass backwards that people are more focused on a chant than the death of a human being.