Looting and Rioting in St. Louis (Merged)

Killer Wench

A teenage boy was killed yesterday by a Ferguson, MO police officer. According to witnesses, the boy was walking to his grandmother's house after leaving a corner store. He and his friend were walking on the street when a patrol office drove by and told them to get on the sidewalk. The boys refused since they were only a few doors down at this point.

The police officer pulls his gun and the boys run. The police officer shoots Mike Brown. Mike throws his hands up asking that they don't shoot him. The police officer in the head then shoots him 8-9 more times, leaving his dead body in the middle of the street so his grandmother could stumble across him.

http://fox2now.com/on-air/live-streaming/

https://twitter.com/hashtag/mikebrown?f=realtime&src=tren

https://twitter.com/AntonioFrench


Protests began peacefully. Locals went out to the street and sat down with their arms in the air, chanting "Please don't shoot me." The peaceful protests continued for about a day but now it has dissolved into looting. Local stores owned by Asians have been broken into. Reports that buildings are burning.

Anonymous has vowed to target the Ferguson Police Department if they harmed the protestors.

Killer Wench

Reports are coming in that they have activated the Missouri National Guard and tanks are being transported in.

https://twitter.com/StLouisJournal/status/498680629391671298

Cookie_Monster

misleading much?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/10/black-teen-fatal-shooting-by-police-in-missouri-prompts-calls-for-federal/?intcmp=latestnews

A news conference was held simultaneously in a different building. There, St. Louis County Police Jon Belmar said the incident began when the officer encountered two men on the street near an apartment complex on Saturday afternoon in a predominantly black suburb a few miles north of downtown St. Louis.

Belmar said one of the men pushed the officer back into his squad car and the struggle began. Belmar said at least one shot was fired inside the police car.

The struggle spilled out into the street where the teenager was shot. Police have not disclosed his name, but family members say it was 18-year-old Michael Brown.

Still a bit OTT sounding but at least mention that the victim had a go at the cop first, hardly totally innocent.

Killer Wench

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

misleading much?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/10/black-teen-fatal-shooting-by-police-in-missouri-prompts-calls-for-federal/?intcmp=latestnews



Still a bit OTT sounding but at least mention that the victim had a go at the cop first, hardly totally innocent.

Nope. That was concocted today in spite of several eye witness statements. The cop that killed Mike Brown is on administrative leave, pending investigation. Cops confiscated cellphones and ripped out security cameras that may have footage. This is why there were protests and the protests have now devolved into looting.

The original story had been that Mike was shoplifting at the corner store but the clerk denied that he did so.


ETA. New reports coming in that looters are targeting White protesters

ETA. Reports coming in that rioters are now attempting to loot homes, including a police officer.

PeteFalk78

patrol office drove by and told them to get on the sidewalk. The boys refused since they were only a few doors down at this point.

Yep that's a great reason to refuse an officers order. :rolleyes:

Respect the cops. Simples. There's more to this story.

average_runner

Killer Wench wrote: »

Nope. That was concocted today in spite of several eye witness statements. The cop that killed Mike Brown is on administrative leave, pending investigation. Cops confiscated cellphones and ripped out security cameras that may have footage. This is why there were protests and the protests have now devolved into looting.

The original story had been that Mike was shoplifting at the corner store but the clerk denied that he did so.


ETA. New reports coming in that looters are targeting White protesters

ETA. Reports coming in that rioters are now attempting to loot homes, including a police officer.

Always two sides to a story. Doubt he just randomly shot hit. Administrative leave is normal

Canis Lupus

Killer Wench wrote: »

Nope. That was concocted today in spite of several eye witness statements. The cop that killed Mike Brown is on administrative leave, pending investigation. Cops confiscated cellphones and ripped out security cameras that may have footage. This is why there were protests and the protests have now devolved into looting.

The original story had been that Mike was shoplifting at the corner store but the clerk denied that he did so.


ETA. New reports coming in that looters are targeting White protesters

ETA. Reports coming in that rioters are now attempting to loot homes, including a police officer.

So the police are concocting stories and have made all the evidence vanish? :rolleyes:

You don't sound biased at all.

No Pants

Killer Wench wrote: »

A teenage boy

18-year-old Michael Brown.

AKA an adult. Using the word "boy" is misleading.

kneemos

No Pants wrote: »

AKA an adult. Using the word "boy" is misleading.

I'd call an 18 year old a boy.

No Pants

kneemos wrote: »

I'd call an 18 year old a boy.

That's good to know.

Big Nasty

Gotta love the intelligence of people rioting, looting and destroying their own neighbourhood.

MarkR

Killer Wench wrote: »

Nope. That was concocted today in spite of several eye witness statements. The cop that killed Mike Brown is on administrative leave, pending investigation. Cops confiscated cellphones and ripped out security cameras that may have footage. This is why there were protests and the protests have now devolved into looting.

The original story had been that Mike was shoplifting at the corner store but the clerk denied that he did so.


ETA. New reports coming in that looters are targeting White protesters

ETA. Reports coming in that rioters are now attempting to loot homes, including a police officer.

Good job you're there to decide who is telling the truth. Have you considered becoming a judge?

montyrebel

why run?

imo thats why the shots were fired

Omackeral

Disenfranchised. That word is bound to be used sometime soon to explain the actions of the looters. Gas that these underprivileged poor souls usually take 50inch plasma TV's and expensive runners rather than bread and milk.

kneemos

montyrebel wrote: »

why run?

imo thats why the shots were fired

You don't shoot someone for running away.Certainly doesn't warrant the death penalty.

Fiery mutant

montyrebel wrote: »

why run?

imo thats why the shots were fired

Always a good reason to shoot someone yeah? If someone pulled out a gun on you, would your first instinct be to run? Especially when it could be a trigger happy US police officer.

Like the above posters, I think there is more to this story than we are hearing. But incidents like this happen far too regularly. Yes, if the officer asked the guy's to get up on the sidewalk, then that's what they should have done, after all, they could have been killed walking on the road.

But shooting a person should be a very last resort thing to do, and by the sounds of at we have heard so far, that was not the case here.

anncoates

Canis Lupus wrote: »

So the police are concocting stories and have made all the evidence vanish? :rolleyes:

You don't sound bias at all.

You can't say that racism/deadly response doesn't exist in American police forces. It's curious that you would be so completely certain that this isn't the case here.

Badly Drunk Boy

kneemos wrote: »

I'd call an 18 year old a boy.

Good boy!

kneemos

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

Good boy!

Good luck.

shruikan2553

I'm sure there is more to this. Gotta love how they are targeting Asian shop owners and white protestors. Nothing better to deal with unproved racism than more racism.

He was unarmed. He was shot when he was 35ft away from the officer. No news reports are disputing that.

If the bullet holes entered to the rear of his body then there really is no excuse.

PeteFalk78

kneemos wrote: »

I'd call an 18 year old a boy.

By definition you are wrong to do that.

Canis Lupus

anncoates wrote: »

You can't say that racism/deadly response doesn't exist in American police forces. It's curious that you would be so completely certain that this isn't the case here.

I don't believe I stated my opinion on the guilt of either party rather I was criticising the OP for being biased as he appears to have formed a conclusion before the matter is even properly investigated.

miss no stars

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

By definition you are wrong to do that.

Eh kinda, kinda not. 18 is legally, in the current day, an adult. 2000 years ago, a 13 year old boy was considered a man. The age is a line in the sand, but 18 year olds vary. Those who've already had kids are probably closer to adult than child, those still in school are much more childlike. I'd consider an 18 year old to be a boy as well. It's funny, I remember hearing things like "an 18 year old woman" when I was that age and thinking how weird it is to call an 18 year old girl a woman.

anncoates

Canis Lupus wrote: »

as he appears to have formed a conclusion before the matter is even properly investigated.

Have you?

kneemos

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

By definition you are wrong to do that.

Technically maybe,but not practically.

Canis Lupus

anncoates wrote: »

Have you?

Nope.

SeanW

Killer Wench wrote: »

Protests began peacefully. Locals went out to the street and sat down with their arms in the air, chanting "Please don't shoot me." The peaceful protests continued for about a day but now it has dissolved into looting. Local stores owned by Asians have been broken into. Reports that buildings are burning.

Why are the Asians being targeted?

Frank Lee Midere

I don't see much of a reason to doubt KW's version. Why would people riot if the guy robbed a shop. Plus if the police have exonerating evidence they can show it. Lots of cc cameras and police car cameras these days.

It's not unlikely that a trigger happy cop shot someone.

Uriel.

SeanW wrote: »

Why are the Asians being targeted?

why not. racism is not confined to the white race.

Frank Lee Midere

SeanW wrote: »

Why are the Asians being targeted?

Because they run the stores being targeted. What were the whites protesting?

anncoates

SeanW wrote: »

Why are the Asians being targeted?

Could be just a case of most of the small neighbourhood stores being Asian-owned.

Not to say that racism doesn't exist across the board, of course.

Uriel.

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

I don't see much of a reason to doubt KW's version. Why would people riot if the guy robbed a shop. Plus if the police have exonerating evidence they can show it. Lots of cc cameras and police car cameras these days.

It's not unlikely that a trigger happy cop shot someone.

why riot and loot at all?

I'll show my distaste for the law (or perhaps one officer) and become a criminal, destroying the very neighbourhood in which I live. Ridiculous stuff.

kneemos

anncoates wrote: »

Could be just a case of most of the small neighbourhood stores being Asian-owned.

Not to say that racism doesn't exist across the board, of course.

Hoe do you jump to those conclusions'

Little CuChulainn

It's pretty irrelevant what the cop did in the context of riots. Whether he shot him in self defense or cold blood it doesn't justify rioting or looting. people mentioned the cops taking cctv and cell phones like it's part of a conspiracy. That's the job of cops, to seize evidence. If it's tampered with or disappears then that is a different matter but so far there is no evidence of that as far as I can see. This is no different than the London riots. Unjustified and criminal in every way.

seamus

Whatever about the nonsense in the OP, there appears to be unified agreement that the guy was unarmed and shot multiple times.

So there's something fncked. When you're carrying an array of non-lethal weapons (no doubt the officer had a tazer, club and mace on his belt) and the first thing you're inclined to pull is your pistol, then that's bad.

This is another of a long list of incidents which indicate that security forces in the US are becoming more and more culturally inclined to pull and use their guns as a first response rather than a last one.

Fr_Dougal

Killer Wench wrote: »

Reports are coming in that they have activated the Missouri National Guard and tanks are being transported in.

https://twitter.com/StLouisJournal/status/498680629391671298

As mentioned on twitter, the photo of the tanks is an old photo and not from last night.

Nice bit of propaganda going on at the moment.

I Heart Internet

They were guilty of "walking while black", I expect?!

Sounds like a horrible story.

No Pants

seamus wrote: »

So there's something fncked. When you're carrying an array of non-lethal weapons (no doubt the officer had a tazer, club and mace on his belt) and the first thing you're inclined to pull is your pistol, then that's bad.

This is another of a long list of incidents which indicate that security forces in the US are becoming more and more culturally inclined to pull and use their guns as a first response rather than a last one.

This is how T.J. Hooker taught it, although if he'd any sense, he'd have taught Heather Locklear a few other things too.

anncoates

kneemos wrote: »

Hoe do you jump to those conclusions'

Just speculating, hence could.

I think I recall similar issues during the LA riots where Korean/Asian small stores were more prevalent in low-income areas and during the riots, the tensions between the communities led to stores being disproportionately looted.

Myrddin

seamus wrote: »

So there's something fncked. When you're carrying an array of non-lethal weapons (no doubt the officer had a tazer, club and mace on his belt) and the first thing you're inclined to pull is your pistol, then that's bad.

The only variable that might explain this that I can think of, is that if the guy that was shot had reached into a pocket or had something in his hand that made the officer perceive it as a weapon. If it is something like that, then the officer was still wrong by shooting first without identifying the 'threat' properly, but in high pressure split second situations, these mistakes can & are made. If it turns out the guy was shot in the back though, then there's no mitigating circumstances.

Tabnabs

seamus wrote: »

Whatever about the nonsense in the OP, there appears to be unified agreement that the guy was unarmed and shot multiple times.

So there's something fncked. When you're carrying an array of non-lethal weapons (no doubt the officer had a tazer, club and mace on his belt) and the first thing you're inclined to pull is your pistol, then that's bad.

This is another of a long list of incidents which indicate that security forces in the US are becoming more and more culturally inclined to pull and use their guns as a first response rather than a last one.

What seems to be emerging besides being shot multiple times, is that the 18y/o got into some sort of an argument with the cop which resulted in the cop being pushed back into his car and the 18y/o continued to struggle with the cop to the end that at least one shot went off inside the car. It appears he decided to run at this point...

Uriel.

Police obviously need to fully investigate the shooting and the detail surrounding that incident and deal with it according to their findings.

But separately, looking at the various videos of the rioting/looting, police also should be trying to identify those committing the crimes and try to follow up and bring them to justice.

Sometimes (a lot of the time) people can be their own worst enemy.

Egginacup

No Pants wrote: »

AKA an adult. Using the word "boy" is misleading.

If it was an 18 year old female would you call her her a girl?

kneemos

Egginacup wrote: »

If it was an 18 year old female would you call her her a girl?

It wasn't an 18 year old female so it's irrelevant,but yeah definitely would.

Egginacup

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

Yep that's a great reason to refuse an officers order. :rolleyes:

Respect the cops. Simples. There's more to this story.

Refuse an officer's order??
Excuse me but police do not give "orders" to anyone. The do not have that power. They have the power to detain you if you are under suspicion of committing a crime or they must cease, desist and allow you on your way. And that's it. They can't even ask you for ID unless you are driving a car.

So save your "respect the badge" rubbish for sci-fi movies and comics.

Soups123

Omackeral wrote: »

Disenfranchised. That word is bound to be used sometime soon to explain the actions of the looters. Gas that these underprivileged poor souls usually take 50inch plasma TV's and expensive runners rather than bread and milk.

Give the looter a loaf of bread and he will eat for a day, give him a 50 inch TV and he can sell it and feed for a month

PeteFalk78

Egginacup wrote: »

Refuse an officer's order??
Excuse me but police do not give "orders" to anyone. The do not have that power. They have the power to detain you if you are under suspicion of committing a crime or they must cease, desist and allow to on your way. And that's it. They can't even ask you for ID unless you are driving a car.

That's great to know.
If somebody is pointing a gun at your head and an officer "orders" that person to drop the gun?
If somebody is kicking your head in and the officer "orders" that person to stop?

Egginacup wrote: »

So save your "respect the badge" rubbish for sci-fi movies and comics.

Haha, I think you are the one that's overdosing on sci-fi movies and comics.
The majority of civilized people will work with police in a civilized manner. The rest have either something to hide or have a huge anti-establishment chip on their shoulder. I probably detest the anti-establishment anarchistic idiots the most.

States are beginning to adopt "stop and identify" statutes which means the police in the US have more control that you mention.

goose2005

anncoates wrote: »

Just speculating, hence could.

I think I recall similar issues during the LA riots where Korean/Asian small stores were more prevalent in low-income areas and during the riots, the tensions between the communities led to stores being disproportionately looted.

"tensions" is quite a euphemism, the violence, hatred and racism was pretty much one-sided.

Omackeral

Soups123 wrote: »

Give the looter a loaf of bread and he will eat for a day, give him a 50 inch TV and he can sell it and feed for a month

All while wearing Nike Air Max and watching his 60 inch TV.

seamus

Egginacup wrote: »

Refuse an officer's order??
Excuse me but police do not give "orders" to anyone. The do not have that power. They have the power to detain you if you are under suspicion of committing a crime or they must cease, desist and allow to on your way. And that's it. They can't even ask you for ID unless you are driving a car.

That very much depends on the jurisdiction to be fair, you can't say the above is true everywhere, all the time.

For example, all road users in Ireland are required to comply with any lawful instruction given to them by a Garda. I.e. an order.

This would theoretically extend to telling pedestrians to get off the road, and failing to comply with the order is an offence.