Looting and Rioting in St. Louis (Merged)

Wompa1 · 16-08-2014 07:26AM

InTheTrees wrote: »

And I believe the White Male Catholic controlled Supreme Court just decided that racism is over in the United states.

Catholic? You think Catholics have influence in the US??

Pop quiz hot shot :cool: How many Catholic Presidents have there been in US history?

For extra marks, what happened to him?

InTheTrees · 16-08-2014 08:01AM

Wompa1 wrote: »

Catholic? You think Catholics have influence in the US??

Well the Supreme court certainly has influence. Some would say the presidents ability to nominate supreme court justices is the presidents greatest power.

And the recent Hobby Lobby decision was certainly religious. Religious organizations can now decide what medications and procedures can be included in employees health insurance policies. It was a strange decision too, that people have commented on as being very pro-religion which is not the role of the supreme court.

Wompa1 · 16-08-2014 08:04AM

InTheTrees wrote: »

Well the Supreme court certainly has influence.

And the recent Hobby Lobby decision was certainly religious.

not necessarily Catholic though...religious for sure..actually probably not even religious. Everything is money

InTheTrees · 16-08-2014 08:13AM

Wompa1 wrote: »

not necessarily Catholic though...religious for sure..actually probably not even religious. Everything is money

Ummm.

Its a majority of old white guys who decide racism is over.

And a Six to three majority of old catholic guys who make a religious decision on womens right to access contraception.

PeteFalk78 · 16-08-2014 08:18AM

The faux outrage here is nauseating.

Rightwing · 16-08-2014 10:28AM

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

The faux outrage here is nauseating.

That is 1 dumb post.

You have no idea whether it is false or not.

Killer Wench · 16-08-2014 02:46PM

Looting and rioting broke out again early this morning. Residents of Ferguson took to protecting the Ferguson Market against the looters.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/16/ferguson-looters-stores_n_5683880.html

Killer Wench · 16-08-2014 02:58PM

Little CuChulainn · 16-08-2014 03:00PM

Tail Docker wrote: »

If you were in this situation, an unarmed suspect didn't stop when told to(and very few do stop..) and resisted arrest by struggling/pushing- would you, if armed, shoot to kill?

Shoot to kill? No. Shoot to stop? Maybe. Depends on all the surrounding circumstances.

RustyNut wrote: »

What was the threat? and to who was that threat directed?

The threat of violence to the next person who had something that took the guys fancy or to the next cop who may not have been able to fight him off, assuming that is what happened.

Egginacup wrote: »

Hypocrisy.
How about this. How about pulling out a gun and defending yourself from someone who might try to kill you. How's that? Is that ok? How about trying some of that "stand you ground" caper against a thug with a badge. Does any of it apply then or not? Why should I as a university graduate have to take orders from a moron in a cruiser just because he thinks he is the law. You kiss his glutes if you want to, if it makes you feel free. My price is higher than subservience.

Because like it or not he is the law. He has been put in the position to enforce the law and your University education doesn't change that.

PeteFalk78 wrote: »

The faux outrage here is nauseating.

The same people shouting about police brutality probably watch Die Hard every Christmas and got a horn when they heard about Bad Boys 3.

PeteFalk78 · 16-08-2014 03:05PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The same people shouting about police brutality probably watch Die Hard every Christmas and got a horn when they heard about Bad Boys 3.

What that means there was a Bad Boys 2. Screw this interwebs thingy I'm going to Xtra Vision

Egginacup · 16-08-2014 04:23PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Shoot to kill? No. Shoot to stop? Maybe. Depends on all the surrounding circumstances.

The threat of violence to the next person who had something that took the guys fancy or to the next cop who may not have been able to fight him off, assuming that is what happened.

Because like it or not he is the law. He has been put in the position to enforce the law and your University education doesn't change that.

The same people shouting about police brutality probably watch Die Hard every Christmas and got a horn when they heard about Bad Boys 3.

He is NOT the law. He does NOT get to determine innocence or guilt and certainly not punishment. He has powers of arrest when he suspects someone to be in the commission of a crime. Sending a hail of bullets into someone who is running away is NOT power of arrest. It is execution.

AlekSmart · 16-08-2014 05:19PM

Killer Wench wrote: »

Here's Oakland, CA:

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/treboros?utm_campaign=ustre.am&utm_source=ustre.am%2FFid0&utm_medium=social&utm_content=20140815192403

Oakland California I take it ?

The offhand references to Berkely and it's Peoples Park in the soundtrack leads me to believe that the Videomaker and his chums may well be unaware of the thread which continues to spin through the mists of time.....

http://wiedel.photoshelter.com/gallery/1969-BERKELEY-RIOTS-Peoples-Park-California/G0000r_Fe.kdWvaU/0/1

Quite often,you can glean a lot more about reality from the background in these clips.....Shops and Offices with unprotected glass for example,not a common site in Downtown Dublin,Ireland for sure.....bicycles with working Lights.....

Even in Ferguson itself,I'm struck by the relative localization of the disturbances...with the V-Mask only now making a belated appearance on the Oakland clip.

I'd be inclined to suggest that given the USA's belief in the moment,any revolution may be a bit away yet ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3Rteve281w

donegal__road · 16-08-2014 05:42PM

Missouri police chief visited Israel in 2011 to take tips from IDF

St. Louis County police chief Tim Fitch will be traveling to Israel next month to learn how Israeli police, intelligence and security forces work to prevent terrorist attacks.

Fitch will visit for a week with other law enforcement officials from across the United States, including representatives of the FBI and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The trip is part of the Anti-Defamation League's National Counter-Terrorism seminar.

Fitch and the others will visit Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Tiberias, among other cities. The Israel National Police and senior officials from Israel's defense forces, intelligence and security organizations will meet with the Americans.

Vandango · 16-08-2014 05:49PM

donegal__road wrote: »

Missouri police chief visited Israel in 2011 to take tips from IDF

So basically it will be top notch training by expert terrorists, in how to deal with civilians.

wazky · 16-08-2014 06:18PM

Just seen footage of the robbery, not only robbing the shop but also acting aggressively towards the shop owner and just being a thug in general, from the footage he looks to be a huge man and in no way a "boy" as some have said he was.

Maybe mentally a child but not physically, and I could see why an officer might have took the shot if a struggle had broken out as they said had.

AlekSmart · 16-08-2014 06:40PM

wazky wrote: »

Just seen footage of the robbery, not only robbing the shop but also acting aggressively towards the shop owner and just being a thug in general, from the footage he looks to be a huge man and in no way a "boy" as some have said he was.

Maybe mentally a child but not physically, and I could see why an officer might have took the shot if a struggle had broken out as they said had.

The physical size of the Average American is often quite surprise to our more delicate senses.

Waay back in the Vietnam era,one of the issues which cost the US Army dearly was the inability of its GI's to follow the slim lithe Vietcong down into their tunnels.

Uncle Sam responded by trawling through the Prison Population,particularly in the Tex-Mex region for inmates of similar slight build....once found,they were offered a new-start workin for Uncle Sam's army,something which many of them grasped with enthusiasm.

https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/warinthevillagesandtunnels.html

http://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/umrcourses/ge342/cu%20chi%20tunnels-revised.pdf

Killer Wench · 16-08-2014 09:23PM

A curfew will be enforced beginning tonight. It will be from 12am to 5 am.

Livestream:

http://new.livestream.com/accounts/9035483/events/3271930

MadsL · 16-08-2014 09:50PM

Killer Wench wrote: »

A curfew will be enforced beginning tonight. It will be from 12am to 5 am.

Livestream:

http://new.livestream.com/accounts/9035483/events/3271930

When are they suspending the Constitution?

Killer Wench · 16-08-2014 09:53PM

MadsL wrote: »

When are they suspending the Constitution?

Monday morning. Obama's on vacation.

hatrickpatrick · 16-08-2014 10:14PM

wazky wrote: »

Just seen footage of the robbery, not only robbing the shop but also acting aggressively towards the shop owner and just being a thug in general, from the footage he looks to be a huge man and in no way a "boy" as some have said he was.

Maybe mentally a child but not physically, and I could see why an officer might have took the shot if a struggle had broken out as they said had.

Regardless of circumstances, specifically shooting an unarmed person in the back multiple times is 100% indefensible. Shooting anyone in the back in such a scenario is unacceptable. There are no mitigating factors which can ever justify it. So if it is established that he was shot specifically in the back, in my view that should be enough for a murder conviction.

Shooting someone in the back by definition cannot be self defense.

Sand · 16-08-2014 10:59PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Regardless of circumstances, specifically shooting an unarmed person in the back multiple times is 100% indefensible. Shooting anyone in the back in such a scenario is unacceptable. There are no mitigating factors which can ever justify it. So if it is established that he was shot specifically in the back, in my view that should be enough for a murder conviction.

Shooting someone in the back by definition cannot be self defense.

Regardless of circumstances? I think you'll find circumstances can have the most amazing impact on results and their validity. If there was a struggle and officer feared for his life or the life of another then circumstances could justify shooting someone in the back. Turning around doesn't immediately make you non-threatening.

The story has already changed from the OP describing the guy just walking home from a cornerstore with his friend to his grandmothers, being randomly assassinated by a cop and strung up for his grandmother to find.

Now it turns out the guy was walking (running) home with his (alleged) accomplice from a cornerstore he just (allegedly) robbed. If you rob cornerstores, it drastically increases your chances of negative encounters with police officers.

I think at this point it is wisest to leave the police to finish their investigation of what happened before making absolute statements on the basis of little or no knowledge of what actually happened.

Donkey Oaty · 16-08-2014 11:08PM

Sand wrote: »

I think at this point it is wisest to leave the police to finish their investigation of what happened before making absolute statements on the basis of little or no knowledge of what actually happened.

Byeee! We'll carry on without ya.

wazky · 16-08-2014 11:16PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Regardless of circumstances, specifically shooting an unarmed person in the back multiple times is 100% indefensible. Shooting anyone in the back in such a scenario is unacceptable. There are no mitigating factors which can ever justify it. So if it is established that he was shot specifically in the back, in my view that should be enough for a murder conviction.

Shooting someone in the back by definition cannot be self defense.

Well being shot in the back does not automatically constitute that it was not self defence, he could have been turning around to pick up a weapon even.

We don't know and more than likely won't ever be told the real story, although if it turns out he was running away and then got shot I'd agree entirely.

Killer Wench · 17-08-2014 12:30AM

The curfew has ticked off Anonymous. They are taking down government websites.

http://www.mo.gov/

http://www.florissantmo.com/

http://www.cityofferguson.com/

Germans using drones?

https://twitter.com/Felonious_munk/status/500781386236952576/photo/1

Manic Moran · 17-08-2014 04:17AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Shooting someone in the back by definition cannot be self defense.

Watch this dashcam video of two cops shooting a guy in the back, and let me know your thoughts.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n7At5RyV_yo

WilyCoyote · 17-08-2014 06:17AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Watch this dashcam video of two cops shooting a guy in the back, and let me know your thoughts.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n7At5RyV_yo

I may not be getting the best reception ........... but on my viewing, these two heroes in uniform need to be executed. And the guy that psychologically evaluated them needs to be questioned as to how he thought they were competent human beings.

Killer Wench · 17-08-2014 06:18AM

Vice live coverage of the curfew. It has been reported via Twitter that this group is armed with weapons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCgSuZQyaTE

Canis Lupus · 17-08-2014 06:37AM

WilyCoyote wrote: »

I may not be getting the best reception ........... but on my viewing, these two heroes in uniform need to be executed. And the guy that psychologically evaluated them needs to be questioned as to how he thought they were competent human beings.

Did you watch both videos?

WilyCoyote · 17-08-2014 06:55AM

Just the one I've quoted.

Canis Lupus · 17-08-2014 07:57AM

WilyCoyote wrote: »

Just the one I've quoted.

I know, otherwise you wouldn't have called the cops scum or suggested their execution.

Looting and Rioting in St. Louis (Merged)

Comments