T1B

Moving Sale wrote:I fear the government more than I fear random violence, so I tend to get more worked up when a cops kills someone than when a random person does the killing. So sue me.

Not a big fan of statistics I see.

Do tell.

Having a heart attack fatso?

It's nothing I have ever heard before, why do you know it so well?

Sudden Sam wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote: At around 3:05, she says it appears that the officer was trying to pull Brown into the car.

You're welcome.

And again, you are saying that means just the opposite right?

Why would a cop try to pull a large man into the front seat of his patrol car?

Cue the head jokes.

To your point, officers are trained to never let subjects they are contacting come up on their car door. It presents a tactical disadvantage that I'm sure Wilson was quite aware of.

And on another forum someone pointed out that an eye socket fracture would cause that eye to immediately swell up & close. Wilson was likely working with only one eye at that point. If Brown turned back to return to Wilson, Wilson had justification for using deadly force.

poptart wrote:What would I do if I was in the situation, as you described it?

Well, Brown "charged" the officer, so we are told.
How close did he get?
I think I need to know that -- before I can say what I would have done.

You would not need to know that because if you waited that long you would probably be dead. You really do not understand the dynamics of a situation where an individual has made a decision at assault another person, assaulted that person and is returning to finish the job. I can tell you from first hand experience when you point a gun at someone and order them to leave the area, and they ignore that command and if they continue to close the distance and are less than 35 feet away, you are probably going to have shoot them to keep yourself from injury or death.

If they comply with your commands and leave the area and the threat goes away, then everybody gets to walk away, that is what has happened with me once.

Two shots in the head?
And he was not armed?

Being armed or not has nothing to do with shot placement.

Could he not have shot him lower -- and stopped him?

Watching a little bit to much Roy Rogers where they "shoot" the gun out of his hand. When you come up with a technique for an accurate tactical aim at under 50 feet with a closing threat, please lets get together and get that technique in the hands of LE across the country. The suspect was at 35 feet and charging towards an officer in the dark that he had already assaulted and seriously injured. 35 feet is the absolute bare minimum that he has to draw a weapon and fire. If a suspect is coming at you with a knife inside of 30 feet, you do not have time to draw , "aim" and fire, you are going to get cut or go hands on. This suspect was returning to assault the injured officer again.

Point the weapon at center mass and start pulling the trigger. Fire until the threat is stopped or you run out of ammo. Do a tactical reload and make sure the perp is down and sweep the area for other threats. I can guaranfuckingtee you that shooting at that rate and distance you can have easily have rounds cover a 2 foot circle or more , and the ones in the back, if they were in the back since all you fucking liberal honks are quoting "people said" instead of waiting for forensics, could have easily came from the perp being spun around by the center mass contact shots.

Look, I'm not saying the two shots to the head were definitely uncalled for, but I am questioning it.

The shooting likely transpired in seconds, likley under 8 seconds total. Not time to aim, no time to "aim low", just survive the next 5 seconds. The officers training worked and he goes home and the perp gets carried by 6. Justice done.

Diego in Seattle wrote:
To your point, officers are trained to never let subjects they are contacting come up on their car door. It presents a tactical disadvantage that I'm sure Wilson was quite aware of.

You may as well be speaking Lower Butanese dialect. Trying to get the doubters to understand the implications of that kind of tactical disadvantage is fruitless.

Derron wrote:Being armed or not has nothing to do with shot placement.

If Brown was perceived by the officer to be a lethal threat, him not being armed is a factor here.

An officer has multiple "tools of force "at his disposal -- and yet he choose to fire away at the unarmed man.

Dead.


http://www.lawofficer.com/article/train ... thal-force

(To use lethal force) The suspect must be a lethal threat or reasonably perceived as one.


Brown, unarmed, was really a lethal threat to the officer?

Well... maybe.

As I've said, I'm not saying he wasn't, but am just questioning it.

I want it proven beyond a doubt that he was.

poptart wrote:I want it proven beyond a doubt that he was.

Why? It won't change the result.

You're getting into "tuck rule" territory now and don't even have a dog in the hunt.

War Wagon wrote:Why? It won't change the result.

Pathetic.

No Screwy, YOU'RE pathetic.

Besides that, it's likely there will never be any proof, one way or another.

And like I said, the result won't change.

Wagon, there is a very clear trend in recent years toward a militarization of police forces.
And we also have many instances of police using force and methods which they are not authorized to use.
It's disturbing.

So we have an unarmed man gunned down here.

I think it's perfectly rationalize to expect that it is clearly shown that the use of deadly force in this case was necessary.

Don't see how what I've said is controversial.

poptart wrote:I think it's perfectly rationalize to expect that it is clearly shown that the use of deadly force in this case was necessary.

It's also perfectly rational to believe that no such thing can ever be shown, either way. Wait, I already said that, why am I saying it again?

Oh, that's right. Because you asked the same stupid question. Again. Are you trolling?

Refer to my first post in this thread about what happened and why. Two different stories, blah blah blah... that's all it will ever amount to.

People can surmise all they want and most already have. Nobody has or will have any proof, ever.

Good cop/Bad cop, whatever. You walk down the middle of the damn street like you own it, you're asking for trouble. He got what he wanted, sooner rather than later. But rest assured, he was going to find it eventually.

You're a funny man sometimes, Wagon.

Imagine if it was your unarmed daughter who was gunned down.


"Oh well. Some people are saying THIS happened, and some people are saying THAT happened. I don't know. We'll never know. The police officer has the badge. He must be right. Let it go, people."


RIP, Daughter Wagon.





First they came for the droopy pants-wearin' gangstas, and I did not speak out --

Papa Willie wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/black-cop-ki ... hide-race/

Black cop killed unarmed white kid back on the 11th. Nothing. Same type scenario.

Yea sorry Rush, I'm not too worried about blacks suppressing whites at this point. As far as the shooting goes, I'm filing it under Badge Nazi until I hear something that makes me think otherwise.

poptart wrote:
First they came for the droopy pants-wearin' gangstas, and I did not speak out --

In our current version it is...

First they came for the druggies.

All of this military shit was tried on the drug trade in the past and very few people seemed to care. Now some cops serve ALL warrants as fully SWATed out units, even for administrative warrants. It's sick.



Find it.
Read it.

No I'm not worried about your little video of a couple of black panthers. I've already posted who I voted for in the last two pres elections.

poptart wrote:You're a funny man sometimes, Wagon.

Imagine if it was your unarmed daughter who was gunned down.

"Oh well. Some people are saying THIS happened, and some people are saying THAT happened. I don't know. We'll never know. The police officer has the badge. He must be right. Let it go, people."

RIP, Daughter Wagon.

First they came for the droopy pants-wearin' gangstas, and I did not speak out --

He doesn't care. As long as it is a balck man dead, it fits his narrow and ignorant world view.

No doubt that when the board gets news that Whitey died from conditions related to a lifetime of smoking and drinking Piss Minus, I'll just lean back, crack my knuckles and embrace the knowledge Whitey got what he wanted and had it coming. In short, he deserved it.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that posters here have no clue about how handguns work. Most prolly have never pulled the trigger on one.

Try this to approximate what it is like. Have a huge neighbor stand 12 yards away from you and out your cell phone in your pocket. Have a third person yell go, and see if you can get your cell phone out of your pocket and pointed at the neighbor rushing you. Unlikely you get the phone out of your pocket before the neighbor tackles you. Then try it again with one eye closed.

Papa Willie wrote:https://www.google.com/search?q=Dorian+ ... &tbs=qdr:d

I'm gonna let Goober figure that out.

Like I'm going to click on one of your stupid links again.

LS wrote:Try this to approximate what it is like. Have a huge neighbor stand 12 yards away from you and out your cell phone in your pocket. Have a third person yell go, and see if you can get your cell phone out of your pocket and pointed at the neighbor rushing you. Unlikely you get the phone out of your pocket before the neighbor tackles you. Then try it again with one eye closed.

Yet Brown was hit with what, a half-dozen shots?

S_M wrote:He doesn't care. As long as it is a balck man dead, it fits his narrow and ignorant world view.

Maybe Wagon is weighing that Brown had just robbed a store -- and police officers don't routinely get badly banged up like this officer apparently did, unless someone has done something very wrong.

Could it be that W. Wagon just doesn't care much for bad actors of any race.

I think so.

They don't call him Whitey Wagon for nothing.

Derron wrote: The suspect was at 35 feet and charging towards an officer in the dark that he had already assaulted and seriously injured.

Actually, it was broad daylight not that it makes any difference in this case.

poptart wrote:Wagon, there is a very clear trend in recent years toward a militarization of police forces.

True. It also has absolutely nothing to do with what happened in Ferguson. This was not a SWAT raid to serve a minor warrant or enforce some ridiculous federal regulation. It was routine police work. If you assault a police officer, you are likely to end up dead.

There is no evidence whatsoever that this was just a good kid minding his own business when he was gunned down for no apparent reason by the police. All the evidence points to a violent criminal suffering the consequences of his own actions.

mvscal wrote:There is no evidence whatsoever that this was just a good kid minding his own business when he was gunned down for no apparent reason by the police. All the evidence points to a violent criminal suffering the consequences of his own actions.

We haven't heard all the evidence.


My suspicious is that the officer made a mistake(s) (which he shouldn't have made) during the course of the encounter -- but that Brown made much worse mistakes, and ended up dead, of course.

But that is just speculation on my part.

poptart wrote:

LS wrote:Try this to approximate what it is like. Have a huge neighbor stand 12 yards away from you and out your cell phone in your pocket. Have a third person yell go, and see if you can get your cell phone out of your pocket and pointed at the neighbor rushing you. Unlikely you get the phone out of your pocket before the neighbor tackles you. Then try it again with one eye closed.

Yet Brown was hit with what, a half-dozen shots?

One shoots to stop the threat. Assuming that the first four shots were to the arm, that likely isn't enough to stop Brown (especially considering he was high).

Diego in Seattle wrote:

poptart wrote: Assuming that the first four shots were to the arm, that likely isn't enough to stop Brown (especially considering he was high).

Do tell.

mvscal wrote:

poptart wrote:Wagon, there is a very clear trend in recent years toward a militarization of police forces.

True. It also has absolutely nothing to do with what happened in Ferguson. This was not a SWAT raid to serve a minor warrant or enforce some ridiculous federal regulation.

I wonder how many juice tests he passed in his career.

Moving Sale wrote:

mvscal wrote:

poptart wrote:Wagon, there is a very clear trend in recent years toward a militarization of police forces.

True. It also has absolutely nothing to do with what happened in Ferguson. This was not a SWAT raid to serve a minor warrant or enforce some ridiculous federal regulation.

I wonder how many juice tests he passed in his career.

He didn't look like a juicer to me in the one pic I saw. He didn't really look very big at all. We should be testing badge monkeys for roids, though, I agree on that point.

He did look a bit skinny, almost as if the recoil from him discharging his weapon at a wired angle, like out a car window, might fuck up his face like giving him a broken nose or eye socket or whatnot.

Brown, unarmed, was really a lethal threat to the officer?

Well... maybe.

As I've said, I'm not saying he wasn't, but am just questioning it.

I want it proven beyond a doubt that he was.

You are stating is he was unarmed. This was found out afterwards.

How did the officer know he did not have a concealed weapon in his belt, or pocket ??

The guy is charging at him after assaulting him once, and you want him to stop for a pat down, or wait until he is 3 feet away and then he shanks your ass ?

Do not have contacts with the police, do not give them PC to jack your ass up. Here is a brief tutorial you may want to review.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR465HoCWFQ

Moving Sale wrote:He did look a bit skinny, almost as if the recoil from him discharging his weapon at a wired angle, like out a car window, might fuck up his face like giving him a broken nose or eye socket or whatnot.

I can tell from this you have handled a lot of firearms.

poptart wrote:

My suspicious is that the officer made a mistake(s) (which he shouldn't have made) during the course of the encounter -- but that Brown made much worse mistakes, and ended up dead, of course.

Do not let some facts about closing distances with a knife cloud that instant decision making you need to make.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEdUo

Derron wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:He did look a bit skinny, almost as if the recoil from him discharging his weapon at a wired angle, like out a car window, might fuck up his face like giving him a broken nose or eye socket or whatnot.

I can tell from this you have handled a lot of firearms.

I know huh? Too bad the same can't be said about you and turf fields. :doh:

poptart wrote:Could it be that W. Wagon just doesn't care much for bad actors of any race.

Derron wrote:You are stating is he was unarmed. This was found out afterwards.

How did the officer know he did not have a concealed weapon in his belt, or pocket ??

A man, knowing an officer has multiple weapons at his disposal, has balls enough to jump and beat an officer.
The man is so ballsy that even though he might be carrying a weapon himself (so you speculate the officer was thinking) , he doesn't even think he needs to use it.
Ho-hum.

The man flees, and the beaten and humiliated officer chases, thinking, "I, with multiple weapons to use, just got my ass kicked by this dude who used no weapon on me, but damn it... I bet he's GOT a weapon!!"

Is that really what you want to sell here?


Well, if the officer thought that, he was wrong.

He nailed an unarmed man six times -- dead.

I guess he has to deal with that.

Being 6'4", 290 lbs is "armed". Also, is the fact that if you do not shoot his ass and he keeps coming, he will soon be armed.

That cop deserves a fukking medal for taking out the trash. And cops need to stop playing tiddly winks with looters. Mow a few of them fukkers down and the rest will get the message.

mvscal wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:

Who wants to bet that this story will change?

You had two stupid pieces of shit walking in the middle of the fucking street with sagging pants and a shitty attitude. Cop says, "Hey, get out of the middle of the fucking street." Now normal people with room temperature and above IQs simply move to the sidewalk or side of the road and don't give the matter another thought.

Evidently this was too much to handle for those brainless yard apes so they decided to argue with the cop. That never ends well and, in this case, ends up with a niqqer face down in a puddle of blood in, you guessed it, the middle of the fucking street...with his fucking pants around his knees like the dumbfuck that he was.

White (and black) cops have a history of shooting black males because black males have a history of acting like violent, subhuman troglodytes who should be gunned down in the middle of the fucking street. Is that the case here? I don't know. I don't give much credibility to statements from cops or niqqers. Both stories are equally plausible.

Had the rage in this situation been focused against the police, I would be fully supportive of their actions. It isn't, though. Instead, they loot local businesses which serve their community and reinforce every negative stereotype there is about them.

If niqqers want to be treated with dignity and respect, they need to start behaving like civilized human beings. I won't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen though.

It's, almost, refreshing to know you are still a racist bag of shit. "Sagging pants"?? WTF, yeah shoot that fucking person! Great take Einstein. I suppose the Sandy Hook kids had it coming, too.

Sandy Hook was an elaborate hoax, designed to help push through gun control legislation in order to disarm the public before the coming economic collapse. I read about it on the internet.