Hey Time, real question: you keep calling the Ferguson situation filled with "animals" and that they are "all animals" and that they are "all scumbags" and anyone who is protesting in your eyes is also a rioter. Is this an accurate summary of where you stand?
Also, have you ever felt you had a racial bias against any skin color other that was not your own?
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
So people who act uncivilized, loot, destroy, steal and vandalize are not scum bags. Ok so what is your definition of a shit head and scum bag?
Oh no sir I don't disagree with you. It's just that, you don't seem to have openly recognized the distinction between the rioters and the protesters.
You keep saying that the rioters are jerks and stuff, and that makes sense, but are you saying that the rioters are only rioting AS protest? And not just using that as an excuse? Or hiding behind the guise of "protesting the jury decision" and just committing crimes?
I mean, it's not like a statement.
I mean, where you do you comment on the peaceful protesting that wants to bring attention to racist history in the Ferguson Police Department?
Well, TI has already shown he sympathizes with the coward cop who fills unarmed suspects full of holes. No offense TI, but given the caliber of opinions and sources you post, I just can't see you being any kind of objective expert on this.
but, just to prove myself wrong and give you benefit of the doubt, what is your opinion on the racial injustices of Ferguson PD, and I'm not talking Michael Brown. If you don't know what I'm talking about, it means you haven't throughly researched this subject, leading the aforementioned doubt of your objectivity. Now if you do know what I'm talking about, isn't it a clear case of racial injustice that should rightfully be protested?
And please, just because I said protested, don't bring up the retard looters/rioters, because they clearly aren't the main protesters nor do they carry the main protesters message. We're talking about the PEACEFUL protesters here. So again, don't the PEACEFUL protesters have a legitimate reason to protest, because based on your past comments, you seem to believe Ferguson's racial injustice is not deserving of any kind of attention, even though several cities are protesting. So I want you to clarify your stance on the peaceful protesters and their stance to me, since, as stated, you don't seem to view it as that big a deal.
Sorry, TI. You're a cool dude, but anybody constantly spouting misinformed information and incredulous sources pisses me off, because it is that kind of public ignorance which is the main reason for our country's (and the world's really) problems and tribulations.
Simply that the truth speaks for itself, the prosecutors, the witness, defendedent testimony and the grand jury.
He shot Michael Brown because Michael Brown was a huge man who was over powering him, lost control of his fire arm and he feared for his life. Since no one here is in law enforcement or the military I get why people have zero clue as to what the right to defend ones self means.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Misinformation is what you are doing is it not? Such as saying the cop had the did not have right to defend himself from being attacked for simply asking Brown to get out of the street and that all accounts of the prosecutor and grand jury was incorrect.
WTF are you going on about? If Brown got shot while trying to wrestle the gun, that's one thing, but Brown was running IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, turned around, and got shot.
Also, I guess you've never heard of "shoot to wound". Brown was at a significant enough distance that a non-kill shot was undoubtedly possible.
Basically, you're confirming that Wilson was a panicked coward who killed an unarmed man because he acted unprofessionally and didn't know how to shoot non-fatally (which should be a requirement for any law enforcement officer).
You seem to misunderstand. This isn't war where it's kill or be killed. Policemen are supposed to resort to fatal wounding ONLY as a last resort, and CERTAINLY not when the suspect is unarmed and running 10 feet in the opposite direction.
Or maybe policemen should recklessly kill everybody who attempts to assault them, going by your logic.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
No he turned around and then proceeded to run after the cop. This is all common knowledge. You are mis informed...Watch the interview I posted after the verdict was made.
You also don't understand how big Brown was..are you purposely hiding or ignoring facts to suit your stance?
First off, the cops account is not reliable since there are so many conflicting accounts. Second off, even he did run after the cop, there's this thing called SHOOT TO WOUND that I hear cops are supposed to do.
Wilson's interview where he describes a David vs Goliath style encounter. Yeah, I saw that crap, again, not surprised you posted it. And again, the encounter in the car doesn't justify Wilson not employing non-lethal tactics against an unarmed man like cops are supposed to do.
😆 Do you understand how big Brown is? I'll give you a hint: BOTH WILSON AND BROWN ARE 6'4. But again, this doesn't matter because it wasn't the physical confrontation in which Brown was shot, so I'm not sure why you even thought to bring this up unless you don't comprehend the subject matter being discussed.
I also note how you danced around my questions. Before replying to ANYTHING else in this post, first answer this question: Do you believe cops don't have to shoot to wound if an unarmed suspect is running at them? Your answer to this will gage your objectivity and acumen here.
Lol you still think he shot him in the back.
All your info is wrong.
You have not kept up with any of the facts, you ignore him attacking the cop, you ignore the verdict, you ignored him being larger and stronger, you ignored him trying to take his gun, you claim he shot him in the back which conflicts with the evidence stating he had no bullet holes in his back.
You have formed you own expert opinion based off hear say and not facts.
Your whole argument is worthless because it's fabricated.