Ferguson, MO

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos much of what you're saying puts you in a light where you've never had a problem with cops. Perhaps because you're a wasc? (not as catchy as wasp but essentially the same) I've been repeatedly hauled off in cuffs for blood tests because officers are convinced my Tourette's is me driving on cocaine. Now that's a white college educated male's reason to dislike cops.  Now let's imagine were an African American in a high crime area who's constantly getting stereotyped? I'm sorry but your constant going on of respect the cops and most are good etc. would be hard for me to follow I can't imagine how hard it would be for someone in say Brown's shoes.  

Oh, I get it just fine.  But your commentary attempts to justify behavior.  What's weird is the African Americans that are speaking out against the actions of some of the thuggish behavior of African Americans.  I guess they aren't WASC....so they must simply be weird, or maybe they grew up in Beverly Hills or something...or maybe they didn't and they are just tired of the actions. Or, if you could riddle me why in departments dominated by African American officers have the same issues going on...are they stereotyping or policing?  You do realize there is a difference, correct?  When one polices in a high crime area, you tend to take proactive actions, which a lot of people don't like. 

No one is saying that there isn't profiling that goes on and some folks have been victims of it.  Let's not pretend that gives someone a right to be stupid, torch businesses, shoot at people, etc, either. 

I'd love to hear your solution.

[ChicosBailBonds]

And it's just amazing that these "investigations" always end up clearing the officer of charges. He might have to take a leave of absence with pay, oh no!

Always?   Any other proverbial hyperbole you left out?


I'm sure there is a checklist you can get your hands on.

Face it, you've done EXACTLY what you lash out at others for....you have tried and convicted this guy based on NO EVIDENCE yet.  He may be guilty as anything, but right now we don't know, but that didn't stop you at all.

[brandx]

I like cops.   They hang out at my fire station during their bathroom breaks, we visit, we insult each other, we drink pop and discuss our customers.   But they are human and they do make mistakes.   While on a medical call, I heard one of the cops, who I have always gotten along with well, say to the drunk/disorderly husband of the patient I was working on "I should have shot you when I had the chance."

I think the cop in Ferguson messed up.     I think the riots in Ferguson have now taken on a life of their own.  

Like everything else, it all comes stems from leadership.

I grew up in Kenosha and always respected the police there. Played ball with and against lots of the guys, never had any runins, blah, blah, blah.

Moved to Racine and it is the opposite. Have no use for them, don't want to talk to them, etc. Just a bunch of arrogant, macho jerks. Not to mention that they are terrible policemen.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Actually he did.  You just dishonestly snipped out that part of the quote, which I put in bold:

"Even though it might sound harsh and impolitic, here is the bottom line: if you don’t want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me."

So in this guy's eyes, it's all up to the citizenry.  "DON'T PROVOKE ME OR I MAY HAVE TO RESPOND!!!!"  It's the Ray Rice defense of law enforcement.

And *this* is the guy who is teaching other cops???  F*cking scary.

Haha hilarious that it's from the article HE posted too. Clearly only the GIANT CLIPPED QUOTE ON THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE was read by Chicos. I can tell this truncated quote will become some sort of rallying cry/meme for dittoheads across social media without a hint of what immediately preceded it.

This whole situation is royally effed.

[Galway Eagle]

Oh, I get it just fine.  But your commentary attempts to justify behavior.  What's weird is the African Americans that are speaking out against the actions of some of the thuggish behavior of African Americans.  I guess they aren't WASC....so they must simply be weird, or maybe they grew up in Beverly Hills or something...or maybe they didn't and they are just tired of the actions. Or, if you could riddle me why in departments dominated by African American officers have the same issues going on...are they stereotyping or policing?  You do realize there is a difference, correct?  When one polices in a high crime area, you tend to take proactive actions, which a lot of people don't like. 

No one is saying that there isn't profiling that goes on and some folks have been victims of it.  Let's not pretend that gives someone a right to be stupid, torch businesses, shoot at people, etc, either. 

I'd love to hear your solution.

Woah dude you're putting many a word in my mouth.  I never condoned rioting and torching a building looting etc is definitely not the answer.  My commentary does not justify "thuggish behavior" if justifies the reason to disdain cops, to not trust cops, to not bend over whenever a cop tells you.  

Regarding the police departments with majority African Americans I'm going to ignore that as factual till you put forth an actual example ti then it just appears like a baseless comment.  

I am aware there is a difference between stereotyping and policing surprisingly I did actually graduate 6th grade when we covered those fun terms.

When one polices in a high crime area and uses those actions that the citizens don't like then it shouldn't come as any surprise that the citizens get annoyed and pushy at cops.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

Yet he still managed to shoot Mike Brown in the head. Twice.

Interesting how you think that when the narrative changes it isn't suspicious at all. It's taken them more than a freaking week to come out with this! Oh and Gateway Pundit? Suuurreeeee.

This first came out last Wednesday....hardly a week.  He was treated at the hospital on August 13th, last Wednesday and it was reported that he was treated with a swollen face from being hit in the head. 

News 4′s Laura Hettiger Wednesday morning, said the officer “was hit” and the “side of his face was swollen.”


They have not come out and said anything publicly about the level of the injuries, because that is a private medical matter.  Of course, when they do release actual information, certain folks like yourself get all bent and start screaming character assassination when videos of the angel are out there robbing convenience stores.  So the authorities are damned if they do and damned if they don't.  Today a report (is it true, who knows) said two sources (District Attorney's office and Police sources) stated his orbital socket was broken.  Whether it was or wasn't, it was reported 6 days ago that he sustained facial injuries without disclosure of how severe...must have been from him running backwards (explains why he wasn't shot in the back) while fleeing and not being anywhere close to the cop.

[Aughnanure]

Always?   Any other proverbial hyperbole you left out?


I'm sure there is a checklist you can get your hands on.

Face it, you've done EXACTLY what you lash out at others for....you have tried and convicted this guy based on NO EVIDENCE yet.  He may be guilty as anything, but right now we don't know, but that didn't stop you at all.

Based on NO evidence? How about a dead 17 year old? Numerous eye witnesses. But no, please trust the police report written by the friends of the murderer.

You know why people don't like cops? Because (generally) cops don't face the full repercussions of their actions and are protected by a system which only goes on to encourage more of this behavior because there are, again, no consequences to deter the action... and if there are, they are minor.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Based on NO evidence? How about a dead 17 year old? Numerous eye witnesses. But no, please trust the police report written by the friends of the murderer.

You know why people don't like cops? Because (generally) cops don't face the full repercussions of their actions and are protected by a system which only goes on to encourage more of this behavior because there are, again, no consequences to deter the action... and if there are, they are minor.

Who is this 17 year old you speak of?  Brown was 18, an adult.   You  continue to be short on the facts, but keep them coming...narrative changing.  Of course, it's not surprising since the media (liberal ones at least), are stating he was a teenager despite the AP guidelines stating that anyone over the 18 should be discussed as a man or a woman.  Then again, this is the same media that likes to trot out photos from age 12 to push their agenda.  You're excused, just gullible in what you read.  http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/18/ap-violating-own-style-guidelines-to-refer-to-michael-brown-as-teenager/

Numerous witnesses???....a few, several of which said he was shot in the back....him...two autopsies said no entry wounds in the back.  They sound like awesome witnesses.  One said he (Brown) didn't attack the cop, I guess the busted up face came from the magic charms guy.  There are also over a dozen witnesses that back the police version....for some reason you ignore those.  Hmm.  Interesting.  You would make a great jurist with your wonderful ability to weigh ALL the facts, not just the ones that fill your biases. 

I think you should rephrase your statement to be "some people don't like cops", even though the vast majority of people in this country support them and want MORE cops on the streets. 

[Aughnanure]

This first came out last Wednesday....hardly a week.  He was treated at the hospital on August 13th, last Wednesday and it was reported that he was treated with a swollen face from being hit in the head. 

News 4′s Laura Hettiger Wednesday morning, said the officer “was hit” and the “side of his face was swollen.”


They have not come out and said anything publicly about the level of the injuries, because that is a private medical matter.  Of course, when they do release actual information, certain folks like yourself get all bent and start screaming character assassination when videos of the angel are out there robbing convenience stores.  So the authorities are damned if they do and damned if they don't.  Today a report (is it true, who knows) said two sources (District Attorney's office and Police sources) stated his orbital socket was broken.  Whether it was or wasn't, it was reported 6 days ago that he sustained facial injuries without disclosure of how severe...must have been from him running backwards (explains why he wasn't shot in the back) while fleeing and not being anywhere close to the cop.

Totes looks like he was worried about the orbital blowout fracture in his eye right after firing 6 shots into this kid. Literally just pacing around the kid and not once touches his eye. I guess it must

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbFROVARxuA#t=20

Why are you even remotely surprised by this? They've been trying to character assassinate the kid since day 1. He smoked weed, he stole some cigars - as if any of those things in any way justifies a murder.

[Aughnanure]

Who is this 17 year old you speak of?  Brown was 18, an adult.   You  continue to be short on the facts, but keep them coming...narrative changing.  Of course, it's not surprising since the media (liberal ones at least), are stating he was a teenager despite the AP guidelines stating that anyone over the 18 should be discussed as a man or a woman.  Then again, this is the same media that likes to trot out photos from age 12 to push their agenda.  You're excused, just gullible in what you read.  http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/18/ap-violating-own-style-guidelines-to-refer-to-michael-brown-as-teenager/

Numerous witnesses???....a few, several of which said he was shot in the back....him...two autopsies said no entry wounds in the back.  They sound like awesome witnesses.  One said he (Brown) didn't attack the cop, I guess the busted up face came from the magic charms guy.  There are also over a dozen witnesses that back the police version....for some reason you ignore those.  Hmm.  Interesting.  You would make a great jurist with your wonderful ability to weigh ALL the facts, not just the ones that fill your biases.  

I think you should rephrase your statement to be "some people don't like cops", even though the vast majority of people in this country support them and want MORE cops on the streets.  

Oh my god, if you keep getting your "information" from garbage sites like Gateway Pundit and Hot Air I'm just gonna keep laughing at you.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/18/michael-brown-autopsy-teenager-surrendering-ferguson

Also, please go on another paragraph long rant about how being 18 instead of 17 totally makes this shooting any different.

And what "beat face" are you talking about? Do you just keep pulling crap out of your ass. There's been no released photos of him. Your "evidence" that you've bought immediately still comes from one tweet from one reporter who got the information form "police sources."

[Coleman]

I think you should rephrase your statement to be "some people don't like cops", even though the vast majority of people in this country support them and want MORE cops on the streets.  

I support more cops on the streets, but I want beat cops who know the neighborhoods, develop relationships and trust with citizens, work WITH communities to protect them and solve problems together. "Do what I say or I shoot you" is not the characterization of the kind of police I would support.

I don't want yet another branch of our bloated military.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Woah dude you're putting many a word in my mouth.  I never condoned rioting and torching a building looting etc is definitely not the answer.  My commentary does not justify "thuggish behavior" if justifies the reason to disdain cops, to not trust cops, to not bend over whenever a cop tells you.  

Regarding the police departments with majority African Americans I'm going to ignore that as factual till you put forth an actual example ti then it just appears like a baseless comment.  

I am aware there is a difference between stereotyping and policing surprisingly I did actually graduate 6th grade when we covered those fun terms.

When one polices in a high crime area and uses those actions that the citizens don't like then it shouldn't come as any surprise that the citizens get annoyed and pushy at cops.  

I'm sure it does bum them out, but the people of that city or jurisdiction elect their Sheriff, or Police captain.  If they don't like how they are policed, then vote differently for your elected officials and change how it is done.  Seems to me, the folks that are actually responsible and voting, want the thugs policed in that matter or it wouldn't continue.

In my view, what you said is that the distrust of the cops is why certain people act the way they do.  You've given them a reason for their actions, a crutch.  I view it as justification.  You say that isn't the case....fair enough, but that's how I read your comments.  Clearly, twice now, you have stated your concerns over cops. I have a differing view, one that the majority of Americans share.  I've also said that some cops are bad, of course they are, but most are not.  You seem to be overwhelmingly on the side of the opposite...most cops bad, some good.  If I have read you wrong, please correct me but your words seem to imply that.

[Aughnanure]

In my view, what you said is that the distrust of the cops is why certain people act the way they do.  You've given them a reason for their actions, a crutch.  I view it as justification.  You say that isn't the case....fair enough, but that's how I read your comments.  Clearly, twice now, you have stated your concerns over cops. I have a differing view, one that the majority of white Americans share.  I've also said that some cops are bad, of course they are, but most are not.  You seem to be overwhelmingly on the side of the opposite...most cops bad, some good.  If I have read you wrong, please correct me but your words seem to imply that.

FIFY

[forgetful]

I didn't say a word about the shooting, you did.

Personally, I'm going to wait until ALL the facts come in.  What I've seen so far, from people like Chris Hayes, Al, and others, is they can't wait to convict someone before ALL the facts come in.

Here's what I've seen so far during the electronic lynching:

Witnesses claim he was shot in the back, autopsy (two of them) show he wasn't.  Oops.  Narrative changing.

Narrative about what an angel this guy was....he was going to college afterall.  Robbed a store minutes prior to getting killed, had a juvenile arrest record, illegal drugs in system.  Ooops.  Narrative keeps changing.

Media claims rubber bullets fired at demonstrators...."rubber bullets" turn out to be ear plugs.  Sensational journalism.

Does this justify his death?  Nope.  I don't know what happened, YOU don't know what happened.  You don't know if the shooting was justified any more than I do.  Let the facts come out, instead a whole lot of people can't wait to bury this guy and convict him.  Meanwhile, over the weekend another 9 African Americans shot and killed by African Americans in Chicago....crickets...crickets...crickets....

In the meantime, some good advice from a cop who teaches other cops.  "Don’t argue with me, don’t call me names, don’t tell me that I can’t stop you, don’t say I’m a racist pig, don’t threaten that you’ll sue me and take away my badge. Don’t scream at me that you pay my salary, and don’t even think of aggressively walking towards me."  Pretty simple.  You bum rush a cop, you're going to get hurt.  Respect the cops, do what they say to do., simple credo to live by.  There are some bad cops out there, but most are not.   

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/08/19/im-a-cop-if-you-dont-want-to-get-hurt-dont-challenge-me/?hpid=z2

You say that you are going to wait for all the facts to come in, then immediately chastise the media reporting what information we have as undertaking a electronic lynching.

So basically, if they publish things that don't fit your agenda it is electronic lynching.

Also, you want to look at new information coming out (changing narrative) that support the cops version of the story (orbital blowout) as indicating that clearly the 18-yr old kid was lying as proof of an electronic lynching.

You, however, don't treat the cops story the same way.  One of facts we do have from the autopsy is that there was no signs of an altercation on Brown.  If (and I emphasize if), the officer suffered an orbital blowout, there would be bruising/contusions to Browns hand/fist.  There were not. 

So we very well may have mutually inconsistent facts, which raises even more questions about what occurred.

If you do really want to wait for all the facts (which I want to wait for), I would suggest just stepping away and not engaging in arguments.  By default to engage in an environment requires taking one side, which means that one does not wait for all the facts.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Oh my god, if you keep getting your "information" from garbage sites like Gateway Pundit and Hot Air I'm just gonna keep laughing at you.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/18/michael-brown-autopsy-teenager-surrendering-ferguson

Also, please go on another paragraph long rant about how being 18 instead of 17 totally makes this shooting any different.

And what "beat face" are you talking about? Do you just keep pulling crap out of your ass. There's been no released photos of him. Your "evidence" that you've bought immediately still comes from one tweet from one reporter who got the information form "police sources."

LOL....you were wrong.  Just admit it.  He was 18, not 17.

Yes, it's a big difference in our society and with the law, but pretend to make it not a big difference.  The magical age of 18 is a huge difference.   You were wrong, your facts were wrong and then you claim that I'm pulling something out.  LOL.

HotAir did what others didn't....verbatim showed what the AP style guide says should be used and then shows what the media actually used.  You don't like that they factually showed that clear difference.  Not surprised.

No photos released of his face...oh noes.  This isn't CSI, it will come out.  There has been no photos released of Kevin Ward's broken spine, but I'm pretty sure there is an investigation and they put his body into the ground a few days ago.  There were no released autopsy photos of JFK's head blown off officially, but you can find them if you look hard enough.  I suppose JFK's top of his head wasn't blown off then, cuz no photos were released.  Shall I continue?

Let me guess, if photos of the officer's face are released in the coming days, months, etc, will you say they are doctored, faked....if they come from MSNBC are they legitimate but if they come from FOX they are not?  How about CNN?  If they come out to be true, will you come back here with the "OMG" hilarity around HotAir and issue an apology?  LOL

[Aughnanure]

LOL....you were wrong.  Just admit it.  He was 18, not 17.

Yes, it's a big difference in our society and with the law, but pretend to make it not a big difference.  The magical age of 18 is a huge difference.   You were wrong, your facts were wrong and then you claim that I'm pulling something out.  LOL.

HotAir did what others didn't....verbatim showed what the AP style guide says should be used and then shows what the media actually used.  You don't like that they factually showed that clear difference.  Not surprised.

No photos released of his face...oh noes.  This isn't CSI, it will come out.  There has been no photos released of Kevin Ward's broken spine, but I'm pretty sure there is an investigation and they put his body into the ground a few days ago.  There were no released autopsy photos of JFK's head blown off officially, but you can find them if you look hard enough.  I suppose JFK's top of his head wasn't blown off then, cuz no photos were released.  Shall I continue?

Let me guess, if photos of the officer's face are released in the coming days, months, etc, will you say they are doctored, faked....if they come from MSNBC are they legitimate but if they come from FOX they are not?  How about CNN?  If they come out to be true, will you come back here with the "OMG" hilarity around HotAir and issue an apology?  LOL

Says the person who wants to "wait" for all the facts to come out.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You say that you are going to wait for all the facts to come in, then immediately chastise the media reporting what information we have as undertaking a electronic lynching.

So basically, if they publish things that don't fit your agenda it is electronic lynching.

Also, you want to look at new information coming out (changing narrative) that support the cops version of the story (orbital blowout) as indicating that clearly the 18-yr old kid was lying as proof of an electronic lynching.

You, however, don't treat the cops story the same way.  One of facts we do have from the autopsy is that there was no signs of an altercation on Brown.  If (and I emphasize if), the officer suffered an orbital blowout, there would be bruising/contusions to Browns hand/fist.  There were not. 

So we very well may have mutually inconsistent facts, which raises even more questions about what occurred.

If you do really want to wait for all the facts (which I want to wait for), I would suggest just stepping away and not engaging in arguments.  By default to engage in an environment requires taking one side, which means that one does not wait for all the facts.

Forgetful...

Interesting.  Let's see, when a news agency says rubber bullets are fired into the crowd and the next day we learn they are ear plugs, that aspect of the report is DECIDED and FACTUAL.  Is it not?  That's settled?

I said all the facts around the case, but if the media is wrong and is proven to be wrong in the process, we can't comment on it? 

As for new information, yup....classic media that rushes to judgment and I'm merely showing how the narrative can change....and it can change again.  That hasn't stopped Al, Chris Hayes and others to dig in on only the facts they want to talk about....what wonderful journalistic integrity.

They can publish things all they want...if the cop is guilty of killing this kid without reason, then I hope he fries.  My agenda, as you call it, is to get to the truth.  You have a big part of the media that has already tried and convicted this guy, and with each passing day new information might change that.  Question is, why is it when new information comes in there are certain outlets that don't care at all, but keep on pushing their agenda regardless?  Shouldn't the new information at least be reported?  They had no problem reporting a lot of other things that were "facts" that may not be.  Lots of selective reporting going on.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Says the person who wants to "wait" for all the facts to come out.

You're the one implying that there is a conspiracy going on because they have waited to release photos or haven't reported them yet. 

Let me guess, you were damn pissed off when they released the video of him robbing a convenience store and having drugs in his system, too.  Damned if they do, damned if they don't....but you'll decide what's important and have convicted already.  Congratulations.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

My agenda, as you call it, is to get to the truth. 

Lots of selective reporting going on.

I agree with you, which is why I'll withhold my outrage for the "out of control cops", and the "liberal media" until the facts get sifted through and the emotion is removed from this case.

People on both sides of this issue aren't very reasonable (yet). Let the investigators do their job. Hopefully we can eventually have some closure.

[jesmu84]

Forgetful...

Interesting.  Let's see, when a news agency says rubber bullets are fired into the crowd and the next day we learn they are ear plugs, that aspect of the report is DECIDED and FACTUAL.  Is it not?  That's settled?

I said all the facts around the case, but if the media is wrong and is proven to be wrong in the process, we can't comment on it? 

As for new information, yup....classic media that rushes to judgment and I'm merely showing how the narrative can change....and it can change again.  That hasn't stopped Al, Chris Hayes and others to dig in on only the facts they want to talk about....what wonderful journalistic integrity.

They can publish things all they want...if the cop is guilty of killing this kid without reason, then I hope he fries.  My agenda, as you call it, is to get to the truth.  You have a big part of the media that has already tried and convicted this guy, and with each passing day new information might change that.  Question is, why is it when new information comes in there are certain outlets that don't care at all, but keep on pushing their agenda regardless?  Shouldn't the new information at least be reported?  They had no problem reporting a lot of other things that were "facts" that may not be.  Lots of selective reporting going on.

Because they're paid to push that agenda?

[ChicosBailBonds]

US Attorney, investigation could take months to complete.  Disclosure of details could ruin investigation.

“While the lack of details surrounding the shooting may frustrate the media and breed suspicion among those already distrustful of the system, those closely guarded details give law enforcement the best yardsticks for measuring whether witnesses are truthful,” Callahan said. “Without those yardsticks, an investigation becomes more of a guessing game or popularity contest than a search for the truth.”

http://time.com/3144985/ferguson-michael-brown-darren-wilson-us-attorney/    (OMG, it's Time magazine....)

Aughanere and others not going to like it....CSI does it in one hour, damnit!!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Because they're paid to push that agenda?

Ding ding, and that's the problem.  The agenda push in today's media (on both sides) is sickening.  It is why the media is held to their lowest levels on record in public polling. 

Liberals still love the media, not surprising because it's like being in a room with like minded people and part of the club, but even there it is horribly low.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/171740/americans-confidence-news-media-remains-low.aspx

[Coleman]

Ding ding, and that's the problem.  The agenda push in today's media (on both sides) is sickening.  It is why the media is held to their lowest levels on record in public polling. 

Liberals still love the media, not surprising because it's like being in a room with like minded people and part of the club, but even there it is horribly low.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/171740/americans-confidence-news-media-remains-low.aspx

You are all over the place. Can we stick to one topic?

[tower912]

Why start now?

[Aughnanure]

You're the one implying that there is a conspiracy going on because they have waited to release photos or haven't reported them yet. 

Let me guess, you were damn pissed off when they released the video of him robbing a convenience store and having drugs in his system, too.  Damned if they do, damned if they don't....but you'll decide what's important and have convicted already.  Congratulations.

Do you mean "drugs" as in scurry marijuana? I was annoyed, but those didn't change a damn thing. Rob some convenience store = justifying a murder?

You're reaching, and it's telling. The cop shot him...6 times! S-I-X.