• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Michael Brown unarmed shooting in Ferguson, MO

Status
Not open for further replies.

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
If the idiot only gets fired, that would be a major injustice to citizens everywhere.. Prolonged jail time is needed for this murder.
Anything less is an injustice to citizens across the country. If no jail time is handed down in this case, then LEO will have a license to kill.
This incident was murder plain and simple...
Can I get the crystal ball that you and WalkingWolf are using to definitively tell you whether the cop's use of force was lawful? With the ability that you two and your crystal ball's (balls'?) possess, I can make a killing in the stock market! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I hope that if either of you two ever have to use deadly force, the prosecutor uses a different method to assess YOUR guilt or innocence.
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Can I get the crystal ball that you and WalkingWolf are using to definitively tell you whether the cop's use of force was lawful? With the ability that you two and your crystal ball's (balls'?) possess, I can make a killing in the stock market! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I hope that if either of you two ever have to use deadly force, the prosecutor uses a different method to assess YOUR guilt or innocence.

Don't need a crystal ball. As some have already plainly said... When your s cop your guilty until proven innocent. With video. Crystal clear in color with audio dubbed over for text. Taken by no less then 6 people from evert angle.

Then you'll just be fired for being stupid and not possessing magic to stop the troubled youth with telepathy.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Don't need a crystal ball. As some have already plainly said... When your s cop your guilty until proven innocent. With video. Crystal clear in color with audio dubbed over for text. Taken by no less then 6 people from evert angle.

Then you'll just be fired for being stupid and not possessing magic to stop the troubled youth with telepathy.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Maybe you could explain HOW the first shot was fired from the car, and clearly Mike retreated that the officer's life was in danger 35 FEET FROM HIS PATROL CAR?

Do you think Mike dragged him? I am amazed by the lack of intelligence and common sense of many of the current LEOs. It is wonder they can tie their shoe laces.
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
Maybe you could explain HOW the first shot was fired from the car, and clearly Mike retreated that the officer's life was in danger 35 FEET FROM HIS PATROL CAR?

Do you think Mike dragged him? I am amazed by the lack of intelligence and common sense of many of the current LEOs. It is wonder they can tie their shoe laces.

I've never shot something that dropped right where the lead connected, shot raccoons before while protecting my livestock, one time I had one run 40 feet after I nailed a perfect headshot. Where the body falls is not always where they met the high speed chunk of pb with their name on it..

By your logic if a suspect runs from police after being shot and dies in surgery, you would be demanding to know why the officer shot the suspect on the operating table......
 
Last edited:

357SigFan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
150
Location
STL MO, USA
YES! By witness accounts and the FACTS on the scene he chased the boy! There is no doubt that the first shot was fired from INSIDE the squad car, yet the boy was finished off THIRTY FIVE FEET from the first shot. It is pretty clear that they did not stroll hand in hand for thirty five feet, and that Mike was not chasing the officer after being shot.

A little common sense goes along way, too bad the police officer possessed none. At the very least this guy should be fired for being so incredibly STUPID!

If the idiot only gets fired, that would be a major injustice to citizens everywhere.. Prolonged jail time is needed for this murder.
Anything less is an injustice to citizens across the country. If no jail time is handed down in this case, then LEO will have a license to kill.
This incident was murder plain and simple..

My .02

Regards

CCJ

Hands are not weapons under Missouri statue.

Chapter definitions. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000011.HTM

Use of force in defense of persons. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000046.HTM

The cop will have his day in court, as will the family. The law is very clear and the cop could use force it now becomes a question of whether or not deadly force was a reasonable response in that situation. I contend that it was not based only on what we know today.

None of us has nearly enough information to make any determination - we didn't witness it, and full disclosure certainly isn't forthcoming (I would argue with good reason at this time, being as the investigation is ongoing). Wilson, and apparently one unidentified witness, paint a picture that is very likely justified, and the 'witness reports' that we've heard so far paint the opposite picture.

What we DO know now it that Brown wasn't the angel that so many claim he was. We do know that he committed a violent robbery a short time before being stopped. Wilson stopped Brown a short time after the robbery while Brown was walking down the street. That's about all we *really* know. We don't know what really happened during the encounter, but I highly doubt Wilson started his shift that day (or any other day) thinking 'I want to kill someone today - I need to find some way to justify doing so'.

It really is sad that, like in the Zimmerman case, so many people have the rope in their hands salivating at the thought of Wilson hanging from it, despite the fact that we don't have near enough information to determine if it was justified or not. And why this mentality? Because a white person shot and killed a black person, so the white person MUST be in the wrong and lying. Regardless of the outcome, even if this really and truly is determined to be a justified shooting, Wilsons life is over. He will have to move way far away because unlike normal, civilized people, those among the community that were rioting, looting and burning innocent businesses down (none of which are civilized behavior) will not accept it and want to exact their own revenge because 'a black person can do no wrong and all white people are out to kill back people'. This case has NOTHING to do with excessive use of force on the part of the police and EVERYTHING to do with race. You know FULL WELL that if Brown was white and/or Wilson was black, this barely would have made the evening news, let alone the rioting, looting, burning down of innocent businesses and the desire to have Wilson hanging from the end of a rope. Sickening.
 
Last edited:

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
So if I were to start punching and/or kicking you, you're just going to sit back and take it saying 'oh, it's only his hands and feet. They're not weapons, so he's not a threat. He can't kill me'? I didn't think so. A good punch to the head to KO you (Or just disorient you enough to get you on the ground), and a good kick to the head once you're down and you're DEAD. Two blows. Most people would only consider knives & guns to be weapons. Like it or not, hands and feet ARE weapons, as is just about anything not nailed down. Go ahead and keep discounting hands and feet (and the mind, as well) as weapons if it makes you feel better.

It seems someone has already beaten me to the punch (no pun intended) in posting the legal definition. I disagree with you personally as well. Also, there's no need to get all mad and insinuate things about me when you do not know me. Whenever you condescend someone online in regards to fighting or self defense, you're only projecting yourself for all to see.

As for your opinion, I am not Darren Wilson. I am not the kid in Colorado open carrying a shotgun. I am not Michael Brown. I'm not any of these people who seem to get themselves into ridiculous situations that they can't get themselves out of. I may comment on them, but I am more careful and calculating than these people. I do not carry about my day like some ******* who needs to intimidate everyone around me. I do not approach issues I come across with aggression unless absolutely necessary, and by absolutely necessary I mean LEGAL. I don't need to prove any points to anyone at this point in my life. I've been there and done that and proven to myself that I don't need to worry about things of that nature. I'm not mentally weak. I'm not afraid of someone who is 6'4" 290 just because they are 6'4" 290. There are smart ways to approach people, because if you induce FEAR within a weak minded individual, crazy **** can happen.

TL;NR - Get off your high horse. What you consider "weapons which can be defended with lethal force" are not legally considered so in this case, and in my opinion, any case. Laws lay down rules in specific cases, and there may be legal activity leading up to those cases, but that doesn't mean that more care could have been used that would have likely saved people's lives. And anyway, I do not think that anyone is going to argue that IF the kid grabbed for the cop's gun then the cop was justified in the first shot inside the car. I think the funny part is how far away the kid was when he died and certain witness statements insinuating he was submitting at the time he was killed.

P.S. To any LEO reading this - especially if you patrol an area as destitute as these places where there is non-stop tension - just chill the heck out and lead by example. Don't get mad at ignorant or mentally deficient people. Try to help them. If some moron is jay walking down the street, pull up next to him and say, "Hey man, I'm not going to cite you, but my buddy who patrols this area is kind of a dick and if he sees you jaywalking he will cite you." Stop trying to incite or escalate the situation by forcing people to submit to you. Make them WANT TO, and earn their respect - and I guarantee you never get attacked or someone tries to kill you with your own gun. Will everyone be susceptible to logic and reason or morality? NO. But you can still generate revenue for your municipality from people who choose not to follow the rules and still help people and probably unknowingly save lives, including your own.
 
Last edited:

Richieg150

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
432
Location
Show Me State
Hands are not weapons under Missouri statue.

Chapter definitions. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000011.HTM

Use of force in defense of persons. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000046.HTM

The cop will have his day in court, as will the family. The law is very clear and the cop could use force it now becomes a question of whether or not deadly force was a reasonable response in that situation. I contend that it was not based only on what we know today.

The Missouri State Supreme Court has ruled :“Something more than fear of size however, is required to justify the use of deadly force in self-defense. Some affirmative action, gesture or communication by the person feared indicating the immediacy of the danger, the ability to avoid it and the necessity of using deadly force must also be present.”

The court quoted with approval that a “man, because he is the physical inferior of another … is [not] … bound to submit to a public [assault] … If nature has not provided the means for such resistance, art may; in short, a weapon may be used… “

SO... hands are considered a weapon, when used to assault, in the state of Missouri, according to this ruling by The Supreme Court of Missouri.
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
The Missouri State Supreme Court has ruled :“Something more than fear of size however, is required to justify the use of deadly force in self-defense. Some affirmative action, gesture or communication by the person feared indicating the immediacy of the danger, the ability to avoid it and the necessity of using deadly force must also be present.”

Noted.

The court quoted with approval that a “man, because he is the physical inferior of another … is [not] … bound to submit to a public [assault] … If nature has not provided the means for such resistance, art may; in short, a weapon may be used… “

This seems quite vague. "If nature has not provided the means," could mean a number of things. Also is there an "equal force" statute? Just curious and have not done proper research at this time.

SO... hands are considered a weapon, when used to assault, in the state of Missouri, according to this ruling by The Supreme Court of Missouri.

I have no idea how you came to this conclusion based on the un-cited quotations you used to back up the claim. Not trying to be a jerk, but I do not see a logical connection between the words "weapon" and "hands" in what you quoted. As a matter of fact, the word hands does not exist in any of your quotations.
 

FBrinson

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
298
Location
Henrico, VA
From NYT :

SUB-JP-BROWN-2-master495_zpsd6a5b9f8.jpg

I'm not sure how having at least 4 bullet wounds in the front of his right arm plays along with being shot while his hands were raised and he had his back to the cop but I am sure that someone on here will explain it soon. :D
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
From NYT :

View attachment 11915

I'm not sure how having at least 4 bullet wounds in the front of his right arm plays along with being shot while his hands were raised and he had his back to the cop but I am sure that someone on here will explain it soon. :D

Damn...

Does this count as facts anyone?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

357SigFan

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
150
Location
STL MO, USA
From NYT :

View attachment 11915

I'm not sure how having at least 4 bullet wounds in the front of his right arm plays along with being shot while his hands were raised and he had his back to the cop but I am sure that someone on here will explain it soon. :D

I think its safe to say Brown was not shot in the back and did not have his hands up when he was shot as 'witness reports' claim...
 

Richieg150

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
432
Location
Show Me State
Noted.



This seems quite vague. "If nature has not provided the means," could mean a number of things. Also is there an "equal force" statute? Just curious and have not done proper research at this time.



I have no idea how you came to this conclusion based on the un-cited quotations you used to back up the claim. Not trying to be a jerk, but I do not see a logical connection between the words "weapon" and "hands" in what you quoted. As a matter of fact, the word hands does not exist in any of your quotations.

The comment was made that hands are not weapons under the Missouri statutes. Definition of WEAPON:1weap·on
noun \ˈwe-pən\

: something that is used for fighting or attacking someone or for defending yourself when someone is attacking you.

Missouri has no Equal force statute, that I could find by searching.
Just because Brown was unarmed, no gun, knife, doesn't mean his hands weren't being used as weapons. The LEO had every right to shoot him IF, he was getting beat by Brown. More people are killed by bare hand beatings than firearms.

FBI Statistic I looked up :
As of 2008, the mortality rate for shotguns was 14%, for rifles was 8% – but the mortality rate for severe beatings was 55%.

Overall, you have roughly a 90 percent chance of surviving being shot. You have less than a 50% chance of surviving a severe beating. A couple of rehabilitation experts say they see a far higher percentage of persons who have been beaten who are permanently disabled than those who have been shot, as well.

Bottom line? If you have a choice, a gunfight is a better option than a beating.

Brown used his size to intimidate and strong arm , as shown in the video. He COULD have very well beat the LEO senseless or to death, would it have been better for the LEO not to fire, IF indeed he had to, and have Brown beat him? Especially if the LEO was sitting in the car, trying to fend off punches.
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
I think its safe to say Brown was not shot in the back and did not have his hands up when he was shot as 'witness reports' claim...

The "witness reports" do not claim that he was only shot once he "raised his hands in surrender." What are you even talking about? Not all the shots happened at once, and I'm fairly certain that no one claimed they all happened at once. Not even the accomplice to the robbery.

I think the only safe thing to say is based on your last few comments your total lack of logical thinking should not be interpreted as fact.

Aren't those gunshots to the head? You ever heard of anyone being shot in the head then running 35 feet and turning around? What about someone killing another person without a weapon from 35 feet away? Me neither.

In fact, 3 witnesses agree that Brown was shot at once while the officer was still in the car, and that Brown ran away while being shot at, then turned around to surrender and was killed. THREE EYEWITNESSES! And just because the officer didn't hit Brown in the back doesn't mean that he didn't shoot at him while he had his back turned, which would explain why someone would think he was shot in the back if they saw it happen.

Seriously, you are so incredibly biased it's abhorrent.

Again, to quote myself:
And anyway, I do not think that anyone is going to argue that IF the kid grabbed for the cop's gun then the cop was justified in the first shot inside the car. I think the funny part is how far away the kid was when he died and certain witness statements insinuating he was submitting at the time he was killed.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snipped--

In fact, 3 witnesses agree that Brown was shot at once while the officer was still in the car, and that Brown ran away while being shot at, then turned around to surrender and was systematically executed. THREE EYEWITNESSES! And just because the officer didn't hit Brown in the back doesn't mean that he didn't shoot at him while he had his back turned.
It has also been reported that Brown was shot while charging/running at the officer - if that was the case, it is a strange way to surrender.

I seriously think that "executed" needs to be left out of our verbiage at this time.
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
It has also been reported that Brown was shot while charging/running at the officer - if that was the case, it is a strange way to surrender.

I seriously think that "executed" needs to be left out of our verbiage at this time.


The "verbiage" used in my statement is the only argument against my statement at this time so I have edited my post accordingly, even though there is a witness statement that he was "executed."

The only "report" right now supporting the claim that Brown "ran toward" the officer is from one man in the background of a YouTube video.

I seriously think that "charged" needs to be left out of our verbiage at this time as well, since there are zero eyewitness statements containing this word.
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
The "verbiage" used in my statement is the only argument against my statement at this time so I have edited my post accordingly.

The only "report" right now supporting the claim that Brown "ran toward" the officer is from one man in the background of a YouTube video.

I seriously think that "charged" needs to be left out of our verbiage at this time as well, since there are zero eyewitness statements containing this word.

I think the bullet wounds to his FRONT lay credence the "charged" aspect. But hey who cares about autopsy reports.... Unless of course they damn the officer.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
I think the bullet wounds to his FRONT lay credence the "charged" aspect. But hey who cares about autopsy reports.... Unless of course they damn the officer.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

It's funny how you still believe that being shot from the front somehow automatically means you were charging your attacker. Wounds to the front of the body prove one thing and one thing only: you were facing your attacker.

Again, there are no witness statements on record that I can find that even mention the word, "charged." Not like that even matters to you.

He was shot 4 times to the right arm, palm facing forward and 1 to the right eye and one to the head.

Put your hands up like you're surrendering. Are your palms facing forward or backward?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top