Steve can't answer for himself?

I'm only trying to help you, jeeze. I'm on your side. Are you ok with that?

YES or NO?

_________________
We all have private ails. The troublemakers are they who need public cures for their private ails.- Eric Hoffer

I always have a hand extended to people that want to be on my side. Forgive me for being skeptical

Got it. Cool. Thanks for playing.

I'm not touching that hand until it's washed, however. You understand, with all the rusty poles, etc...

_________________
We all have private ails. The troublemakers are they who need public cures for their private ails.- Eric Hoffer

No, he does not deserve money (whatever amount) for killing someone, even if they are just a common criminal. He deserves the support he's getting so he knows that he is appreciated for all he does as a Police Officer and so he knows that there are MANY people who believe that he did nothing wrong. I'm sure there will be a civil suit whether or not the grand jury elects to bring charges against him of a criminal nature. So there will very likely be legal expenses.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!

That's what I don't get about this. A lot of people are saying let's wait til we get the facts. The FACT that he shot an unarmed man 6 times is enough to clearly demonstrate he is guilty of something.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

Who believes he did "nothing wrong" besides his family members, hardcore racists, cops, and broads who are married to cops?

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

I encourage everyone to click on this and read the comments people posted with their donations.

_________________

Those are the worst.

_________________

Surely they are waiting until all the facts come out before making any judgments.

_________________

Oh my God! I have a real good friend who I've known forever who is one of them. The shit she posts on Facebook regarding this topic is ridiculous. I'm not someone who beefs on my friends on Facebook, but it's hard to read some of the stupid shit she and the cop wives who are her friends are writing without responding.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

The "facts" need clarification. It may be a "fact" that he shot Brown 6 times. But there are different ways someone can be shot 6 times. One way would be if he shot Brown in the back and head 6 times execution-style. Another way would be to say Brown charged toward Wilson and the officer started firing, hitting Brown 4 times in the arm (which didn't stop Brown), and then finally hit him critically with the last two shots.

Same thing with people repeating the fact that Brown was "unarmed." Technically true...but if someone fights with an officer for the officer's gun, he is no longer entitled to unarmed treatment in my opinion.

It could be that the officer is guilty...I don't know all the facts. My point is that even the facts can be twisted to be more inflammatory, depending on one's point of view.

_________________

They might be the most combative people I have seen on the internet. I don't think any of them work jobs either. They just sit at home on facebook and comment about how dangerous their husband's job is.

_________________

See I actually tolerate this better. At least they have somewhat of a decent reason to be completely biased. They're worried their husband wont come home on a nightly basis. They are completely ridiculous and often say things that contradict facts, time and space but like I said, at least you know why.

If they are so worried that their husband's job is unsafe, maybe they should convince him to find a new line of work.

My husband has the right to shoot an unarmed man so he can come home safely to his kids tonight!!

_________________

Ive seen this written before and just want to clarify, you are saying that once someone goes for the cop's gun (failing to get it), the cop is justified to execute that person?

Is the goal public safety or "whats right"?

Look, Im just saying I understand where it comes from as opposed to people who have no connection but still say crazy shit

I doubt most cops' wives are sitting and worrying they won't come home at night. I'm also sure there are probably many jobs that are more dangerous.

_________________

The irony is I've never known a cop who didn't cheat on his wife, although I'm sure there may be some out there.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Elon, Tulsi, and Don

Again, "execute" is inflammatory and not productive.

I'm trying to say that someone trying to get an officer's gun should not be considered "unarmed" (at that specific moment). Of course, Brown would have regained the unarmed status if he was unsuccessful and was running away from the officer. But if showed the officer a willingness to fight for his gun, and then decided to charge the officer, I'm not sure what the officer is supposed to do, other than shoot. And "shoot for the legs" is not a viable answer.

_________________

No, it's accurate. Because if you're justifying killing the guy (not giving him the unarmed treatment) because of something he did and NOT for the officer's safety. That's an execution. No other word for it.



Ok, well that's a complete 180 from the original comment. Of course he wouldnt be unarmed if he got the gun or during a struggle for one.


Seriously? Maybe im naive, but Im pretty sure Police are trained to stop someone a few different ways before just shooting them?

what, like Jedi mind tricks?

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

Depends on the circumstances. The size of the person (Brown was 6'4" 300 lbs), the temperament (Brown showed the willingness to attack and go for the gun), whether the person is charging you, etc. Various factors would go into the decision to use deadly force. Some would be justifiable, others clearly not.

_________________

_________________
Elections have consequences.

A takedown? Mace? Tazer?


Are you saying that a cop being charged has no options other than to shoot?

Got it, so anyone makes any sort of move toward a cop and the cop must shoot them. Sounds good.

Of those three options, a Taser would be the only practical one in my opinion.

One of the other dads who had a son on my kid's baseball team is a cop and he brought his Taser to one of the games. I was surprised to learn that cops (at least in his district) are required to be Tasered themselves as part of the training, to give them an understanding of its effects. He said it was horrible.

_________________

Right, but you wake up.

What about mace isnt practical? It completely blinds the attacker. What's the issue there?


I think you guys are wrong or at the very least underselling the different options/tactics police have for stopping an unarmed suspect