Thanks for the reading. Did they refuse to leave? The account is completely one sided. I have a hard time believing the reporter was following direction and minding his own business and then was arrested for doing nothing. Maybe that did happen, I just have a hard time believing it.

 

I believe the police in Ferguson are in a tough situation. They do not know who is going to be peaceful and who is not. Who is a threat and who is not. There is no way to tell the difference.

 

I am not on a particular side. I tend to side with police in situations like this because it is their job maintain peace and order. You may be right that the militarization of the police may have made it worse. I don't know. I do know that if I am a police officer in that situation, I would want to be militarized. An angry crowd can get unruly very quickly and this crowd has proven that.

 

 

The reporter was a customer at the McDonalds yet was charged with trespassing there? Isn't that a tad ridiculous? If they were actually doing anything why were quickly released? The POLICE CHIEF HIMSELF even said that the officers that arrested the reporters "probably did not know what they were doing". The probably did not know what they were doing but they're given riot gear and assault weapons? Nice.

The reporter was a customer at the McDonalds yet was charged with trespassing there? Isn't that a tad ridiculous? If they were actually doing anything why were quickly released? The POLICE CHIEF HIMSELF even said that the officers that arrested the reporters "probably did not know what they were doing". The probably did not know what they were doing but they're given riot gear and assault weapons? Nice.

 

Are you sure the Chief didn't mean the police, "probably did not know what the reporters were doing."? I wasn't there. I don't know how it went down. The article said the police came in and said the McDonalds is now closed and they needed to leave. If they did not leave or refused to leave, I would assume that would be trespassing.

 

I am sure there are some things the police are doing wrong. I can only imagine what type of stress the officers are under during this situation.

Thanks for the reading. Did they refuse to leave? The account is completely one sided. I have a hard time believing the reporter was following direction and minding his own business and then was arrested for doing nothing. Maybe that did happen, I just have a hard time believing it.

 

I believe the police in Ferguson are in a tough situation. They do not know who is going to be peaceful and who is not. Who is a threat and who is not. There is no way to tell the difference.

 

I am not on a particular side. I tend to side with police in situations like this because it is their job maintain peace and order. You may be right that the militarization of the police may have made it worse. I don't know. I do know that if I am a police officer in that situation, I would want to be militarized. An angry crowd can get unruly very quickly and this crowd has proven that.

 

It does not appear that they refused to leave. I believe one of the reporters even shot video of the incident. And the fact that they were released pretty quickly leads me to believe that someone realized the arresting officers had made a terrible mistake.

 

So if the Ferguson police can't tell who is a threat, what should they do? Just launch tear gas? What about if people are standing in their own backyard with family and friends? Should they be considered threats? Should they be tear gassed? Because that has happened in Ferguson.

 

And I think the military should be the ones militarized, not the police. If it's that bad, call the National Guard. They are trained much more extensively for situations that require militarization. And apparently the governor of Missouri feels the militarization has made it worse as he's removing the militarized Sheriff's department from the area.

Are you sure the Chief didn't mean the police, "probably did not know what the reporters were doing."? I wasn't there. I don't know how it went down. The article said the police came in and said the McDonalds is now closed and they needed to leave. If they did not leave or refused to leave, I would assume that would be trespassing.

 

I am sure there are some things the police are doing wrong. I can only imagine what type of stress the officers are under during this situation.

 

Since when did the police get to decide when a private restaurant closed?

Are you sure the Chief didn't mean the police, "probably did not know what the reporters were doing."? I wasn't there. I don't know how it went down. The article said the police came in and said the McDonalds is now closed and they needed to leave. If they did not leave or refused to leave, I would assume that would be trespassing.

 

I am sure there are some things the police are doing wrong. I can only imagine what type of stress the officers are under during this situation.

 

Seems pretty clear to me he was taking about his officers:

 

Ferguson chief tells me @WesleyLowery and @ryanjreilly's arresters were "probably somebody who didn't know better."

 

Didn't know better, but hey, lets give them rifles and send them out to deal with protestors--that should work out well.

That's a common misnomer, it depends on which program they come from:

 

It is clear that local law enforcement agencies use DHS

funds ostensibly obtained for the purpose of fighting

terrorism to conduct ordinary law enforcement

activities. In New Hampshire, for example, three police

departments—in Concord, Keene, and Manchester (cities

that are separated from each other by approximately 30

miles)—each used DHS grants to fund the purchase of an

armored BearCat (the amount of grants received by these

agencies ranged from $215,000 to $286,000). Justifications

offered for these grants included prevention, protection,

response, and recovery activities pertaining to weapons of

mass destruction and the threat of terrorism

 

That isn't one vehicle shared by 3 nearby cites, each city got the funding for one. They cost taxpayers at least $615,000.

 

So it's essentially the federal government playing the books not the police department. The feds "give" a grant to a needy PD with the only sole purpose to purchase a Humvee. Without the purchase they don't get the grant. But it goes in the books as a grant given and profit taken in.

Statement from Missouri Sen. Clair McCaskill on situation in Ferguson, Missouri:

 

"We need to de-militarize this situation - this kind of response by the police has become the problem instead of the solution. I obviously respect law enforcement's work to provide public safety, but my constituents are allowed to have peaceful protests, and the police need to respect that right and protect that right. Today is going to be a new start, we can and need to do better."

 

 

Senator probably knows more than we do here. As a public servant if their leader is calling for better job to be done then the officers involved need to do so. Hopefully she's correct with her reasoning for the comment and it's not just because of public outcry.

TV crews hit by bean bags, tear gas

 

Here's a video of some media being teargassed and then officers turning their cameras off.

TV crews hit by bean bags, tear gas

 

Here's a video of some media being teargassed and then officers turning their cameras off.

 

I'd like to see the 4-5 hours of footage up to that point. If the officers were in the wrong then that would certainly prove it.

The escalation of police towards these protests proves to me it isn't race that caused the cop to kill him, it's the police brutality towards everyone. They seem to love causing issues.

I'd like to see the 4-5 hours of footage up to that point. If the officers were in the wrong then that would certainly prove it.

 

This is my point. Unless we are there to witness everything, I only believe half of what I see and less of what I hear. The media is taking sides and publishing the items that match their side. Not publishing the rest of the story.

 

It is truly a no win situation for the police officers involved. If they pack up and go home, they will be blamed for not keeping the peace.

I'd like to see the 4-5 hours of footage up to that point. If the officers were in the wrong then that would certainly prove it.

 

I'm finding it difficult to justify shooting tear gas at reporters. Even the IDF avoids firing on journalists.

I'm finding it difficult to justify shooting tear gas at reporters. Even the IDF avoids firing on journalists.

 

I watched a live stream of it going on last night. The cops told the protestors it was time to leave and started giving warnings. After the crowd refused to go home, the cops started with some crazy noise to make them leave. The tear gas and rubber bullets followed after the noise didn't drive the group home. Saw several media people caught up in the group.

I'm finding it difficult to justify shooting tear gas at reporters. Even the IDF avoids firing on journalists.

 

I watched a live stream of it going on last night. The cops told the protestors it was time to leave and started giving warnings. After the crowd refused to go home, the cops started with some crazy noise to make them leave. The tear gas and rubber bullets followed after the noise didn't drive the group home. Saw several media people caught up in the group.

 

This is my point. Unless we are there to witness everything, I only believe half of what I see and less of what I hear. The media is taking sides and publishing the items that match their side. Not publishing the rest of the story.

 

It is truly a no win situation for the police officers involved. If they pack up and go home, they will be blamed for not keeping the peace.

 

That's what I was wondering. All plays towards what builder said above.

Make no mistake, the media is reporting whatever gets them more readers/viewers/subscribers. That's it. Facts are optional.