November 25, 201411 yr Stay classy looters. Glad this youth you "cared" so much about could die so you could grab some free cell phones...wow Not sure I follow. The people who are looting, the vast majority of them, would probably be looting regardless. Thieves are thieves and they'd steal if it were the other side rioting because of an indictment, that's just how low-lifed lots of thieves are. My point: looters are probably only about themselves and don't care.
November 25, 201411 yr Lisa Bloom MSNBC legal analyst is a civil rights attorney and only daughter of Gloria Aldred so that explains a lot. She is questions the character of the prosecuter and calling it a fixed case. She has never been a prosecutor or apart of a grand jury hearing. But she is an expert . MSNBC has now spent 15 minutes and still going assassinating the prosecutors character. 90% of the personalities on that network are hacks.
November 25, 201411 yr How so? If you are going to say that Michael Brown was a deadly threat to an officer, then you have to say that a guy loaded to the gills with weapons going into a theater, opening fire on patrons and killing them is a danger too. IMO, the latter is much worse. It'd be ridiculous to say that if Brown was a severe threat, then the guy in Aurora wasn't. Now, it's just as ridiculous to say you'd blame an officer too severely they emptied a clip into the armed Aurora shooter, but I don't think anyone is saying that. Again two different situations. Two different police forces. Those officers must of not felt threatened or attacked. I think it's a joke to compare two diffent circumstances to try and make a point justice wasn't served.
November 25, 201411 yr Author Not sure. He didn't have a weapon as far as Officer Wilson could tell. How close it too close? He tried to take Officer Wilson's weapon. He was also a very large man. Anyone who grabs for an Officers gun then after running away, comes back again is putting themselves at risk of getting shot imo.
November 25, 201411 yr Again two different situations. Two different police forces. Those officers must of not felt threatened or attacked. I think it's a joke to compare two diffent circumstances to try and make a point justice wasn't served. Didn't the Aurora shooter surrender too? It doesn't sound like Brown surrendered, he charged.
November 25, 201411 yr Again two different situations. Two different police forces. Those officers must of not felt threatened or attacked. I think it's a joke to compare two diffent circumstances to try and make a point justice wasn't served. I'm stunned that we see eye to eye so much these days :thumb:
November 25, 201411 yr One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Besides the point the theatre shooter didn't attack the police he apparently surrendered. Right. Kind of like the kid in Cleveland with the BB gun who hadn't killed anyone and had a 911 call saying that it was a child and most likely a toy? You go into a situation trusting a guy who has just indiscriminately shot up a movie theater and is off his rocker and trust his word that he's surrendered?
November 25, 201411 yr How so? If you are going to say that Michael Brown was a deadly threat to an officer, then you have to say that a guy loaded to the gills with weapons going into a theater, opening fire on patrons and killing them is a danger too. IMO, the latter is much worse. It'd be ridiculous to say that if Brown was a severe threat, then the guy in Aurora wasn't. Now, it's just as ridiculous to say you'd blame an officer too severely they emptied a clip into the armed Aurora shooter, but I don't think anyone is saying that. The officer that shot Brown was being attacked by Brown. Brown was trying to take the officers gun and I'm sure it wasn't just to pawn it. The he theatre shooter surrendered. HUGE difference unless you are advocating shooting anyone who is involved in a violent crime even if the officer isn't being threatened.
November 25, 201411 yr Author Saw this come across my newsfeed and thought it was interesting enough to share. "Regardless of today's outcome, I think it's interesting that an unarmed kid who stole a pack of cigarillos was killed by police officers yet a person who opened fire on a movie theater was apprehended alive." As a man of the law you should know why that's the case. The two situations are completely different. Mainly because James Holmes was not a threat at the time he was apprehended.
November 25, 201411 yr He tried to take Officer Wilson's weapon. He was also a very large man. Anyone who grabs for an Officers gun then after running away, comes back again is putting themselves at risk of getting shot imo. We agree he had no weapon in his hand, correct? If so then I'd say distance matters. Is he a threat at 100 feet with no gun? 75? What is the point of no return?
November 25, 201411 yr Author See I think Jake Tapper has done a good job and was just pointing out it was only a trash can burning. Tapper is awful.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.