If I'm a racist, then you and everyone else on this board are too.
Saints or Aints.....skin color judgment is for chumps.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
If I'm a racist, then you and everyone else on this board are too.
They were initiated by police officers being rude.
Interesting. That shows that some of you have a reading and listening problem as she didn't say anything about him breaking the law THAT day. So keep spreading that lie that he was breaking the law when you've got no proof of that.
You don't know the details of why he stuck his hand in the car. The only person who really knows is the man who killed him and either he's a liar or his chief is. That by itself is probable cause for an indictment.
You're stretching to your version of the truth now. The public wasn't running to get away from him. The public didn't have issues with Mike Brown. They did with the police.
What do you think the legal next step should have been since you're so gung ho on the police shooting people?
Again, you keep stating that lie and apparently not reading what she said. At no point did she say he was selling cigarettes that day.
Saints or Aints.....skin color judgment is for chumps.
need to include your friends who are calling me a racist in that.
Two kids walking down the street and not moving out of the way. Officer tells them to move out of the street (realize that the words that you posted are hearsay and we do not know if in fact the police officer spoke that way to the kids) and they tell him to essentially take a hike.
Police officer pulls up to the kids and one reaches into the car to attack the cop. At what point here did the police officer initiate the crime?
If there was no proof, the police could have arrested him, he be brought into the station, be shown that there is no proof and then he could have filed for false arrest. I haven't seen any false arrest charges, have you?
Hmm - What would be the purpose for any man to reach into a police car and try to wrestle the gun from the police officer? He had GSR on his hands. That's pretty clear.
So the young man reaches into a police car, tries to take the cops gun, gets shot and you say he's not a threat to the public?
Would you like for your daughter to be near him at that point? I'm sorry but he would be a VERY clear threat to the public.
The logical next step would be for the police officer to gain custody of the perpetrator.
Hmm - he was arrested 9 times for selling illegal cigarettes and he was out on bail for this particular crime. If he wasn't selling cigarettes, why not cooperate with the police?
Why not show them that he wasn't selling anything and that he could check his pockets and stuff?
Or maybe it was that the police had already seen the crime occur?
Nice try Troll.:thumbs: And yes I am in good company!
I'm not gonna lose any sleep over what the esteemed group of Christians on this board refer to me as.
Don't lie.......you'll be back for more.
I didn't say
Hummm that didn't take long!:smilewinkgrin:
Didn't have to take long to refute your lies.
Trollin:laugh:
It's what self-admitted trolls do.:thumbsup:
Don't wear out that thumb....you might need it some day.:laugh:
Apparently.
Garner would be alive today, if he wouldn've only listened to common sense. He did not deserve to die ... no one deserves to die .... but he was the author of his own circumstances. Sure the cops may have been more than forceful in arresting him. In fact they should ALL be disciplined for excessive force, but murder, no way. Involuntary manslaughter? Again, no way. They were doing their job, and Garner refused to comply to their directions when they attempted to arrest him!
He was at fault, and his death is on his shoulders, not the NYPD!
Straight up true bro.
Thanks ... I can be rational when not fighting the naysayers. :smilewinkgrin: It seems that I am forever putting out fires from the matches tossed my way by RD2 haters! Well, if there is any positive to take away from this, it is simply this. I am hated enough by many on the board, that they love to see my name pop up so they can come after me, even it's just for spelinq and gramer errers :smilewinkgrin:
May HIs force be with you!
Two kids walking down the street and not moving out of the way. Officer tells them to move out of the street (realize that the words that you posted are hearsay and we do not know if in fact the police officer spoke that way to the kids) and they tell him to essentially take a hike. Police officer pulls up to the kids and one reaches into the car to attack the cop. At what point here did the police officer initiate the crime?
If there was no proof, the police could have arrested him, he be brought into the station, be shown that there is no proof and then he could have filed for false arrest. I haven't seen any false arrest charges, have you?
Hmm - What would be the purpose for any man to reach into a police car and try to wrestle the gun from the police officer? He had GSR on his hands. That's pretty clear.
So the young man reaches into a police car, tries to take the cops gun, gets shot and you say he's not a threat to the public? Would you like for your daughter to be near him at that point? I'm sorry but he would be a VERY clear threat to the public.
The logical next step would be for the police officer to gain custody of the perpetrator.
Hmm - he was arrested 9 times for selling illegal cigarettes and he was out on bail for this particular crime. If he wasn't selling cigarettes, why not cooperate with the police? Why not show them that he wasn't selling anything and that he could check his pockets and stuff? Or maybe it was that the police had already seen the crime occur?
Concerning Brown, it is alleged that he fit the description of the store suspect and the officer was waiting on backup, but chose to confront Brown and his partner, alone, while sitting down, before backup arrived. That was not wise or safe. Further, if Brown then proved he could overpower the officer, what kind of training says that once you are safe and the suspect is away, that you then confront him again - alone - when your backup has not yet arrived?
It makes no sense. Justified shooting or not, the actions of the police officer showed poor judgment, which in and of itself would make any logical person question the entire situation. His version of events make it seem justified, but I have my doubts about trusting his word because of those illogical actions.
I doubt he would have have put another box of cigarillos in danger if the officer, after seeing his sheer size and that he was outnumbered, would have waited another 160 seconds, more or less, for help.