Michael Brown shooting.

Not true at all. One can present a danger to others when they are unarmed.

Someone please call Project and Amazon's parents. I think it is past their bed time.

Yes. Years ago, I decided to research why. With years in school and personal research, I have investigated, so when I think about it I have sources to justify my reasoning.

Mike Brown was a violent criminal, who's ultimate goal was to wind up dead or in jail. Gangster rap music probably contributed to his behavior I'd imagine..

Yo, you given any thought to doing something about the massive flamewar in this thread on the seventh page? Just a thought. I know expecting any of you folks to actually do anything to make the community a better place these days is asking for way too much, (you're all much more likely to only moderate people you personally dislike, as I saw first hand from that side) but just do us that one solid so those two raging children don't continue to make it hard for adults to have a conversation.

Sure, Randolph. The moderation team took care of it. Thank you for telling us. Have a nice day.

By the way, stay classy.

@redstorm72: " "Peaceful protesters" riot and loot, but it is the cops fault for tear gassing and arresting them, not the protesters fault for destroying their own community. Cops are just people, not some hive minded evil entity"

not everyone in ferguson was rioting and looting some were but some were actually trying to hold a peaceful protest and some were even protecting store fronts so why tar everyone with the same brush.

@tocool340: "Charging at someone in an attempt to do bodily harm while being fully aware that they are packing heat means you get whatever the hell is coming to you whether you're unarmed or not. Only someone who's looking to die would do that..."

I started out thinking that the cop was well out of line on this one, but as we are being drip fed little bits of info here and there that points at Brown as the aggressor it's hard to call.

The only argument I have against the cops version is unless Brown was suicidle why would he run away from the cop after being shot then turn around and charge at a cop who has a gun pointed at him? I don't see any evidence that brown was depressed or suicidle.

Maybe Brown did charge at the officer, the officer started firing in quick succession, after recieving the first few shots Brown started to surrender and put his hands in the air but the officer was firing too quickly and Made the fatal 2 shots to the head.

A lot of witnesses said the officer shot brown as he had his hands in the air. To onlookers it would have looked like the cop shot/executed Brown even though he had his hands in the air.

Still though did the cop have to shoot to kill? 3 shots in the arm 1 in the neck 2 in the head, surely the cop could have shot Brown in the legs to bring him down? After all Brown was unarmed and once brought down would not have posed a threat.

I think deadly force was excessive. Brown had punched the hell out of the officer, the officer would have been pretty pissed that a black man has beat his ass, when Brown charged at the officer the officer made his mind up that he was gonna kill Brown and he thought he was justified in doing so.

1) Cops are not trained to shoot for the legs. When they feel they are in danger they are taught to aim for the center mass and bring the target down. Center mass is the widest area. Going for disabling shots requires more precision, and has much more room for misses that could open a window of opportunity for the assailant that can prove fatal.

2) He was not "pissed" he was badly injured and scared for his life. Michael Brown was a very large man, and could have easily ended Officer Wilson's life. If indeed he had already badly injured him, (the type of injury he is reported to have suffered takes a pretty serious amount of force to cause) and if indeed he had already struggled with him for his gun earlier, and if he then rushed back at him… then lethal force was indeed more than justified.

This idea that someone being unarmed means deadly force is off the table needs to go away. It's simply not true. The mounting evidence is starting to paint a much less innocent picture for Michael Brown, especially considering he had only just committed strong arm robbery on camera literally a few minutes before, which speaks to his state of mind at that time and why he would so something as stupid as attack an armed police officer. Frankly, it's looking more and more like Officer Wilson is owed an apology and financial compensation by the people who keep smearing him as a racist renegade cop, who are themselves, looking and acting really damn racist.

Nope. You don't shoot at legs. That is not going to be effective. Like the military you are trained to shoot center mass. Period.

If an individual presents a threat....and beating someone is a threat.....then you shoot. Center mass. You shoot.

@LJS9502_basic: fair enough if that's how they are trained.

@Randolph: fair enough but.......

"He was not "pissed" he was badly injured and scared for his life"

How do you know he wasn't pissed off, was you there? Yes he may have been scared he also may have been pissed off. So for you to say he was not pissed off without any knowledge or evidence of his emotions at the time makes no sense.

I get that the cop may have been justified and that you are sticking up for him but you are going too far now by acting like you know what emotions he was going through at the time. What's so wrong with the fact that he might have been angry he's a human being with emotions not a f**king robot.

Some guy beats your ass and almost prevents you from going home to your wife and kids, you telling me that wouldn't make you slightly angry?

If this story is true, Michael Brown got what he deserved.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/20/missouri-cop-was-badly-beaten-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

how hard is it not to assault a cop? the fact of the matter is if you get into an altercation, the outcome is uncertain. crazy shit can happen. i know a guy who was killed in a fistfight outside a bar because when he fell back on the ground he hit is head the wrong way. the risk and uncertainty is magnified when you KNOW the other person is armed. why you would still put yourself in that situation boggles the mind.

did the officer use excessive force to subdue brown? it's certainly possible and he ought to face the consequences of that. but why would brown put himself in a situation where that question even has to be asked?

@thegerg: sorry Greg I'm not familiar with cops shooting procedures.

Which is why I ASKED if Wilson had to shoot to kill which is why I asked if Wilson could have shot Brown in the legs to bring him down. I didn't realise asking a question on a subject to gain knowledge of a subject was ignorant, the subject being cops shooting procedures.

just so we all know what cops deal with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nawCMt6MiDI

Note the comments. Those people are part of the problem.

This thread has revealed to me who the racists are in OT. Didn't know there were so many.

@softwaregeek: yeah we already know what cops have to deal with, we were not born fucking yesterday.

Anecdotal evidence. And of course your own bias will slant your findings. Always better to get a wider demographic and multiple POV.

No, we're not allowed to shoot to maim. If we have to discharge our firearms it's because we feel it's necessary to use deadly force.

Who are the racists, exactly?

you might. I fear others here do not.

@airshocker: "No, we're not allowed to shoot to maim. If we have to discharge our firearms it's because we feel it's necessary to use deadly force"

So you are a cop?

Yes.

Obviously anyone who thinks there might be more to the story and didn't immediately and unconditionally believe the initial news reporting.

America has a history of treating poor people like that. Being black has nothing to do with it. They treated German and Irish immigrants like that. They treated Chinese like that. They treated the Japanese like that. This is how MOST countries have treated their poor people because those people are also the most likely to commit violent crimes, particularly robbery and assault.

So, the better question is, why are Blacks in America still making the predominantly poor, urban areas of America?

Research with sources is actually the complete opposite of an anecdote. Also, the schools I studied at required multiple points of view as sources in that they were of various ethnicities, different genders, and age groups as well as social class; and nationality; and time periods; etc. As far as personal bias, I approach situations objectively whenever possible while not detracting from my own relevance. I am not sure where you got all what you said from within my previous posts.

@airshocker: your a cop, cool!

So thegerg said;

"No one that is trained to to shoot a weapon at people is taught to shoot to kill or shoot to injure. You shoot to stop the threat, and the most effective way of doing that is NOT shooting someone in the legs."

You said;

"No, we're not allowed to shoot to maim. If we have to discharge our firearms it's because we feel it's necessary to use deadly force."

So deadly force is shoot to kill right?

Pretty much this.

@xeno_ghost: Still though did the cop have to shoot to kill? 3 shots in the arm 1 in the neck 2 in the head, surely the cop could have shot Brown in the legs to bring him down? After all Brown was unarmed and once brought down would not have posed a threat.

I think deadly force was excessive. Brown had punched the hell out of the officer, the officer would have been pretty pissed that a black man has beat his ass, when Brown charged at the officer the officer made his mind up that he was gonna kill Brown and he thought he was justified in doing so.

But that's the thing, you don't shoot for the legs or arms, you shoot for the center mass which is something police are taught to shoot for. Shooting for limbs don't work like the movie or games as people can fight through pain if it means they can get their hands on you. Besides that, correct me if I'm wrong @airshocker, but isn't it illegal to purposely shoot to wound (Arms and legs)? Or is it just considered a very dumb thing to do?...

@thegerg: ok cool I get it.

By the way what is ignorance FTL?

It all comes down to one fundamental question; have the police and the officer in question justified the shooting of the unarmed teenager? The answer is simply no. Who's burden is it to affirm justification of the shooting? The shooter. The burden does not fall on these right-wing pundits from so-called "news outlets", or these racists with their conjecture and unsubstantiated what if scenarios. They weren't the ones who who pulled the trigger. They're not associate with the police force. They're not experts of any kind. So what they say means nothing and I don't understand why some of the folks here have given these losers validation of any kind.

He was a violent criminal that attacked a police officer. By law the officer was in the right.

GG WP.

Let's keep things civil, folks.

Like.... Racism?

@tocool340: yeah air shocker already said earlier a few post up that cops are not allowed to maim and can only use deadly force.

@thegerg: thanks.

EDIT: that was for telling me what FTL meant.

@thegerg: "That's not what he said at all"

air shocker said;

"No, we're not allowed to shoot to maim. If we have to discharge our firearms it's because we feel it's necessary to use deadly force."

Are you just being difficult because I didn't use his exact words, or did I not understand what he said?

Are cops allowed to maim?

Are cops allowed to use deadly force?

Lack of work ethic, a culture that puts little importance on education, thug culture, fatherless homes.

Basically people are put into a cycle of poverty and aren't working hard or making good decisions to get out of it.