Ferguson burning.

Post spam, politics, funny things, personal stories, whatever you want. Please remain respectful of all individuals regardless of their views!

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby (SWGO)Kren » Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:53 pm

MATTHEW'S_DAD wrote:I agree. More times than not those cameras protect the officers and the departments from frivolous lawsuits. Money is an issue here, but as time marches on and the cameras come down in price, more departments add them to their force.


I agree that this is what is required as it could identify what has transpired should the incident ever go to court. Unfortunately even when evidence is produced from video you can count on rioters dismissing it and still go on a rampage because destruction and chaos is simply what they want anyway.

More UK Police forces are adopting this approach an some forces have being using them since 2006 here.

Kren
:action-smiley-043:
Look at the past to improve the future.
User avatar
(SWGO)Kren
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:27 pm
Location: Everywhere!
Xfire: kren1

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby (=DK=)Samonuh » Wed Nov 26, 2014 6:01 pm

(SWGO)Kren wrote:Unfortunately even when evidence is produced from video you can count on rioters dismissing it and still go on a rampage because destruction and chaos is simply what they want anyway.


Yea, but video evidence of what truly happened would have meant far less media coverage, therefore less rioting.
...انا أتكلم اللغة العربية. هل هي سيئة؟ لا
User avatar
(=DK=)Samonuh
Community Member
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 5:20 am

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby Jesse48 » Wed Nov 26, 2014 10:52 pm

cant believe these idiots would destroy their own town.I gues that's just something they will have to live with when no new businesses will ever want to open up in the area
User avatar
Jesse48
Community Member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 5:40 pm

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby Duel of Fates » Wed Nov 26, 2014 11:14 pm

Jesse48 wrote:cant believe these idiots would destroy their own town.I gues that's just something they will have to live with when no new businesses will ever want to open up in the area


I am betting most of the damage is being caused by outsiders. Much easier to torch someone else's town than your own. Good thing we got anarchists to help us organize these protests. :evil:
Image
User avatar
Duel of Fates
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:21 pm
Location: I am here, and there.
Xfire: virago777

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby haasd0gg » Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:08 pm

Leave the anarchists out of this!
User avatar
haasd0gg
Overlord
 
Posts: 4036
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:32 am
Xfire: haasd0gg

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby WD-40 » Thu Nov 27, 2014 5:52 pm

here's a couple links to wise black men who have their [poo] together on Ferguson.
http://therightscoop.com/epic-monologue ... -stand-up/

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/artic ... n-ferguson
User avatar
WD-40
SWBF2 Admin
 
Posts: 4537
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 10:12 pm
Location: Likely on some crappy Hotel internet connection
Xfire: faststart0777

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby ProfessorDreadNaught » Fri Nov 28, 2014 3:00 pm

صَامَّنُحْ(=DK=) wrote:I just don't see how you can justify not bringing to trial any incident that results in a dead body with six bullets lodged in it. I'm not implying anything about the cop's innocence or guilt, but it seems ridiculous that this isn't at least being indicted. If the main concern is saving time/money, it can be assured that the rioting will be much costlier in the end.

Sorry this is late in the thread, but it warrants a response.

The simplified facts are that there was a large man walking in the middle of the street. A police officer while trying to detain this person was violently attacked. At some point in the altercation the large man decided to run / give up. The officer, responded with deadly force and killed the man.

Question 1. Was something wrong done by the officer?
Question 2. If yes, Were there extenuating circumstances that would cause the wrong doing and mitigate his culpability?

Clearly the use of deadly force was not justified in hindsight in this case.
HOWEVER, a number of telltale signs indicate that in the heat of the high stress moment, the officer reverted to his training and followed what he believed was proper procedure. It was THAT procedure and partially the incompetence of the officer that lead to the death of this man.

A stupid man created a dangerous, high stress confrontation with an armed police officer. During this confrontation, the police officer has the right and the duty to protect himself with any and all means including, in this case, the use of deadly force. When the suspect disengaged to run or give up, the situation changed. The officer no longer had that right or duty to protect himself with violence.

BUT at that critical moment, when better trained, better disciplined individuals would take a moment to take stock of the situation and come to the conclusion we've reached in hindsight, this officer proceeded as if the threat were still imminent and ongoing. His training told him that this threat was life threatening and following procedure he expended rounds into an assailant until he felt it was safe to stop.

In the heat of being attacked his mind shut down and training took over. The difference between think and react made all the difference in the world to these men and this community.

Not many can remain calm in that moment of combat. We train our law enforcement in a repetitious fashion to instill reaction when the mind shuts down from fear. The body knows what to do. We do the same to our soldiers.

IN THIS CASE ONLY!! In the end it is clear that when you play chicken with armed men, sometimes you lose. It is also clear that this officer does not have the self discipline to be responsible for his actions under such duress and should be relieved from the police force to find a less stressful occupation.

Finally to address your question directly Sam, "indicting" someone is accusing them of a crime. It is clear that no criminal act was committed by the officer and indicting the deceased would serve no purpose. What you want is an investigation by an uninterested third party or persons. That is EXACTLY what a Grand Jury is.
“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see.”
“You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”
"Freedom (n.): To ask nothing. To expect nothing. To depend on nothing."
ProfessorDreadNaught
Community Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Ferguson burning.

Postby (=DK=)Samonuh » Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:16 am

Thanks for the response Dread!
...انا أتكلم اللغة العربية. هل هي سيئة؟ لا
User avatar
(=DK=)Samonuh
Community Member
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 5:20 am

Previous

Return to Non-Game Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests